Re: NAT is not a mechanism for securing a network.. but.. HELP!
From: Volker Birk (bumens_at_dingens.org)
Date: 08/24/05
- Next message: Volker Birk: "Re: Problem web-brosesr and (kerio ?)"
- Previous message: Volker Birk: "Re: NAT is not a mechanism for securing a network.. but.. HELP!"
- In reply to: Nicky: "Re: NAT is not a mechanism for securing a network.. but.. HELP!"
- Next in thread: Nicky: "Re: NAT is not a mechanism for securing a network.. but.. HELP!"
- Reply: Nicky: "Re: NAT is not a mechanism for securing a network.. but.. HELP!"
- Reply: Shawn K. Quinn: "Re: NAT is not a mechanism for securing a network.. but.. HELP!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: 24 Aug 2005 10:34:09 +0200
Nicky <hackeras@gmail.com> wrote:
> And how can router be crashed? By what way?
If it does NAT/masquerading, a DoS attack is very easy from inside. Just
exploit the maximum size of the NAT table by flooding with packages opening
a huge number of connections.
Yours,
VB.
--
"Es kann nicht sein, dass die Frustrierten in Rom bestimmen, was in
deutschen Schlafzimmern passiert".
Harald Schmidt zum "Weltjugendtag"
- Next message: Volker Birk: "Re: Problem web-brosesr and (kerio ?)"
- Previous message: Volker Birk: "Re: NAT is not a mechanism for securing a network.. but.. HELP!"
- In reply to: Nicky: "Re: NAT is not a mechanism for securing a network.. but.. HELP!"
- Next in thread: Nicky: "Re: NAT is not a mechanism for securing a network.. but.. HELP!"
- Reply: Nicky: "Re: NAT is not a mechanism for securing a network.. but.. HELP!"
- Reply: Shawn K. Quinn: "Re: NAT is not a mechanism for securing a network.. but.. HELP!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|