nanog mailing list archives
RE: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection?
From: Nathan Eisenberg <nathan () atlasnetworks us>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 17:52:15 +0000
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
I'd argue that the above has everything to do with firewalling, and nothing to do with NAT. Slightly OT: It boggles the mind a bit when I find desktop shops -not- using imaging. I would think most people would prefer not to stare at OS install screens - and when you can blast out a fully patched XP image easily in sub-10 minutes, the ROI is staggering. Nathan
Current thread:
- Re: Is NAT can provide some kind of protection?, (continued)
- 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)