On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 10:34 -0700, Scott Silva wrote: > William L. Maltby spake the following on 6/13/2006 4:41 AM: > > On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 18:53 -0400, Thomas E Dukes wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> I have been on a dynamic ip for about 5 years and have just upgraded to a > >> static ip. > > <snip> > > > > I almost didn't mention it because it's so common a concern now, but > > just in case. > > > > Static IP gives attackers a lot more leeway in their attempts to > > penetrate.<snip> > I have a dynamic address at home, and according to the logs, it hasn't changed > for over a year. > So I think the firewall and TCP Wrappers stuff applies to ANY machine > connected to the internet. Yep. It's just that whenever someone makes the switch, someone else always remembers to say what I said, essentially. It's really like a gun: always assume it's loaded and handle with care. So too, regardless of static or dynamic, secure your setup. *But*, it's generally considered a little less risky to have a frequently changing IP. BTW, my IP used to not vary much either. But now TW Cable here in the Piedmont/Triad Region has recently made some changes and it is changing more frequently now. I tend to defeat it, not on purpose *yet*, because I stay "up" for extended periods. But they are getting "smarter" (or stupider, depending on your goals) about it. -- Bill -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060613/06730d18/attachment-0005.sig>