Re: Does IPv6 preclude use of a NAT gateway?
Camaleón <noelamac@gmail.com> writes:
>>> > It's probably not the best thing, but I depend on the NAT gateway for
>>> > a lot of my security--with IPv6, will I still be able to do that?
>>>
>>> NAT and security do not match. You better put a good firewall and/or
>>> IPS system in between ;-)
With IPv6 it is not an issue. It's not like IPv6 is actually routable
across the internet. :->
>> Hmm, I need to knock on some wood--wait, I can knock on my head--that is
>> about the same ;-) So far, NAT seemingly has provided pretty good
>> security for me.
>
> :-)
>
> Yes, most of us -wrongly- believe that our NATed router is like a wall
> between our computers and the dangerous external web (because indeed it
> is hidding somehow) but this is not a security measure per se but
> security by obfuscation: that we can't see it does not mean we can't
> reach it. There can be still holes in router's firmware or bad configured
> DSL devices that may expose the user regardless NATed or not ;-)
OK, you put a new XP box directly on the internet and I'll put one
behind a NAT router box. Do you wish to take bets on who can update
before getting owned?
NAT is a firewall. Maybe not a great one. But it does function as such.
--
Johan KULLSTAM
Reply to: