-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote:
>>I feel compelled to quickly point out that NAT/masquerading is _not_ a >>security feature. What you're describing is a stateful firewall, which >>allows only inbound traffic which is related to outgoing requests. This >>is not in any way related to network address translation, which is what >>NAT/masquerading does. iptables can do both, but please don't confuse >>them, nor rely on NAT to protect you. > >All points well accepted. However, in self-defense it is only my language >which is at fault; my iptables is competently set up. I figured as much ... just didn't want to let that confuse the unwary. Cheers -d - -- David Talkington PGP key: http://www.prairienet.org/~dtalk/0xCA4C11AD.pgp -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 6.5.8 Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.75-6 iQA/AwUBPNcOcb9BpdPKTBGtEQJCGgCg24QOpc3/Mc6AmGIrBkDeN4cJCtIAn07m NsFktp8SiGwWW0mTKoBGQbhd =zqpj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
