Re: DSL router and security
Howard,
Oh dear. Please tell us what ISP this is so we can take special care to
avoid it. :)
(Note: NAT breaks all sorts of things, and it is incredibly cheap for an
ISP to use NAT, since they, as an ISP, /should/ be able to afford the IP
address space.)
Regards,
Alex.
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCM d- s:+ a--- C++++ UL++++ P L+++ E W++ N o-- K- w
O--- M- V- PS+ PE- Y PGP t+ 5 X- R tv+ b DI--- D+
G e-- h++ r--- y
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
On Thu, 10 Feb 2000, Howard Mann wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I use DSL with Slink. I previously had a static IP address. I used an IP Chains ruleset as one security level. All was well.
>
> My ISP recently mandated a configuration change for the Cisco DSL router from " bridging" to "ppp" mode, including NAT at the router level.
>
> The router now changes my assigned IP address to a private Class A address ( 10.0.0.2 ). I changed my networking ( eth0) settings to reflect this.
>
> I guess I no longer need the IP Chains firewall. Is this correct ?
>
> What security considerations/measures should I now adopt with respect to my new setup ?
>
> My knowledge of the function of this router is rudimentary.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Howard Mann.
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-security-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
Reply to: