[52278] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Wireless insecurity at NANOG meetings
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (alex@yuriev.com)
Mon Sep 23 09:58:53 2002
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:00:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: alex@yuriev.com
To: Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <031301c26307$d76bead0$8c2a40c1@PHE>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> > Rubbish.
> >
> > There are only two or three types of locks that cannot be picked from t=
he
> > outside by a lockpicker within 10-15 minutes. None of those locks is on=
your
> > outside door. Why do you bother to lock your house?
> >
> But in the case of public WLAN, who is the one that you=B4re trying to ke=
ep
> out?
That is not the point that was responded to [1].
> You don=B4t give the keys to your house to 500 people so your analogy
> sucks.
Again that was not the point that was responded to.=20
In a case of public wireless LAN or any other public line you by
*definition* do not care about protecting public. Can someone please explai=
n
to me why (apart from relative ease of mounting those attacks) do we care
about attacks mounted via wireless LANs more than attacks mounted over any
other medium?
Alex
[1] The point that the original poster made was that since the WEP is rathe=
r
trivial to break, one should not use WEP at all.
