ip vs. dhcp security

[PTrudeau]

I'm asking this question for a family business that has roadrunner sevice. Right now they don't have a static ip address, but need one to connect Muzak service (remote cameras). The computer support firm that manages the network says that having a static ip address will make the network more vulnerable and wants to charge $1000 to improve security. Sorry, I don't have more details on their solution.

I can't find anything definitive one way or the other. Kind of sounds like the support firm is blowing smoke, but I need to have proof.

Thanks for the help,
Pat

 

[segment]

for $1000 I'll give you a /26 and a machine to go with it. They're giving you crap. Having a crappy network regardless of static addressing is problematic, as since anyone can scan subnets for problems can likely find you anyway. Anyway, you could probably look into something like noip (

http://www.no-ip.com)

for a pseudo static address. Might help or you can look into getting some form of proxy service to use as a static address.

sil

http://www.politrix.org

 

[PTrudeau]

segment,
Thanks for the reply. Can you point me to someplace to get a set of reliable facts to show a very non-tech oriented mother-in-law that the guys she has are not totally on the ball? Just yesterday, she got one of the e-card viruses. Scares the s*** out of me to think what they have running for security.

For my own education, what the he** is a /26?

Thanks again,
Pat

 

[thedaver]

/26 is a CIDR network notation for an allocation of static network addresses. Without explaining CIDR (look it up, you should learn), you'll be allocated somewhere in the 750+
IP addresses range if the other poster was serious. Sounds like he/she was making a point rather than making an offer.

Surfinbox.com Business Internet Services - National Dialup, DSL, T-1 and more.

http://www.surfinbox.com/ds3.php

 

[PTrudeau]

Thanks daver,

And to pacbell for the 1 page explanation of having no class @

http://public.pacbell.net/dedicated/cidr.html

That's a good example of what I need to prove/disprove my point of static ip's making a network more vulnerable to attack. Is a network 5%, 10%, 50% more vulnerable? Less?
Is it just the visibility of a static ip that makes it more likely to be hacked?

Just looking to get pointed in the right direction. Did a dogpile search (Google, Yahoo, Ask Jeeves About, LookSmart, Teoma, Overture, FindWhat, etc), didn't find it. Maybe NIST or CERT?

Would I be better served posting this in forum117?

Thanks again,
Pat