News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:IPv6 Is Hard by ninkendo on Tuesday February 18, 2025 @06:56AM (#43088537)
> The most common NAT (PAT) configurations don't deny unsolicited inbound traffic

That doesn’t make sense.

If I have a single routable IPv4 addresses and 100 machines behind it with RFC1918 addresses, how can any possible router “allow by default” say, port 22? Which machine would it route it to? Would it pick the first one? Randomly select one?

Of course NAT has to drop incoming unsolicited packets. Unless you tell it which machine to route them too, it couldn’t possibly know how to “allow” them in the first place.

Re:IPv6 Is Hard by Dagger2 on Tuesday February 18, 2025 @11:21AM (#43091410)
IP packets have a "destination IP" header field that specifies where the packet goes. The router reads that to figure out where to send the packet.

The only thing NAT does is rewrite the dst or src headers of packets. If there's no rule or state entry that applies to a packet, it doesn't drop the packet. It just leaves the original headers on it.

Re:IPv6 Is Hard by ninkendo on Tuesday February 18, 2025 @06:16PM (#43096372)
How would a packet with a destination IP of my internal RFC1918 address have landed on my WAN interface in the first place? It would require my ISP to have a routing rule that sends it to my router. Is that the threat model you’re thinking about?
Re:IPv6 Is Hard by icedchai on Tuesday February 18, 2025 @01:11PM (#43093085)
He's assuming your non-routeable RFC1918 addresses are actually routed from the Internet, which won't be happening in the normal consumer use case.