-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Christofer C. Bell wrote: > On 12 Apr 2006 18:01:56 +0200, Ingemar Nilsson <init@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> "Bill Polhemus" <bill@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> >>>> For the life of me, I do not understand why anyone would hook their >>>> computer up directly to the cable (or dsl) modem rather than through a NAT >>>> router. >>> Some people trust the software running on their computers more than the >>> software running on a cable modem. Personally, I would never let a cable >>> modem connect directly to my internal network. I would always want a computer >>> I controlled acting as a firewall between it and my network. >> If I have no running services with ports open to the network, what's the >> real difference? Okay, I understand about possible kernel bugs, but how big >> is this risk? > > If you are not running anything listening to any ports, there is no > risk involved. If you are not running anything listening on any ports, why do you have an internet connection? C. - -- Craig McLean http://fukka.co.uk craig@xxxxxxxxxxx Where the fun never starts Powered by FreeBSD, and GIN! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEPShRMDDagS2VwJ4RAjivAKC4M6MGwZ3nqUIsZ1qO7yUAPDV66gCg4lE7 O7Pl+zBdqv7IIYXrlLLZI04= =mQFi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
