Re: Microsoft Worm

From: Frode (news_at_mascot.REMOVETOREPLY.dyndns.org)
Date: 08/17/03

  • Next message: Colonel Flagg: "Re: usenet email privacy question" 
    Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 15:29:39 +0200

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

    mto wrote:
    > <SNIP> ISP's should be responsible for installing a NAT router at the
    >> least for every customer - for business accounts they should require
    >> a firewall.
    > You're forgetting the cost factor here. The public wants CHEAP net
    > access. Adding NAT for every user would significantly raise the cost to
    > the ISP and lead to endless tech support problems from the huge number of
    > customers that cannot configure their own dial-up. End-user price would
    > have to be raised accordingly, leading to a mass exodus to cheaper ISPs.
    > This idea might be good security but it is BAD business.

    One of the most successful ADSL providers in my country (Norway) bases its
    service on the premise that each user gets sent a netopia nat
    router/firewall to plug into the wall at home. There's no option to hook up
    without it. It's also significantly cheaper than its only major competitor
    that only offers a pppoe solution directly exposing the connected computer.

    Any user "advanced" enough to really need to run servers inside their NAT
    can configure forwarding rules via a webpage hosted by the ISP.

    I'm not terribly experienced in the adsl technology, but I have the
    distinct impression you need some hardware at home either way. Based on the
    above it doesn't seem the added cost of having at least NAT in that box is
    prohibitive compared to a bare-bones version.

    - --
    Frode

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: PGP 8.0.2

    iQA/AwUBPz+DQuXlGBWTt1afEQKFLwCgr5Fce3/DD8b/evcgkUzka80us9MAoOHt
    JhemrSXA5r8UTyUBurN4MzHt
    =5WQp
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  • Next message: Colonel Flagg: "Re: usenet email privacy question"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Some Kudos for Dell
      ... >>> to provide remote support we had to get SBC to allow us to use Bridge ... >>> mode in order to get a public IP so that we could manage the NAT on ... > no cost to the user or the ISP. ... >> question came up about providing at cost Antivirus software. ...
      (alt.sys.pc-clone.dell)
    • Re: Big drifting
      ... > When you look at the cost of just getting a Nat B licence then add in a ... Nat B licence £30 ... Cheap car to use £300 ...
      (uk.rec.cars.modifications)
    • Re: Microsoft Worm
      ... Adding NAT for every user would significantly raise the cost to ... > can configure forwarding rules via a webpage hosted by the ISP. ... In my experience the Cable Modem and DSL ...
      (alt.computer.security)
    • Re: So lets build a router
      ... Robert C. Martin wrote: ... > for home use, it will handle DHCP, NAT, etc, etc, and should cost less ... on a date for each line item, such as "we can bring the cost to less than ...
      (comp.object)
    • Re: DSL with User PPP and Static IP
      ... I have implemented all the changes including disabling the IPFW firewall ... set log phase chat connect lcp ipcp command ... > Your rc.conf is all wrong, you are doing the nat process in both ... > set authname YOURLOGINNAME # Replace with your ISP account IP ...
      (freebsd-questions)