Добро пожаловать, Гость. Пожалуйста авторизуйтесь здесь.
FGHIGate на GaNJa NeTWoRK ST@Ti0N - Просмотр сообщения в эхоконференции IPV6
Введите FGHI ссылку:


Присутствуют сообщения из эхоконференции IPV6 с датами от 31 Jul 11 14:37:00 до 01 Apr 24 00:03:00, всего сообщений: 7402
Ответить на сообщение К списку сообщений Предыдущее сообщение Следующее сообщение
= Сообщение: 5823 из 7402 ============================================= IPV6 =
От   : Tony Langdon                     3:633/410          27 Jan 19 20:11:00
Кому : Victor Sudakov                                      27 Jan 19 20:11:00
Тема : Re: NAT
FGHI : area://IPV6?msgid=967.fido-ipv6@3:633/410+20b2c31c
На   : area://IPV6?msgid=2:5005/49+5c4c6f84
= Кодировка сообщения определена как: ASCII ==================================
Ответ: area://IPV6?msgid=2:5005/49+5c4d9890
==============================================================================
-=> On 01-26-19 21:18, Victor Sudakov wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

VS> It was not intended as a security mechanism initially, but over time,
VS> it became one, and is required by many security guidelines. Ask some
VS> computer security specialist you trust, if you don't believe me.

Well, having compared notes, I am wary of anyone who calls themselves a
"specialist" without personal knowledge and trust of the person. :)  I've
certainly heard a lot of dodgy stories about so-called "specialists" in
networking from a very trusted source over the years.

VS> Of course it does more! No packet filter *hides* *src* *addresses* of
VS> your internal hosts, and that is exactly what security people love NAT
VS> for.

True, but IPv6 has mechanisms for source IP privacy without NAT.

VS> Sorry you are mistaken. Very few attacks nowdays are based on injecting
VS> malicious traffic into your network, those times are long gone.
VS> Information gathering about your intranet could be much more important
VS> than the ability to send traffic into it from outside.

That is a good point.

TL> NAT still creates a lot of problems, ask anyone who'd wrestled with
TL> port forwarding, to try and get services opened to the Internet.

VS> That's a different story, I myself have wrestled enough with IPv4 NAT.
VS> So I would be happy to advocate NAT-less IPv6 to anyone, but I need
VS> arguments. Have not heard anything new so far.

Yeah so have I and it's a pain in the proverbial.


... Sir, the Romulans do not take prisoners!
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)

К главной странице гейта
Powered by NoSFeRaTU`s FGHIGate
Открытие страницы: 0.048335 секунды