Author: Jon Dart
Date: 20:40:57 01/10/05
Go up one level in this thread
NAT alone does not offer much protection. You need a device that implements a stateful inspection firewall. They are not expensive. The fact that port 113 is "closed" vs. in "stealth mode" doesn't really affect your security if the firewall is preventing any connection attempts from reaching your internal LAN. --Jon On January 10, 2005 at 22:57:24, K. Burcham wrote: > > >Whenever I install a home computer for anyone, I always install the pc behind a >router with NAT for protection. So far most are willing to spend the extra >money. The router I prefer costs about $60. > >Using the software available on the internet that scans for open, closed and >stealth ports, I have found that one brand of routers will leave port 113, >Ident, in a "closed" state instead of a "stealth" state. >I always change port 113 to the stealth state once I am finished with setting up >the customers pc. This way when I do a complete port scan, all will show in a >"stealth" mode. > >anyone here have any comments on how secure this is? >any comments at all about doing this, advantages or disadvantages? >I am more curious about any negative comments. > >kburcham
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.