Port to Linux

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Some users have requested a Linux version of PeerBlock.  

While I'd love to consider a port, the base code we "inherited" from
PeerGuardian 2 (the PG2 RC1 Test3 version) has a lot of Windows-specific
stuff strewn throughout the core code.  We will be working on changing this
as we move towards a PeerBlock 2.0 version, at which point a port will be
at least feasible.  If you're interested in a Linux port of PeerBlock, make
sure you "Star" this issue!

In the meantime, my understanding is that there's a "moblock" project out
there, which is a fork of PG2 for Linux.  I have no direct experience with
it, but it may be an option for you.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by peerbloc...@gmail.com on 29 Oct 2009 at 7:38

• Blocking: #240

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by peerbloc...@gmail.com on 3 Nov 2009 at 8:12

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Would love to see a Linux version of this, would be great to run on Ubuntu! :)

Original comment by VerusLib...@googlemail.com on 10 Jan 2010 at 3:14

[GoogleCodeExporter]

You've got this for now for Ubuntu (linux): http://mobloquer.foutrelis.com/

Original comment by smapdi...@gmail.com on 11 Jan 2010 at 2:40

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Many thanks

Original comment by VerusLib...@googlemail.com on 13 Jan 2010 at 7:14

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

So MoBlock will be PeerBlock, LLC, answer to a Linux version? Will there be a 
version
from PeerBlock?

Original comment by rhodryk...@gmail.com on 18 Jan 2010 at 4:00

[GoogleCodeExporter]

We will be rearchitecting PeerBlock's code base in the PeerBlock 2.0 timeframe, 
to
remove all the Windows-specific stuff from it, at which point we do plan to 
make a
Linux version.  Moblock is just one alternative to tide you over in the 
meantime.

Original comment by peerbloc...@gmail.com on 18 Jan 2010 at 5:50

• Added labels: Milestone-2.0

[GoogleCodeExporter]

When is the planned Beta and/or release date for PeerBlock 2.0?

Original comment by rhodryk...@gmail.com on 18 Jan 2010 at 5:54

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Right now we're working on PeerBlock 1.1, something which we hope to have 
released as
a Stable Release within the next month or so.  After that we'll be working 
PeerBlock
1.2, with an estimated Stable Release coming 3-4 months later.  While working 
on 1.2,
we'll also be re-architecting our code for 2.0, so that once 1.2 is released we
should be able to jump right in and start implementing our new design(s).  

Given all that, I'd expect to see a Beta Release of 2.0 sometime in the 6-9 
month
timeframe.  Sooner if we end up attracting more developers, later if someone 
gets hit
by a bus.  That's obviously still a ways out however, so plans might change...

We will definitely keep this bug updated as that time approaches however, so 
anyone
who's "Starred" it will receive update notifications.

Original comment by peerbloc...@gmail.com on 18 Jan 2010 at 6:24

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Peerblock isn't required for blocking. Using a simple script to get and parse 
the lists 
into ipset then iptables works great.

Original comment by nwmcsw...@gmail.com on 19 May 2010 at 12:12

[GoogleCodeExporter]

You'll still need an app to do that to allow the layman to do it. :)

Original comment by Praese...@gmail.com on 19 May 2010 at 4:08

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Does anyone know if moblock can be used to block all ip's accept a whitelist?

Original comment by CJ.Wijtm...@gmail.com on 3 Jun 2010 at 5:58

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Moblock cannot compile for x64 easily. We will be getting to porting the code 
base from 
PB soon enough if you can wait. 

Original comment by mynameherebro on 3 Jun 2010 at 6:57

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Would love a pure Peerblock version for linux instead of clones with half baked 
settings.

Original comment by elkoki...@gmail.com on 24 Jun 2010 at 11:21

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I have been looking into this and so far the manual way is this:
1. Install peerblock in my winbox
2. Select the lists from iblock
3. Once the lists are updated, manually export the list to .p2p
4. Upload the .p2p to the linux box
5. Run a small bash script that do:
   a) sort and remove duplicates from the .p2p
   b) convert the ipranges to CIDR/subnet format or you can use -m -iprange without converting
   c) load the converted format to iptables (LINUX) or pf (BSD)

Issues arises, iptables will get error loading rules if you have 300k lines but 
no issues with PF

Suggestion:
1. Have a separate a standalone peerblock export and update function, so that a 
simple task scheduler script can run auto update and export and send to linux 
boxes
2. Write a a convert program of the peerblock .p2p ip database than can be 
called from command-line and write a winscript to export and send to linux box

This is probably a temporary solution to those who runs seedbox/headless linux 
while waiting for V2.

