Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:29:52 +0200 From: Achim Patzner <ap@bnc.net> To: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Performance improvement for NAT in IPFIREWALL Message-ID: <20030703082952.GA92881@bnc.net> In-Reply-To: <3F037D5B.9070908@mac.com> References: <3F0316DE.3040301@tenebras.com> <20030702183838.GB4179@pit.databus.com> <3F0327FE.3030609@tenebras.com> <3F0331EE.6020707@mac.com> <3F0350C7.7010009@tenebras.com> <3F036571.8030609@mac.com> <3F036DEE.8010408@tenebras.com> <3F037D5B.9070908@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 08:48:27PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote: > >>"Since NAT actually adds no security, > >You're of the school that sez "what I tell you three times is true?" > It worked for Dorothy, right? :-) Well... If you only want to convince hillbillies it might be enough. Actually NAT makes networks safer; it has been stopping a lot of drive-by self-foot-shooting by Windows users around me (who were so frustrated by not being able to run their c00l borgware. You see? I'm a strong believer in "the enemy is NOT out there on the Net"... Achim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030703082952.GA92881>