dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
390
Angrychair
join:2000-09-20
Jacksonville, FL

1 recommendation

Angrychair

Member

The problem

Good article. Have had friends who ran low end linux machines as routers since the 90's. My problem with these is the power consumption.

Even the lowest end of normal computers tend to draw a significant amount of power more than appliance routers do. (~50+ watts for a headless linux machine compared to ~5 watts for an appliance)

Not to even mention your linux machine being used as a router is a target, unlike an appliance router.

A compromised linux machine is a real problem, so it just seems like a lot more admin work and power use than most people would want in the long run.

fifty nine
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ

fifty nine

Member

said by Angrychair:

Not to even mention your linux machine being used as a router is a target, unlike an appliance router.

A compromised linux machine is a real problem, so it just seems like a lot more admin work and power use than most people would want in the long run.

Isn't that what you have a firewall for?

I run Snort IDS on my firewall too.
Angrychair
join:2000-09-20
Jacksonville, FL

Angrychair

Member

Yes, of course you have a firewall for intrusion protection, isn't that axiomatic? My point is it's just a point of extended risk compared to an appliance.

Davesworld
join:2007-10-30
Thermal, CA

Davesworld to Angrychair

Member

to Angrychair
said by Angrychair:

Not to even mention your linux machine being used as a router is a target, unlike an appliance router.

Excuse me? How is Linux running in your cheap appliance (almost all of them) less of a target? Your assertion makes absolutely no sense!