As I have personally found out the hard way, you should make sure all the
security inside your firewall is as good as you can make it. I had a Win 2k box
compromised despite having a certain amount of security and virus protection set
up because another user inside our firewall opened an email attachment which
promptly attacked everything it could find inside our firewall. Fortunately I
had enough of the security fixes installed on my system so it didn't turn into a
zombie but I learned a lesson from it.
I would say that as soon as you put up a wireless access point, you are making
your home Lan much more susceptible to attacks. So it behooves you to make sure
that all your systems have the latest security patches in place with an on-going
schedule to review and install any security patches that become available.
I think the major risk to folks that have high speed persistent network
connections is that someone will use their wireless access point to circulate
virii and trojans which of course would appear to be originating from the
cable-modem/DSL connection. Bad stuff...
-Alex
Wirth's Law: Software gets slower faster than Hardware gets faster!
"On the side of the software box, in the 'System Requirements' section, it
said 'Requires Windows 95 or better'. So I installed Linux." - Anonymous
The closest I'm going to get to retirement is when I put new Michelins
on my car!
On Tue, 23 Apr 2002, Benjamin Scott wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Apr 2002, at 3:46pm, Alex Hewitt USG wrote:
> > Even though WEP is considered a very weak standard, it's better than
> > nothing.
>
> Some have argued that you are, in fact, better off with nothing, as WEP
> simply gives you a false sense of security.
>
> In my opinion, it depends mostly on what you are protecting. For a home
> connection that you really don't care about, WEP is likely to be adequate.
> For a business, forget it.
>
> > In order for someone to break down your WEP security, they need to capture
> > an hour or more of your traffic.
>
> From what I have heard, some of the poorer WEP implementations can
> actually be cracked in minutes. I don't understand the details, but I guess
> it has something to do with the randomness of some initial numbers or
> something...
>
> ("I read it on the Internet, it has to be true!")
>
> --
> Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not |
> | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or |
> | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. |
>
>
> *****************************************************************
> To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body.
> *****************************************************************
>
>
*****************************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body.
*****************************************************************
