From: "Geo." 

Depends on the exploit I would imagine. There are techniques that allow you
to probe behind a nat device and other types of firewalls so just because
something isn't directly on the net doesn't always mean it's safe. But yes,
usually being behind a proxy would be considered "safe enough".

Geo.

"Thees Peereboom"  wrote in message
news:opr16d5pvj7q6jhl{at}news.barkto.com...
> Geo,
>
> It's only connected through the firewall, which is a W2K machine. You
> still think that it would be vulnerable?
>
> - Thees Peereboom
>
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 19:23:12 -0500, Geo.  wrote:
>
> > "Thees Peereboom"  wrote in message
> > news:opr148m8bk7q6jhl{at}news.barkto.com...
> >
> >> So I need to install NT4 on the new server (my current workstation,
> >> which
> >> is one of the W2K machines). The problem is, of course, that I don't
> >> want
> >> to lose all my current configurations, userprofiles, etc.
> >
> > Want some advice, move off NT4 to either 2K or 03 because there won't be
> > any
> > more security patches for NT4 as of 12/31/03. Also rumor has it there
> > may be
> > some major new exploit that affects pretty much every OS and router in
> > the
> > works (I posted in homeless.hack about this). If true, it may be a
rather
> > sudden end to NT4 usage.
> >
> > Geo.
> >
> >
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5