Mailing List os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com Archived Message #571

From: "Andy Willis" <os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com> Full Headers
Undecoded message
Subject: Re: [OS2Wireless]Re: David Pogue wakes up about WIFI encryption
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 09:49:51 -0700
To: OS/2 Wireless Users Mailing List <os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com>

Lewis G Rosenthal wrote:
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).
I fear for this country when everyone has to be protected (from themselves).  Personal responsibility is a thing of the past it seems.

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.

Just about every "right" that is protected now days are any but the rights that _were_ clearly outlined in the constitution.
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. :-)

Lewis, don't give them any ideas :P
<snip>
"Excuse me: Can you tell me the IP address of this cable?"
 - Actual question from a MCSE!

  
Priceless...

I get pestered from time to time that I should get MCSE certified.  I have had to logon to a webpage and set a user's password for them because all of their MCSE training did not teach them how to change an expired password.


Subscribe: Feed, Digest, Index.
Unsubscribe
Mail to ListMaster