Re: do i need a hardware firewall?

From: tarquinlinbin (fleagle_at_myrealbox.com)
Date: 02/23/04


Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:54:31 +0000

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 03:50:05 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.com> wrote:

>Need and should have are very different things. With the vast number of
>hacks for every OS out there, a router with NAT should be everyone's
>first line of defense (or something better).
>
>The NAT will protect the XP box and it should be installed to help
>prevent anything that Win missed and to prevent hacks due to user-
>configured holes.
>
>--
Thanks all for the nifo,,Can someone give me a brief explanation of
NAT and how this helps security please??

Thanks

joe



Relevant Pages

  • Re: do i need a hardware firewall?
    ... >>hacks for every OS out there, a router with NAT should be everyone's ... Antivirus package ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
  • Re: Why do I need a software firewall?
    ... > the user regardless of the settings in the Windows Firewall ... The Windows-Firewall will protect the user regardless of the settings ... of the NAT device. ...
    (comp.security.misc)
  • Re: Why do I need a software firewall?
    ... >> the user regardless of the settings in the Windows Firewall ... > The Windows-Firewall will protect the user regardless of the settings ... > of the NAT device. ...
    (comp.security.misc)
  • Re: Server Security
    ... NAT will not protect you ... > I have a Win Advance Server with two LAN cards, ... the 2nd connected to a LAN. ... > using NAT over private 10.0.0.0 addresses. ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.security)
  • RE: HACKED - redLine - SaCReD =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Seer=A9?= 2006
    ... the only server to have been affected. ... the internet and this is done with the router. ... This is called a DMZ...Why are you recommending him to use NAT? ... malware protection just behind the router so that they also protect the ...
    (microsoft.public.security)