|
Posted by Burkhard Ott on January 13, 2008, 9:20 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Am Sat, 12 Jan 2008 21:34:29 +0100 schrieb Sebastian G.:
> The router adds exactly zero protection.
>
>> Its like your car. If you lock the doors, most thieves will move on
>> to a car that ISN'T locked.
>
>
> Except that a router doesn't add any security.
I totally aggree with you Sebastian, the companies try to suggest security
is a drag and drop thing. As you can see these tactics helps to sell the
most crap.
cheers
|
|
Posted by Al Dykes on January 13, 2008, 9:31 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
>Am Sat, 12 Jan 2008 21:34:29 +0100 schrieb Sebastian G.:
>
>
>> The router adds exactly zero protection.
>>
>>> Its like your car. If you lock the doors, most thieves will move on
>>> to a car that ISN'T locked.
>>
>>
>> Except that a router doesn't add any security.
>
>I totally aggree with you Sebastian, the companies try to suggest security
>is a drag and drop thing. As you can see these tactics helps to sell the
>most crap.
>
>cheers
A router doesn't, but any home broadband gateway with more than one
RJ45 jack on the inside ever made is going to run NAT and NAT is a
drop-dead firewall for incoming connections.
That's exactly what the vast majority of retail computer users need as
a big part of a safe computing regime.
|
|
Posted by Sebastian G. on January 13, 2008, 12:29 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> A router doesn't, but any home broadband gateway with more than one
> RJ45 jack on the inside ever made is going to run NAT and NAT is a
> drop-dead firewall for incoming connections.
Apparently you don't understand how NAT works. Dropping an incoming packet
is only done if others means of routing the packet fail:
- existing NAT states (denote that this can be triggered at the client)
- Layer 7 protocol helpers
- a DHCP's server knowledge about connected clients
- UPnP and network topology discovery
- guessing the most likely target (!)
> That's exactly what the vast majority of retail computer users need as
> a big part of a safe computing regime.
Nonsense. The vast majority abuses MSIE as a webbrowser, MSOE as a
newsreader, Windows Messenger as IM and Windows Media Player as media
player, and a router doesn't change anything about this trivial exploitability.
|
|
Posted by Victek on January 12, 2008, 8:38 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options > Although I use only one computer. I would like to add a router for the
> firewall protection.
>
> Any specific suggestions?
>
> Thanks for the help.
I'm using a Netgear WGR 614. Along with NAT it offers SPI (stateful packet
inspection), and the option turn off response to ping and UPnP. It does
support wireless, however the radio can be turned off if you don't need it.
If/when you do you can enable WPA2 encryption. This router only costs $39.
This is so affordable that I don't see the point of using a previous
generation router without the more advanced firewall options. JMHO of
course.
|
|
Posted by Todd H. on January 13, 2008, 8:30 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> Although I use only one computer. I would like to add a router for the
> firewall protection.
>
> Any specific suggestions?
Hi Tom,
Don't let Sebastian's cheery demeanor and pedantry over terminology
dissuade you from a good idea of some hardware based protection
between you and the internet. Right after he tells you that what you
propose is a bad idea, he'll be sure to tell you that the "firewall"
software that is currently the only thing keeping your computer from
unsolicited internet traffic is completely inadequate.
what's your budget? If "under $100" is the target, a lot of folks
have used the Linksys BEFSR41 (wired) or WRT54GL (includes wireless
functionality) to good success. Both include a stateful packet
inspection hardware based firewall. It's not a "real" firewall in the
way boxes costing several times this would be, but it's also largely a
plug and play effort versus spending a signficant portion of your week
learning to configure it.
Wired only:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833124001&Tpk=befsr41
Wireless as well, and the version that lets you grow into 3rd party
firmware if you ever decide to play with it:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833124190
Best Regards,
--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | why wireless router cheaper than plain router? | June 15, 2005, 11:40 am |
| Connecting to VPN Router That's Behind Another Router | January 29, 2008, 8:06 pm |
| Router/Firewall/VPN Appliance vs. Router and firewall appliances | May 4, 2006, 5:28 pm |
| router contains a built-in switch versus router without a built-in switch | September 14, 2005, 10:22 pm |
| 56k router with nat | May 4, 2005, 10:46 pm |
| router | May 13, 2005, 1:05 pm |
| Do I need a new router? | August 13, 2005, 11:09 pm |
| do i need a new router | September 19, 2005, 7:58 pm |
| Help with router | December 30, 2005, 9:06 am |
| NAT Router | March 27, 2007, 11:53 am |
|
XML site map