Re: New Protection for 802.11
-- Reading the Wifi report, http://www.weca.net/OpenSection/pdf/Wi- Fi_Protected_Access_Overview.pdf it seems their customers stampeded them and demanded that the security hole be fixed, fixed a damned lot sooner than they intended to fix it. I am struck the contrast between the seemingly strong demand for wifi security, compared to the almost complete absence of demand for email security. Why is it so? --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG IWe4JFeDeor04Pxb96ZsQ7xX+JAwxSs8HQfoAeG5 4rQX6tgLhAvAwLjF+SXlRswSmphBhw4cOXLe9Y4r5 --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com
On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, James A. Donald wrote:
-- Reading the Wifi report, http://www.weca.net/OpenSection/pdf/Wi- Fi_Protected_Access_Overview.pdf it seems their customers stampeded them and demanded that the security hole be fixed, fixed a damned lot sooner than they intended to fix it.
I am struck the contrast between the seemingly strong demand for wifi security, compared to the almost complete absence of demand for email security.
Why is it so?
Because e-mail goes over a wire and Wifi is broadcast. Tapping wires is harder than setting up an antenna in a truck outside your building. It has a lot to do with psycology and magazine articles. It has nothing to do with security. If a lot of people were getting screwed because their e-mail was being read, and it got written up in PC magazine, security would be a much bigger issue. A lot of Wifi users have been screwed and it's showed up in trade journals. That's all! Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
participants (2)
-
James A. Donald
-
Mike Rosing