nanog mailing list archives
Re: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection?
From: Jack Bates <jbates () brightok net>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 11:25:30 -0600
On 1/12/2011 11:16 AM, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu wrote:
140 million compromised PC's, most of them behind a NAT, can't be wrong. :)
And yet blaster type worms are less common now, and I still get the occasional reinfection reported where a computer shop installs XP pre-patch with a public IP. A simple stateful firewall or NAT router would stop that and allow them to finish patching the OS. There is always a new attack vector.
Jack
Current thread:
- Re: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection?, (continued)
- Re: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection? Jim Gettys (Jan 15)
- Re: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection? Mark Smith (Jan 16)
- Re: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection? Jim Gettys (Jan 16)
- Re: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection? Owen DeLong (Jan 12)
- Re: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection? Lamar Owen (Jan 13)
- Re: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection? Owen DeLong (Jan 12)
- Re: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection? Dave Pooser (Jan 12)
- Re: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection? Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 12)
- Re: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection? Jack Bates (Jan 12)
- RE: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection? Nathan Eisenberg (Jan 12)
- Re: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection? Jack Bates (Jan 12)
