From: "Sam Lewis" <os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com>
Message-ID: <4618F2E0.1020103@rollanet.org>
Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2007 08:49:20 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (OS/2; U; Warp 4.5; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041220
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: OS/2 Wireless Users Mailing List <os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com>
Subject: Re: [OS2Wireless]The 'Final' Nail in WEP's Coffin?
References: <list-1073189@2rosenthals.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-1073189@2rosenthals.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Carl Gehr wrote:

>On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 15:29:19 -0700, Neil Waldhauer wrote:
>
>  
>
>>On Sat, 07 Apr 2007 17:42:34 -0400 (EDT), "Carl Gehr"
>><os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com> wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Either eCS provides support, or users will find that they
>>>can no longer attach to any wireless site that cares about a
>>>secure network.
>>>      
>>>
>>I'm sure that's true, but in several years of using wireless on eCS, I haven't
>>encountered a public, secure network.
>>
>>The current GenMac/XWLan is quite nice for using public, unsecured wireless. I
>>use it often.
>>
>>Neil
>>    
>>
>
>Neil, 
>
>While you are certainly correct about 'hot spot' access, there is the
>implication in the article that WEP is/should be removed from any APs
>that are sold in the future in order to encourage better security.
>
>So, let's say I want to improve the speed of MY network from the
>802.11b that I currently have, to 802.11g.  I need a new router/AP, but
>it does not support WEP, only WPA2 to promote a more secure
>environment.  Of course, when I make the router/AP change, I would
>expect to use my new TPad T60s that support 'g' access and WPA2.
>       Oops!  Cannot do this because neither the Intel PRO/1000
>              [8086:109A] nor the Intel 3945 a/b/g  [8086h:4227h]
>              adapters.  [OT for this list, but no audio support
>              either; applicable because it is a netlabs.org project
>              as are the two network adapters.]
>
>How does eCS exist should this happen?
>
>Carl
>

Carl,
Thanks for the link to the article.  I find these interesting.

However if one wants/requires a secure network then WiFi shouldn't be 
used, period.  I don't care what type of encryption/security scheme is 
employed, WiFi will always  be vulnerable  because there will always be 
some intelligent hacker with too much time on their hands with nothing 
to do but crack networks.  Heck as per your article governments will pay 
these hackers to crack the networks.

My company doesn't allow WiFi on the corporate network.  I'm expect that 
is a common policy with most major companies as well with government 
agencies.  A friend of mine just got rid of all his WiFi equipment 
because his wife's government employer won't allow it to be used when 
she VPN's into the work network.

So the bottom line is if you really require a secure network then the 
only way to accomplish that is physical security.  How good is the lock 
to your network closet? :)
Sam

Scanned by WinProxy
http://www.Ositis.com/