NAT, as a concept, offers fine security. If you can't route to the internal
network, you can't reach the internal network. On the other hand, using NAT
alone is a little like putting all your eggs in one basket -- you need to
WATCH THAT BASKET. If the NAT router (or whatever you're using) is
compromised, then your internal network is at risk.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gaute Gullesen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ju Kong Fui" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Firewalls Mailing List (E-mail)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 1:18 PM
Subject: Re: To NAT or not to NAT?
> On Wednesday, February 21, 2001, 4:18:09 AM, Ju Kong Fui wrote:
>
> > Does NAT really help to hide/secure the internal network? Or it is just
> > purely a method to help easing the pain of having not enough of public
IP
> > addr?
>
> i wouldn't say hiding your IP address is that much help for
> security. but the side effect of having incoming connections blocked
> makes the network less accessible and possibly harder to break.
>
> but, that also puts limitations on the users. so if you don't need
> NAT, don't use NAT.
>
> just my opinion.
>
> ================================================================
> Gaute Gullesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> phone: +47 922 48 107
> Fingerprint: AF90 7B96 9835 AA26 4DCC D4F7 1B82 110C B5DF 00B1
> Support the antiSecurity movement!: http://anti.security.is/
> ================================================================
>
>
> -
> [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
>
>
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
