• Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    6 months ago

    Are you saying that everyone’s router’s firewall drops all packets from connections that originate from outside of their network?

      • Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        6 months ago

        So, really, you were “correcting” me for you and your specific setup at the very beginning because your router’s firewall has a deny rule for all inbound connections because I must have been confusing what a NAT and what a firewall is because I must have been talking about your specific configuration on your specific devices.

        Holy. Fucking. Shit.

        • orangeboats@lemmy.world
          1·
          6 months ago

          Oh come on, are you seriously suggesting that default-deny stateful firewall is not the norm??

          Holy. Fucking. Shit. Indeed.

          You keep on suggesting to me that you really have no idea how networking works. (Which is par on course for people thinking NAT == security, but I digress)

          Let me tell you: All. Modern. Routers. include a stateful firewall. If it supports NAT, it must support stateful firewalling. To Linux at least, NAT is just a special kind of firewall rule called masquerade. Disregarding routers, even your computer whether Linux (netfilter) or Windows (Windows Firewall) comes built-in with a stateful firewall.

          • Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            6 months ago

            Having a NAT on a consumer router is indeed the norm. I don’t even see how you could say it is not.

            I never said NAT = security. As a matter of fact, I even said

            It was not designed for security but coincidentally blah blah

            But hey, strawmanning didn’t stop your original comment to me either, so why stop there?

            Let me tell you: All. Modern. Routers. include a stateful firewall.

            I never even implied the opposite.

            To Linux at least, NAT is just a special kind of firewall rule called masquerade.

            Right, because masquerade is NAT…specifically Source NAT.

            I’m just going to go ahead an unsubscribe from this conversation.

            • orangeboats@lemmy.world
              1·
              6 months ago

              Were I really strawmanning you? Is “I never even implied the opposite” really true? Quote:

              So, really, you were “correcting” me for you and your specific setup

              Yeah, my “specific setup”… which can be found in virtually all routers today.