MSGID: <10j5sc7$3etcd$10@dont-email.me> 97e783a4
REPLY:  61f54d99
PID: PyGate 1.5.2
TID: PyGate/Linux 1.5.2
CHRS: ASCII 1
TZUTC: 0000
REPLYADDR tnp@invalid.invalid
REPLYTO 3:633/10 UUCP
On 01/01/2026 12:26, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> The internal network destination address_is_  in its routing table.

But not its port. And not in its NAT table,

The essence of NAT is that the originating port cannot be accessed directly.

And that *everything* gets translated, There is no concept of 'allowing 
some shit through even though it's not in my NAT tables' beyond 
theoretical.

Whether  that is a feature of NAT or a firewall, is semantics, but *in 
practice* it is not a security risk.

If the police want to examine my server, they simply knock on the door 
with a warrant. No matter what protocol is on the interface



-- 
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that 
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is 
fully understood.



--- PyGate Linux v1.5.2
 * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)
SEEN-BY: 105/81 106/201 128/187 129/14 305 153/7715 154/110 218/700
SEEN-BY: 226/30 227/114 229/110 112 134 200 206 275 300 317 400 426
SEEN-BY: 229/428 470 616 664 700 705 266/512 291/111 292/854 320/219
SEEN-BY: 322/757 342/200 396/45 460/58 633/10 280 414 418 420 422
SEEN-BY: 633/509 2744 712/848 770/1 902/26 2320/105 5020/400 5075/35
PATH: 633/10 280 229/426