• Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 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.