| Da: |
"Lewis G Rosenthal" <os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com> |
Intestazioni complete
Messaggio non codificato |
| Oggetto: |
Re: [OS2Wireless]Re: David Pogue wakes up about WIFI encryption |
| Data: |
Sat, 13 Jan 2007 11:25:29 -0500 |
| A: |
OS/2 Wireless Users Mailing List <os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com> |
|
|---|
On 01/11/07 11:36 am, Doug LaRue thus wrote :
** Reply to message from "Carl Gehr" <os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com> on Tue, 09 Jan 2007 22:37:02 -0500 (EST)
Here's a very timely article on this topic. It should generate some
interesting discussion...
Carl
On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:23:27 -0500, Computerworld First Look wrote:
* Wi-Fi concerns prompt new security laws
http://cwflyris.computerworld.com/t/1179890/44248198/46688/2/
Once again the laws miss the mark since what is needed to be protected is
consumers/customer data and information. We need laws to start protecting
OUR data from careless corporate security practices and enable monetary
damage rewards for those harmed. Only then will businesses start thinking
more about what is the right thing to do instead of just doing what ´everyone
else is doing´.
Forcing EVERYONE to close their wireless network sounds more like the laws
were promoted by the cable and ISDN networks or just plain ignorance at
the law making level.
Doug, I finally took the time to *read* this article (though I have not as yet read the laws discussed). Your point is well-taken. I got a distinct chuckle out of the mention that the equipment manufacturers be required to provide warning stickers about Wi-Fi security. This is like Smith & Wesson providing a sticker which says that guns can be used as lethal weapons (I'm an NRA member).
The fact that the Westchester County IT department is war driving is another hoot. Talk about taxpayer dollars (not) at work...
Again, much of this comes down to the mistaken impression that consumers have a right of privacy. There's no such mention in the Constitution; we are all the gatekeepers of our own privacy. Security-lax businesses should indeed be held to account in civil court, and should it be proven that the individual (the plaintiff in such cases, one would assume) was negligent in using http vs https, for example, the case should be thrown out.
I can use the electrical current in my house to jolt my neighbor, but I wouldn't expect the Long Island Power Authority to drive by and make sure that I didn;t have any extension cords in my garage long enough to reach across my proprty line. :-)
<snip>
"Excuse me: Can you tell me the IP address of this cable?"
- Actual question from a MCSE!
Priceless...
--
Lewis
------------------------------------------------------------
Lewis G Rosenthal, CNA, CLP, CLE
Rosenthal & Rosenthal, LLC
Accountants / Network Consultants
New York / Northern Virginia www.2rosenthals.com
eComStation Consultants www.ecomstation.com
Novell Users Int'l www.novell.com/openenterpriseserver
Need a managed Wi-Fi hotspot? www.hautspot.com
------------------------------------------------------------
|