Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: ISP router [Was: Yes, You Need A Firewall On Linux - =?UTF-8?Q?Here=E2=80=99s?= Why And Which To Use]
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2025 19:40:03 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: the-candyden-of-code
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <slrn10b40cl.3thn1.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
References: <106sehe$2kv5n$1@dont-email.me> <87ms8dkcq6.fsf@atr2.ath.cx> <106ubb4$33em5$1@dont-email.me> <6dobmlx9de.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <1070q3q$3m69k$10@dont-email.me> <a01enlxmr9.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <1083746$1m96$13@dont-email.me> <108425m$7efa$3@dont-email.me> <emmgnlxv15.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <1085j44$j3am$14@dont-email.me> <m68jnlxg6h.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <1088gh9$19b27$6@dont-email.me> <8bulnlxf5e.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <108ade7$1n7i9$2@dont-email.me> <eo0nnlxut7.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <108ali5$1pga7$1@dont-email.me> <108b1vt$1sh9b$2@dont-email.me> <mgt37iFb0fbU12@mid.individual.net> <108c4ro$234t5$12@dont-email.me> <108dht5$2f5h3$4@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2025 19:40:04 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6138e03686ebfd62351134edf08f14dd"; logging-data="2322156"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+oJkm0WSvij2RqcvD+L+ziUH5RqMHCucc/a79trLhySA=="
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:OJyMuF7gKOee2e+afohnqEVG2e4=
X-Face: b{dPmN&%4|lEo,wUO\"KLEOu5N_br(N2Yuc5/qcR5i>9-!^e\.Tw9?/m0}/~:UOM:Zf]% b+ V4R8q|QiU/R8\|G\WpC`-s?=)\fbtNc&=/a3a)r7xbRI]Vl)r<%PTriJ3pGpl_/B6!8pe\btzx `~R! r3.0#lHRE+^Gro0[cjsban'vZ#j7,?I/tHk{s=TFJ:H?~=]`O*~3ZX`qik`b:.gVIc-[$t/e ZrQsWJ >|l^I_[pbsIqwoz.WGA]<D
Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:72675

Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 23:12 this Saturday (GMT):
> On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:23:52 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> The OSI model was just more academic spaff. Most hardware/software
>> broke that model anyway.
>
> Not sure what a better alternative is, which is why still use it, or
> at least parts of it. My interpretation:
>
> Layer 0
>     -- the laws of physics. Our starting point for building everything
> Layer 1
>     -- the physical connection. Might be a wire, might be radio waves,
>        cans connected by string, whatever.
> Layer 2
>     -- the point-to-point communication protocol
> Layer 3
>     -- routing layer
> Layer 4
>     -- end-node-to-end-node communication
> Layer 5
>     -- process on one node communicating with process on another node
> Layer 6
>     -- not really meaningful
> Layer 7
>     -- the actual applications the user wants to run
> Layer 8
>     -- the human user

So you're saying a Social Engineering attack could be called a Layer 8
attack?

> If you look for example at IEEE802, then that’s kind of a split across
> layer 1 and layer 2. IEEE802.2 defines the MAC layer, with those “MAC
> addresses” we’re all familiar with, which is point-to-point but
> hardware-independent. Then IEEE802.x for x ≥ 3 defines all the various
> options for a hardware-dependent layer under that. E.g. 802.3 is (near
> enough) what we call “Ethernet”, 802.11 is wi-fi, and so on.


So that's why wifi is called 802.11 sometimes, cool!
-- 
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom