2 ms·
I've often seen criticism that "NAT is not a security boundary" etc., but never seen them explained. How is putting your network behind a NAT different from a
by tgsovlerkhgsel 9y ago
I've often seen criticism that "NAT is not a security boundary" etc., but never seen them explained.
How is putting your network behind a NAT different from a stateful firewall set to deny inbound connections (and allow outbound and related ones)?
- maccam94 9y agoIt's different because not only does it deny inbound connections, it breaks the end-to-end principle[1] of the internet. You can have the security boundary without NAT by using a firewall, so if that's all you want, don't use NAT. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End-to-end_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End-to-end_principle