Original comment by aminuddi...@gmail.com on 31 Jul 2010 at 3:45

[GoogleCodeExporter]

would love to see a linux build.

Original comment by Anton...@gmail.com on 19 Aug 2010 at 5:38

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I would love to have a build for Linux!! Moblock is rather lackluster, and well 
Peerblock is one of Linux dreams!

Original comment by nickeric...@gmail.com on 5 Oct 2010 at 2:29

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I have a Linux server that handles all of my torrenting for me. Absolutely NEED 
peerblock for Linux...

Original comment by Rile...@gmail.com on 15 Oct 2010 at 2:59

[GoogleCodeExporter]

If you don't mind just running a daemon without gui, peer guardian linux (pgl) 
is pretty nice. You can set it and forget it: it automatically updates, starts 
at system startup (via rc / init.d), and restarts itself should it need to (via 
it's watchdog process). If you need to add an IP/range to the allow list, just 
add a line in /etc/pgl/allow.p2p. This is probably the best option for a 
server, as you can use pglcmd to interact with pgl without needing a gui (like 
via ssh, etc).

Original comment by masonPh on 15 Oct 2010 at 3:52

[GoogleCodeExporter]

All i have to say is TY, i hope everything works out. my edge router is linux 
based... ive been running a virtual OS on top of it, running XP just to have 
Peerblock pre-block ipaddress ranges....

TY, and please do youre best to get this ported ASAP!!!!

Original comment by mnovick1...@gmail.com on 6 Nov 2010 at 1:32

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Would love to see it. My school tracks my every movement, and I'm a bit 
paranoid about it. Now that I have Linux (So that Microsoft can't track me 
either) I have no peerblocker!

Original comment by EzraB...@gmail.com on 9 Jan 2011 at 12:06

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I would love this as a headend for my router. That way if someone is running a 
torrent on my home network, it'll block it out at the router-level instead of 
every individual computer.

Original comment by sim...@gmail.com on 10 Jan 2011 at 12:55

[GoogleCodeExporter]

YES Peerblock for Linux PLEASE! I's even pay for the damn thing... LINUX is 
lacking when it comes to software support... Linux is gaining popularity... 
wont be too long when Microsoft will be running scared on the home front.

Original comment by constitu...@gmail.com on 11 Mar 2011 at 12:07

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Indeed, I'd love to see a comprehensive Linux port and I'll star the request, 
but I'd just like to add a list of parameters that I believe users will find 
important

-Open Source. Should go without saying, but I just wanted to confirm that we 
really value the Open Source nature of PeerBlock and would love to see it exist 
on other OSes

-GUI and CLI options - Comment 20 talked about PeerGuardianLinux and 
interfacing via CLI.  This is important and with current tech like PGL and 
MoBlock, they're "made" for CLI.  Of course, there are many users that prefer a 
GUI for their desktop linux installs, and then move onto CLI if they set up 
some sort of server. 

-Consider offering the tech to linux Gateway projects like Untangle. I see 
there's a separate note regarding this, but it would be very nice to see 
Untangle and other Router/Gateway projects incorporate PeerBlock the same way 
they do ClamAV. It would really help to get the PeerBlock name out there and 
they'd help contribute to the code base. 

-Automatic updating of the program and blocklists is imperative. So many other 
offerings, even OpenSource Torrent clients (with the exception of Deluge and 
KTorrent, methinks) don't offer automatic updating of blocklists or the ability 
to use multiple lists. PeerBlock's ability to do so would be a great boon to 
Linux and compound the protection that is often lacking in many clients 
(Notably, the otherwise awesome qBitTorrent).  Updating the program can be done 
through repos, distro-specific packages, manual install etc... but especially 
for those less technical users that may need the protection all the more and 
are still learning Linux, it would be nice if the program itself could update 
to the latest version. This is very useful especially with distros like Ubuntu 
that sometime freeze versions of universe/multiverse packages to "known 
working" at release, so it means that without adding a 3rd party repo or some 
sort of manual install, you'll have to wait 6 months for a new version. While 
this has its benefit with say, not allowing you to update to an X.org that 
would be incompatible with your graphics drivers, it does have its downside. 

-Integration of PB with built in linux iptables/ipchains and other firewall 
solutions and their GUIs. 

