[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Is NAT can provide some kind of protection?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

> No, NAT doesn't provide additional security. The stateful inspection that
> NAT cannot operate without provides the security. Take away the
> address mangling and the stateful inspection still provides the same
> level of security.
>

There is a least one situation where NAT *does* provide a small amount of
necessary security.

Try this at home, with/without NAT:

1. Buy a new PC with Windows installed
2. Install all security patches needed since the OS was installed

Without NAT, you're unpatched PC will get infected in less than 1 minute.

Cheers,

- - ferg

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Desktop 9.5.3 (Build 5003)

wj8DBQFNLf8gq1pz9mNUZTMRAjduAJ4w7az13wwn1zsze0DoLTRvOajxxQCgmWMG
ZckeFBpLWyoqG/g9iD2cKIk=
=yYof
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



-- 
"Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
?Engineering Architecture for the Internet
?fergdawgster(at)gmail.com
?ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/