[X4U] Router better?

[Philip J Robar]

On Mar 13, 2005, at 3:31 PM, Paul Moortgat wrote:

> Is a router a better proctecion than Netbarrier for breaking in a 
> Mac?  Or is it equal?

First let's distinguish between routers that just do NAT (network 
address translation) and those that have a real firewall built in. NAT 
just hides your local network behind a single public address. It's 
better than nothing, but someone who knows what they're doing can get 
around it. As a matter of fact most ISPs can now tell if you're running 
a "hidden" network through their service.

A real firewall actually knows something about the bits that should or 
shouldn't be flowing through your network. Better routers have 
something called a  Statefull Packet Inspection firewall. Even very 
inexpensive routers have SPI firewalls these days.

See http://www.homenethelp.com/router-guide/features-firewall.asp for a 
short, but good explanation of these issues.

The disadvantage of the firewalls found in inexpensive routers is that 
they usually only monitor packets coming into your network. Software 
firewalls like Netbarrier also watch the packets that originate from 
inside your network and warn you when they see something suspicious.

"NetBarrier X3 analyzes data as it leaves your computer and prevents 
unauthorized exporting of private information such as credit card 
numbers, passwords, sensitive data and more. . . NetBarrier X3 also 
helps cover your tracks, by refusing to give out certain personal 
information." http://www.intego.com/netbarrier/

This is more of a worry with Windows and all the Spyware that is 
present in that environment.


Phil


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2381 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://listserver.themacintoshguy.com/pipermail/x4u/attachments/20050313/41012f25/smime.bin