From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Grant Taylor <gtaylor@riverviewtech.net>
Subject: Re: tcp conn tracking
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 12:49:16 -0600
Message-ID: <45ABCCAC.5010907@riverviewtech.net>
References: <33219704.200191168881881760.JavaMail.root@smtp1.mistletoetech.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0701151926260.9996@blackhole.kfki.hu>
Reply-To: gtaylor+reply@riverviewtech.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701151926260.9996@blackhole.kfki.hu>
List-Id: <netfilter.vger.kernel.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter>,
	<mailto:netfilter-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: </pipermail/netfilter>
List-Post: <mailto:netfilter@lists.netfilter.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netfilter-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter>,
	<mailto:netfilter-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org
Errors-To: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
To: Mail List - Netfilter <netfilter@lists.netfilter.org>

Jozsef Kadlecsik wrote:
> "... NAT is not meant to be a security solution. ..."

Indeed NAT in and of its self is not a security solution.  That being 
said, quite often the obscurity that it provides is erroneously used as 
a (basic) security solution.



Grant. . . .