logoalt Hacker News

sphlast Thursday at 6:40 AM2 repliesview on HN

The problem with firewalld is that it has the worst UX of any program I know. Completely unintuitive options, the program itself doesn’t provide any useful help or hint if you get anything wrong and the documentation is so awful you have to consult the Red Hat manuals that have thankfully been written for those companies that pay thousands per month in support.

It’s not like iptables was any better, but it was more intuitive as it spoke about IPs and ports, not high-level arbitrary constructs such as zones and services defined in some XML file. And since firewalld uses iptables/nftables underneath, I wonder why do I need a worse leaky abstraction on top of what I already know.

I truly hate firewalld.


Replies

bingo-bongolast Thursday at 7:33 AM

Coming from FreeBSD and pf, all Linux firewalls I’ve tried feels clunky _at best_ UX-wise.

I’d love a Linux firewall configured with a sane config file and I think BSD really nailed it. It’s easy to configure and still human readable, even for more advanced firewall gateway setups with many interfaces/zones.

A have no doubt that Linux can do all the same stuff feature-wise, but oh god the UX :/

show 3 replies
pslast Thursday at 10:14 AM

Hate it as well. Why should I bother learning about zones and abstract away ports, adresses, interfaces etc. only to find out pretty soon that my baremetal server actually always needs fine grained rules at least from the firewalld's point of view.