|
Posted by Les Cargill on January 30, 2008, 7:06 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
>> Another box to secure traffic over a cable in the house? Brilliant!
>
> Yep. Paranoia is a good thing. To someone with "serious security
> concerns", such added boxes will pacify them for a while. At least
> until the next alarmist theoretical exploit is released in the trade
> press. Besides, wearing one of those cool looking electronic key
> loaders on a neck chain is high tech fashion.
>
> I'm waiting for home Tempest qualified packaging and shielded
> keyboards. Maybe home routers with built in RADIUS servers and
> biometric authorization. Maybe a video camera in the laptop that
> recognizes the owner. Naw, too easily spoofed. Maybe an
> olfactometric (smell) sensor that recognizes the user by their
> distinctive aroma. Simple fingerprint readers are so passe and can be
> faked. I almost forgot the encrypting ethernet adapters for securing
> LAN traffic from sniffing.
>
> Of course, the same users that are so concerned about their security
> can't seem to get OpenPGP and Enigmail encrypted email working. They
> also can't seem to remember their 100+ odd passwords (or use the same
> same password for everything). They also lose their X.509 certificate
> dongles and barely understand how the technology is used, much less
> how it works. Meanwhile, their Vista box demand approval for doing
> just about everything, that genuine security alerts are lost in the
> muddle.
>
> For those with "serious security concerns" (and for those selling the
> technology), no amount of additional security or additional black
> boxes, is enough.
>
>
If you have "serious security concerns", take the bloody thing
offline.
--
Les Cargill
| 
XML site map