Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue
From: Barry Margolin (barmar_at_alum.mit.edu)
Date: 10/13/04
- Previous message: Michael: "Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Leythos: "Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue"
- Next in thread: Leythos: "Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 00:24:24 -0400
In article <MPG.1bd5eb7cf0bb7d03989848@news-server.columbus.rr.com>,
Leythos <void@nowhere.org> wrote:
> In article <ckgvdm$24j$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>, david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk
> says...
> > "
> > NAT is NOT a security solution.
> > Firewalls are security solutions.
> > "
>
> I express this same thing when I hear people stating they own a firewall
> when all they own is a NAT device.
What devices are you talking about? Most home broadband routers include
basic firewall functionality. No, it's not as powerful or configurable
a firewall as a PIX, SGS, or Checkpoint, but neither is it just a packet
filter or NAT.
-- Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
- Previous message: Michael: "Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Leythos: "Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue"
- Next in thread: Leythos: "Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|