> That is why many of us keep repeating that NAT is not a security mechanism.
You can say that in general, network firewalls are not a security mechanism. They are at most a means to prevent brute-force attacks from outside of the network.
You can say that in general, network firewalls are not a security mechanism. They are at most a means to prevent brute-force attacks from outside of the network.
Punching through NAT, and most associated state tracking filters, is very easy.
I've implemented such in a production corp environment, as a product to be sold. There is no magic here, it is all well understood technology by the practitioners.
If you actually want to have packet filtering (a firewall) then deploy a firewall instance distinct from any NAT, and with appropriate rules. However that only really helps for traffic volume reduction, the actual security gain from a f/w per se is now minimal, as most attacks are over the top: HTTP/HTTPS, POP/IMAP etc.