Dave,
I agree fully. By todays standards, the NAT-firewall is no longer not
much of a shield.
I also agree that IPv4 is also not something to build on for the future,
stepping up to IPv6 is the way to go. One has to be prepared for it
since the transition is occurring now at a higher speed.
Victor,
To answer your question directly, no, NAT does not provide adequate security
... for anything.
The best NAT can do is provide obfuscation, or “security by obscurity” which
has been proven beyond the shadow of any doubt to be no security whatsoever.
It just hides information that can
If you run locally, fine for now. However, if you aim to run remote it
will not suffice. Also, today we have to think more about security in
depth, so one have to consider if one machine is breached, then the
others will be wide open if you overly consider the local net as safe.
Therefore to a
I will test port 9200 then.
Security on the network does not work very well at all, and telnet is no
longer installed as it is a security issue to use it. The tradition of
opening ports through firewall/NAT will leave a port open with no
security. For that SSH or TLS is the way to go these
Most home routers have NAT (network address translation). Does this
provide adequate security for this application?
If not, why not? Serious question, not a challenge!
73,
Victor, 4X6GP
Rehovot, Israel
CWops #5
Formerly K2VCO
https://www.qsl.net/k2vco/
.
On 09/02/2022 10:00, Henk Remijn PA5KT
The K4 is accessible through telnet on port 9200.
No security.
It is always a good idea to have security but I would prefer to have the
telnet without security and put the security in the network.
Make sure you have a good firewall between the internet and your radio
equipment. Dont trust
6 matches
Mail list logo
