|
|
|
|
|
by lxgr
1048 days ago
|
|
In almost all NAT implementations, public-side ports are dynamically assigned, which implies that inbound connections aren't possible (unless port forwarding is explicitly configured). Is that really conceptually so different from a stateful firewall allowing inbound packets only for established connections/flows? "NATs are good because otherwise people wouldn't have any firewalls" is a tired take, yes, but I don't see the point being needlessly pedantic about the semantics of NAT vs. stateful firewalls when in this case, the effect is the same: No inbound packets without prior outbound packets (or a connection establishment for TCP). |
|