William L. Maltby spake the following on 6/13/2006 10:45 AM: > 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. I like the loaded gun analogy, as I have many "bullet wounds" from the internet. Some of them were self-inflicted! -- MailScanner is like deodorant... You hope everybody uses it, and you notice quickly if they don't!!!!