-64-bit support (AMD64).  While I'll always run the 32-bit files necessary to 
run what I can't in 64, its nice to find Linux programs meant for 64 bit 
systems, rather than having to do a dependency dance to figure out what you're 
missing in your 32bit support environment, or have incompatibilities (Flash 
comes to mind...sigh) 

Thanks again for considering this! 

Original comment by Chivalri...@gmail.com on 16 Apr 2011 at 12:57

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I am jre, co-author of PeerGuardian Linux (pgl).

I welcome any sort of collaboration. Just contact me per mail or at 
phoenixlabs.org, if I don't react here. The technical solution we use in Linux 
is the kernel netfilter framework: network traffic is sent with iptables rules 
with the target NFQUEUE to kernel userspace. There the pgl daemon checks 
whether the traffic matches the blocklists (so no need for thousands of 
iptables rules for every range). I think this is the most efficient solution on 
Linux. So we have a different, incompatible basis for Windows and Linux. Also 
other things are quite Linux specific (automatic start, automatic blocklist 
update, port whitelisting with iptables rules). Still, for other parts of the 
application there might be porting/collaboration possibilities.

About pgl:
pgl is the official succesor of moblock/blockcontrol/mobloquer, all previous 
authors agreed on this.
License: GPL3+
Next to the already mentioned CLI (pglcmd) we now also finally have a GUI 
(pgl-gui).
pgl works fine on 32 bit (i386) and 64 bit (amd64), and I think also other 
platforms.
We provide a source tarball (make && make install), and Debian (and Ubuntu) 
packages in a repository.

Original comment by jre.phoe...@gmail.com on 25 Aug 2011 at 8:36

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Phoenixlabs.org has not been updated in forever.

And http://phoenixlabs.org/pglinux/ results in 404.

So what is the new address?

Original comment by war59312 on 25 Aug 2011 at 10:17

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hey jre, glad to have you interested in what we've been doing.. Right now
we've been moving away from the idea of mobloque and a few other
alternatives to the original code base.. We are looking to port the code to
other platforms. Now I know very little about linux in general other then
that's what I use for my OS. The reasoning behind wanting to stay with the
original code base is so it can be updated as a whole together rather then
apart..I know that windows UI environment in well different then linux and
that's where the code spit needs to occur..

Our lead Dev has been MIA for some time and so the project has gone a bit
stagnant but we still have two well off developers working on the windows
end. We are looking towards the 2.0 release to include a linux and Mac
version. But thus far there is no joy because we have failed to recruit a
the developers needed to work the code...

Original comment by mynameherebro on 25 Aug 2011 at 10:36

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Yeah, we've been a bit dormant - hope to remedy that soon.

As far as collaboration goes, though, that might be a bit difficult.  PGL is 
GPL licensed . . . and we are not.  We are currently planning on making our 
next release dual-licensed GPL and non-GPL (to preserve the possibility of 
someone licensing our code for a non-GPL commercial variant, for example), but 
inclusion of any code from PGL would "taint" our entire source-tree.

Moving forward we're working on turning PeerBlock's source code into a much 
more modular architecture, with common "core code" interfacing with 
platform-specific code where necessary.  e.g. list management: common; 
service-wrapper: platform-specific; UI: common (via e.g. Qt); driver layer: 
platform-specific.  This should permit us to easily maintain a common platform 
across Windows/Mac/Linux/BSD.  It's possible that an abstraction layer could be 
built to wrap PGL in the interface we'll have defined for the "driver layer", 
but I don't expect that to be the way we'd want to go moving forward.

I do have a few questions regarding the design of PGL, will contact you (jre) 
outside of this issue-tracker once we're ready for deeper level conversations 
if you're so inclined.

And as mynameherebro said, thanks your your interest in our project!

Original comment by peerbloc...@gmail.com on 26 Aug 2011 at 3:34

[GoogleCodeExporter]

war59312,
pgl can be found at http://sourceforge.net/projects/peerguardian/

Original comment by masonPh on 27 Aug 2011 at 12:12

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Linux version would be Amazing!!!

Original comment by jcarbone...@gmail.com on 27 Aug 2011 at 9:50

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I didn't vote for this issue previously, and therefore wasn't aware of your 
answers.

I just started a thread in the forum: 
http://forums.peerblock.com/read.php?5,11501

Original comment by jre.phoe...@gmail.com on 28 Aug 2011 at 12:59