On 6/12/10 4:34 PM, "John R Pierce" <pierce@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 12/06/10 4:27 PM, Brian Mathis wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Bob McConnell<rmcconne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> No, the downside is that each address used will be exposed to the world.
>>> I consider that a serious security flaw. ...
>> What you are talking about is a FIREWALL, which is NOT THE SAME THING
>> as a NAT router. ...
>
> Bob, much like my employer's 'E Security' people, seems to think that
> the host addresses themselves are privileged proprietary secrets, and
> exposing them increases the probability of being hacked.
This has been discussed to death on the NANOG list, where various admins
haven't taken the time necessary to unwarp their thinking based off bad
security doctrines from the 90s.
--
Gary L. Greene, Jr.
IT Operations
Minerva Networks, Inc.
Cell: (650) 704-6633
Office: (408) 240-1239
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
