alt Hacker NewsFling it around?
There are a shitload of people who maintain networks, like home or small business networks, that aren’t network administrators. Most of those people are not prepared to have their Chinese WiFi cameras, myriad smart appliances, and heck, even home computers easily individually accessible from the internet. It’s an extremely simple concept, no?
Replies
Lack of NAT doesn't imply lack of firewall, though.
And home routers have firewalls that block inbound connections by default -- including with no-NAT IPv6.
NAT is good. It's CGNAT that's bad, because that's NAT imposed on subscribers, and not NAT that they control.
nobody suggests they should be, the ONLY difference is that the routers will block inbound connections by default, and you open your port in the firewall section instead of the shitty router instead of the nat/port forwarding
Actually I think most people really do want that stuff accessible from the internet. Currently that requires a central server and a subscription, but imagine if it didn't. Imagine if you could log into your washing machine from anywhere instead of only when you're at home, and it would keep working even if LG went bankrupt.