No, I was thinking of ICMP denial of service attacks and udp scans.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ederlindo Cojuangco [SMTP:derts @
cebu .
mozcom .
com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 1997 4:49 AM
> To: Stackpole, Bill
> Cc: 'grantj @
pacbell .
net'; firewalls @
GreatCircle .
COM
> Subject: RE: Network Address Translation Security
>
>
>
> On Tue, 25 Nov 1997, Stackpole, Bill wrote:
>
> > If you implement all the Cisco security recommendations, a good
> > access-list, deny inbound pings and do NAT you will make it pretty
> > difficult for anyone to do much harm. Make sure all the security
> > patches are up to date on the hosts you allow inbound traffic (i.e.
> > mail) to. If this doesn't sound like it will be enough you could
> > implement the Firewall Feature Set Cisco has just announced. It
> won't
> > be out for a couple of months but it will provide an extra measure
> of
> > security for about $900. Plus the cost of upgrading your flash
> memory.
> ===============
> Hi! With regards to the inbound pings who've mentioned above is
> in that relation to the land Dos attack on routers? Just curious.
>
> EDERTS
>
|
|
