2 ms·
I remember those days too. They had nothing to do with computers not being behind a NAT.
by bigstrat2003 2y ago
I remember those days too. They had nothing to do with computers not being behind a NAT.
- tptacek 2y agoThey had to do with computers being directly addressable, routable, and reachable by the entire Internet, which was the default prior to widespread deployment of NAT. NAT isn't the best way to do it, but it probably is the single biggest factor in reducing the external reachability of endpoint IPs.
- tucnak 2y agoNAT deployment here is only tangential to the real differentiator: the firewall. I mean, you can make a case that NAT is a poor man's firewall but you should know that it's not a substitute for a security model. Zero trust is now the dominant philosophy, and it allows for firewall rules to be derived procedurally. It's a shame the likes of Microsoft only care about "zero trust" insofar their compliance checkboxes with the the US government. They see it as a chore. Contrary to Google, Cloudflare, et al.
- tptacek 2y agoNAT was originally delivered as a security mechanism.