Re: How secure is secure?
From: David (thunderbolt01@netscape.net)
Date: 02/28/03
- Next message: Robert Tinsley: "Re: How secure is secure?"
- Previous message: Rishi Gangoly: "How secure is secure?"
- In reply to: Rishi Gangoly: "How secure is secure?"
- Next in thread: Robert Tinsley: "Re: How secure is secure?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: David <thunderbolt01@netscape.net> Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 06:50:27 GMT
Rishi Gangoly wrote:
>
> /sbin/iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.1.0/24 -j MASQUERADE
> /sbin/route add -net 192.168.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.1.3
> /sbin/route add -net 192.168.2.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.1.2
>
> Am I secure from hackers or should I still be worried about beefing up
> security with added rules using iptables?
>
> Is it safe to assume that if there aren't any services running on a
> computer, then that means I am 100% secure?
I would say that if those couple of lines is all you have for a
firewall that you need to do some more work on it or maybe take a
look at Arno's IPTABLES scripts at www.freshmeat.net if you want a
very functional script.
-- Confucius: He who play in root, eventually kill tree. Registered with the Linux Counter. http://counter.li.org Slackware 9.0-beta Linux 2.4.20tbls i686 (GCC) 3.2.2 Uptime: 8 days, 9:07, 1 user, load average: 1.00, 1.15, 1.49
- Next message: Robert Tinsley: "Re: How secure is secure?"
- Previous message: Rishi Gangoly: "How secure is secure?"
- In reply to: Rishi Gangoly: "How secure is secure?"
- Next in thread: Robert Tinsley: "Re: How secure is secure?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|