3 ms·
As far as I see the only thing you're really suggesting here is that consumer routers should have firewalls that can't be disabled, and that NAT currently fulfi
by denkmoon 3y ago
As far as I see the only thing you're really suggesting here is that consumer routers should have firewalls that can't be disabled, and that NAT currently fulfills this function.
Much "We're from Silicon Valley and we're here to help" vibes.
- iforgotpassword 3y agoFor the ISP-provided one, absolutely a sensible move. Just like most ISPs here don't offer bridging mode anymore in their modem+router combos. This still doesn't mean someone who has no clue will end up buying a device that allows them to do this, and ignore a warning message in big bold letters and still do it, but the vast majority of people will be saved from themselves.
- fullspectrumdev 3y agoThat’s what my current ISP does - their current router firmware doesn’t have functioning UPnP, nor does it have an option for port forwarding. It’s extremely annoying.