[mythtv-users] Mythbackend Service not starting up after 0.25 upgrade

[Larry K]

On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Zarthan South <zarthan at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>>>> It is less confusing to everyone if you just XXX out the middle two
>>> octets as in 192.XXX.XXX.15
>>>
>>
>> I don't see any reason to obscure a NATed IP address.  Does this present
>> some sort of vulnerability or risk?
>>
>>
> While an internal NATed address isn't a vulnerability in itself it is a
> piece of information that can be used when mounting an attack. If you
> always use the XXX to block out a NATed address you won't forget when you
> post that type information from work where it can be used. The poster
> obviously wanted to conceal their address hence my suggestion.
>

Yeah, I was just trying to understand how a NATed address could be used, as
you say, by an attacker.


> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
> http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20120417/b855f56c/attachment.html>