Programmer Humor

32495 readers

34 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
No NSFW content.
Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

683

Basically the extent of my IPv6 knowledge (lemmy.world)

submitted 4 months ago by renzev to c/[email protected]

88 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Template source: https://web.archive.org/web/20210304000634/https://www.government.nl/topics/coronavirus-covid-19/visiting-the-netherlands-from-abroad/checklist

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] AceBonobo 1 points 4 months ago (3 children)

The main benefit of a NAT is that by default it prevents all external access to the hosts inside the network. Any port you have open is not accessible unless explicitly forwarded.

This has a lot of security benefits. Regardless, everything you said is sounds true to me.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

You can get exactly the same benefit by blocking non-established/non-related connections on your firewall. NAT does nothing to help security.

Edit: BTW--every time I see this response of "NAT can prevent external access", I severely question the poster's networking knowledge. Like to the level where I wonder how you manage to config a home router correctly. Or maybe it's the way home routers present the interface that leads people to believe the two functions are intertwined when they aren't.

[–] AceBonobo 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I didn't mean prevent, just makes it harder by default. You can still open connections from within the NAT

Edit: I do admit to failing at accessing my IPv6 PC from my IPv6 phone

Edit2: apparently NAT is full of security bugs

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If your home router blocked incoming connections on IPv4 by default now, then it's likely to continue doing so for IPv6. At least, I would hope so. The manufacturer did a bad job if otherwise.

[–] AceBonobo 1 points 4 months ago

I figure the mobile carrier was blocking incoming connections to my phone. This was a couple of years ago, things might have changed since then.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, no. If remote hosts could not send traffic to hosts behind NAT almost nothing would work.

The hacks employed to make NAT work make security worse, not better.

[–] AceBonobo 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

You're talking about NAT traversal? We do have control over which we apps we run though?

Edit: apparently NAT is full of bugs