Is NAT can provide some kind of protection?

[bill at herrin.us (William Herrin)]

On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Brian Keefer <chort at smtps.net> wrote:
> 1.) ?Allows you to redirect a privileged port (on UNIX) to a
> non-privileged port.?For daemons that don't implement some
> form of privilege revoking after binding to a low port (and/or aren't
> allowed to run as root), this is very useful. ?It's much easier to
> have a firewall redirect than to implement robust privilege revoking.
> ?Example: PAT 25/tcp -> 2525/tcp.

There was a patch offered for the Linux kernel years ago that exported
the network ports as a filesystem where you could set who could bind
which port by changing the ownership and permissions on the "files." I
never understood why Linus rejected it.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com? bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004