full-disclosure - PIX vs CheckPoint

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20040630202146.01e42d58@213.30.158.180>
From: llevier at argosnet.com (Laurent LEVIER)
Subject: PIX vs CheckPoint

At 10:29 30/06/2004, Cyril Guibourg wrote:
>AFAIK, a PIX can operate without NAT. Did I miss something ?
Yes, NAT can be disabled on Pix.
See the 'nat' command.

Simply put the appropriate line syntax and it will behaves as a normal 
Firewall.
But only behaves because no routing daemon, and Pix keeps managing packets 
as a NAT box, he just does not change the source IP

Brgrds

Laurent LEVIER
Systems & Networks Security Expert, CISSP CISM