[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Dynamic IP log retention = 0?

On Wed, 11 Mar 2009, Joe Greco wrote:

> In our neighbourhood, we don't have a high crime rate.  Despite that,
> if we saw someone walking from house to house, trying doorknobs, we'd
> call the cops.  The fact that everyone has locks on their doors does
> not make it all right for someone to go around from house to house to
> see if they're all locked.

  However, it's not illegal, AFAIK.  It's only illegal if you enter.  Either
  that, or I'm gonna go prosecute some Girl Scouts.

  More relatedly, is there some sort of obligation with IPv6 to move all of
  your NAT'ed hosts away from NAT?  Just because you can doesn't make it a
  good idea.  I agree, NAT != security, but it does give one a single point
  to manage those hosts behind it.

Peter Beckman                                                  Internet Guy
beckman at angryox.com                                 http://www.angryox.com/