-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Snipped down to last paragraph
"So it seems to me that if you use NAT/PAT, you don't need a real firewall unless you're actually permitting some kind of traffic to connect to something from the outside. Is that right? - -- Dee" Hi Dee, A lot of firewalls use NAT/PAT so if you are using it then you are using a firewall/ing (technique?) Also if you don't have any listening services then it becomes much harder for an attacker to remotely execute code on your system (especially if it is *ix, hi m$ outlook and all your bugs ((heh I say that as I type this e-mail in outlook)) ). Not sure if that cleared things up or not. I think it is really arguing the semantics of a nuance (ie NAT/PAT forget about firewall yet a lot of firewalls actually use this for firewalling or a means of). HTH, Leon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month. http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com> iQA/AwUBPAenBNqAgf0xoaEuEQLz7ACfWR8W3+cuRWZ0KHkdeAS8cVNTgW4An1AJ i1Wd139r7vhcQvDZGob/Z4/c =zpvZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
