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