🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Xns94447C1CBCCCAjbuserspc9org@130.179.16.24>,
Jem Berkes  <jem@users.pc9__org> wrote:
:Sure, NAT doesn't guarantee security (actually it's not even designed for 
:security, that's a firewall). But at least NAT will will keep out random 
:probes that might otherwise reach NetBIOS, P'N'P, IIS/SQL, or some other 
:fantastic Microsoft OS feature:)

When going out, NAT implimentations often try to use the same source
port number, using a different port number only if the original is in
use. So if you have a PC that has NETBIOS turned on, and
Wiley E. Windows decides to do name resolution from the netbios-ns
(udp 137) source port, then the NAT implimentation might, as long
as the translation lasts, allow -anyone- to connect to that port.
And this being UDP, there is mechanism to signal when the name
resolution conversation is finished, so the translation would be kept
open until some timer expires.

The countdown theme from "Jeapordy" is running through my mind loudly
enough that you can probably hear it from your end of the city, Jem ;-)

-- 
Positrons can be described as electrons traveling backwards in time.
Certainly many Usenet arguments about the past become clearer when they
are re-interpreted as uncertainty about the future.
   -- Walter Roberson