Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Absence?! (Score 1) 595


Try explaining DHCP, MAC addresses, and static assignments to the average person. Good luck

Exactly why NAT has some security benefits. Set it and leave it alone as a part of other security processes at the OS layer.

Comment Re:Absence?! (Score 1, Insightful) 595

Security is a process. If that process is made easier for some users by using NAT, then it's a benefit. Home users can't manage firewalls effectively. NAT is a good method (even if flawed) to protect some classes of users. Is it perfect? No. But that's why you also have other protections at other layers (host-based firewall, virus scanners, etc.)

Comment Re:Absence?! (Score -1) 595

Incorrect. NAT does have a security benefit. Unless ports are opened, there is no direct inbound access into the backend subnet. Yes, firewalls exist and can protect IPv6, but having a NAT simplifies security for most home users.

Comment No, well maybe (Score 1) 72

In one sense I disagree of the need for solid Linux skills. The rise of short term systems (in general, DevOps) means that you don't need to be concerned with the inner workings of the system and you just use something like chef to configure the system on an as-needed basis. You won't care how long the system is stable because it'll only be around for a few hours. After that it's destroyed only to be recreated later on. You can build entire systems without even enabling SSH and having interactive access.

On the other hand, there is still a need for qualified people since not everyone has bought into DevOps. They want systems that exist for years with little to no unexpected downtime. I see this as a bit of a pendulum swinging back at some point. Not sure when.

Comment Re:No options. (Score 2) 229

I don't think it was their intent - it's just how things progressed.

In return for getting a monopoly in a town, the cable company set up local access channels, gave free cable TV to schools and town offices, likely gave free Internet to all those areas too. The money to pay those things needs to come from somewhere - either you pay more taxes or you pay more on the cable bill. We're now at the point where all these things have been established for years and the cable companies have contracts with towns granting them monopoly status for the length of the contract. My town now has competition since I can choose between Comcast and FIOS but you can't realistically have a brand new cable company come in and offer service - there's limited amount of space on telephone poles. Maybe we move to a model where Comcast offers the physical layer as some sort of Ethernet-like protocol and customers get to choose their Internet/Cable/phone from one of multiple providers.

Slashdot Top Deals

FORTUNE'S FUN FACTS TO KNOW AND TELL: A giant panda bear is really a member of the racoon family.