Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 33 of 33
  1. #31
    Untangle Ninja sky-knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    26,393

    Default

    Good stuff! Glad it's working for you.
    Rob Sandling, BS:SWE, MCP
    NexgenAppliances.com
    Phone: 866-794-8879 x201
    Email: support@nexgenappliances.com

  2. #32
    Master Untangler
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    101

    Default

    Just to confirm once more I am on business in the Bay Area, USA this week and using IPSec address of 0.0.0.0 on my Untangle IPSec VPN app still allows my to connect to my VPN server using a dynamic hostname that updates with any WAN IP changes.

    So if nobody on this forum raises violent objections why this might be a security risk I think we have a solution?

  3. #33
    Untangle Ninja sky-knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    26,393

    Default

    It's not any more of a security risk than running it on a specific address. 0.0.0.0 just means it's running on all addresses and the only downside I can think of is someone might try to connect to the L2TP service from a configured client from inside the network they are connecting to. That'll effectively disable the network connection on the device, but it won't do anything to Untangle or the surrounding network.

    But my opinion is having a service active on many IP addresses is the same security weakness as having it active on one address. Something that's publicly accessible is at risk, doesn't matter how many times it's accessible.
    Rob Sandling, BS:SWE, MCP
    NexgenAppliances.com
    Phone: 866-794-8879 x201
    Email: support@nexgenappliances.com

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2