I think the analogy is wrong. It's not that the padlock is preset to 0-0-0. The problem is that users don't even bother to use the padlock.
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Outmesguine > Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 11:19 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [SOCALWUG] Forbes Goes Warwalking in New York > > http://wireless.weblogsinc.com/entry/9039361947182348/ > > Wi-Fi Security Needs to be Easy > Posted Jun 15, 2004, 12:34 PM ET by Mike Outmesguine > > Forbes goes warwalking with a security consultant in New > York. Gary Morse > appears to be using a Linux-powered PDA with Kismet Wireless > software to > scan the airwaves. The results showing unsecured Wi-Fi > networks are nothing > new to readers of The Wireless Weblog. However, the padlock > analogy used to > describe user apathy hits the problem dead on: > > "Consider for a minute what the world would be like if all > padlocks were > sold with the default combination "0-0-0" to unlock them, and > that if you > wanted a different combination you would have to set it > yourself. Since > people are lazy, wouldn't lots of padlocks in use still have the 0-0-0 > combination? Consider the implications of using such a lock > on the box that > contains all of the company's trade secrets. > That's essentially what many novice Wi-Fi users do when they > buy their first > wireless router, and Morse has the proof right on the screen > of his PDA. > [...]" > > User apathy is a constant battle in the computer industry. The growing > number of security problems appearing from constantly connected home > computers shows that there is a systemic problem. By creating > technology > hurdles common for tech-literate people, we run into problems > when it's not > user-centric simplicity. The wireless industry needs to make > security a Yes > or No question. Users need to have something as simple as, > "Do you want > fries with that?" > > > >
