logoalt Hacker News

reincarnate0x14today at 5:41 AM1 replyview on HN

UPNP and a dozen other NAT defeating tactics exist and have since the early 2000s. NAT translates addresses. Thinking a non-routable range is safe because it's behind NAT is at this point grossly ignorant of how modern network equipment works. It's kind of like port-knocking; yes it makes the attack slightly harder, but doesn't prevent it.

e.g. symmetric NAT exists and often doesn't come with a stateful firewall. Just because the linux box with iptables is protecting your network uses NAT doesn't mean NAT is doing the heavy lifting here. I can see the OMG MY PRIVACY crew is out in force here apparently misunderstanding that NAT does not do that either. I mean, we can explain things to you, but we can't understand it for you.


Replies

stackghosttoday at 7:56 AM

>UPNP and a dozen other NAT defeating tactics exist and have since the early 2000s.

I know that, and you know that, but squillions of people think that turning the UPnP setting off (if they even know what that is) is sufficient, which is why the myth persists.

show 1 reply