|
Posted by Juergen Nieveler on October 11, 2005, 7:21 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
>> Either go for real security, or no security - if you have no
>> encryption enabled, you'll at least always remember that there's a
>> good reason to be carefull.
>
> Oh? If you can't afford a suit of armour, best to leave your arse
> flapping in the wind than put on a pair of trousers?
I don't wear trousers for security, I wear them to prevent freezing my
balls off. Even WITH a suit of armour, I'd still wear trousers
underneath :-)
Juergen Nieveler
--
Ever stop to think and then forget to start again?
|
|
Posted by Alun Jones on October 11, 2005, 3:34 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
>
>>> Either go for real security, or no security - if you have no
>>> encryption enabled, you'll at least always remember that there's a
>>> good reason to be carefull.
>>
>> Oh? If you can't afford a suit of armour, best to leave your arse
>> flapping in the wind than put on a pair of trousers?
>
> I don't wear trousers for security, I wear them to prevent freezing my
> balls off. :-)
Similarly, you don't use WEP for security, you do it so your neighbour
doesn't keep using your bandwidth.
Personally, I'd classify an unwanted orchiectomy as somewhat of a security
issue.
Alun.
~~~~
|
|
Posted by Juergen Nieveler on October 12, 2005, 5:33 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> Similarly, you don't use WEP for security, you do it so your neighbour
> doesn't keep using your bandwidth.
But I'd have to stop reading his emails, then ;-)
Juergen Nieveler
--
Committee: People who keep minutes and waste hours
|
|
Posted by Alun Jones on October 12, 2005, 1:21 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options >
>> Similarly, you don't use WEP for security, you do it so your neighbour
>> doesn't keep using your bandwidth.
>
> But I'd have to stop reading his emails, then ;-)
Not at all - he's using wide-open wireless networking after all, more or
less trivial to sniff whether it's to your router or not.
Alun.
~~~~
|
|
Posted by Unruh on October 12, 2005, 12:14 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
>>> Either go for real security, or no security - if you have no
>>> encryption enabled, you'll at least always remember that there's a
>>> good reason to be carefull.
>>
>> Oh? If you can't afford a suit of armour, best to leave your arse
>> flapping in the wind than put on a pair of trousers?
>I don't wear trousers for security, I wear them to prevent freezing my
>balls off. Even WITH a suit of armour, I'd still wear trousers
>underneath :-)
I wear trousers to stop the mosquitos from biting me in uncomfortable places.
I do not pretend that they will stop grizzlies, so I keep my eyes open for
them.
Similarly with WEP.
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | wireless security | June 22, 2006, 2:23 am |
| using wireless internet without security | December 8, 2006, 4:02 am |
| wireless security tools | May 6, 2007, 10:53 am |
| THE NON-WIRELESS WIRELESS NETWORK MONITORING SYSTEM | September 14, 2005, 11:38 am |
| Technical Question on wireless security | July 17, 2005, 7:05 am |
| Wireless adapter security question | April 10, 2006, 1:35 pm |
| wireless router password security | May 7, 2008, 9:59 am |
| Home wireless router security by limiting the number of available IP addresses | June 16, 2007, 11:06 pm |
| Public Wireless Network together with Private Wireless Network | November 15, 2007, 3:39 am |
| Help for noob re wireless | January 16, 2007, 7:54 am |
|
XML site map