On 2010-09-09 19:43, John E. Perry wrote:
On 09/08/2010 05:33 PM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
Golly - NAT IS NOT A SECURITY MEASURE! How many times does that have to be said to sink in?
So what? I've never run across a router that wasn't also a pretty decent firewall. My present Netgear Wifi router makes me invisible to the public Internet, and that's the way I like it. Using WPA/PSK makes me close enough to safe from wardrivers for my purposes.
Yeah, if I stored a lot of critical information on my wife's Windows computers, and if I were important enough or rich enough to make it worth some crook's while to attack me, I could see the need for more.
How critical is your money? >:-) I met a chap, actually the teacher at a networking course I took. He commented on how he, quite easily, entered his neighbour WiFi network. From there, he gained access to the windows machine. From there, he captured the login and password used for that neighbour banking account. Then he verified that login/pass by entering himself into that banking account, had a look, and exited. He said that, had he really intended to move money, he would have hacked a second wifi somewhere to do the mischief, so that when the police or whoever started to track back who was responsible, his own IP would not be the one listed, but somebody else's. Thus, even if you don't have bank accounts, if your network is breakable it can be used to cause mischief to others (spam sending, for instance), and you would be the prime suspect when the police start investigating >:-) -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 11.2 x86_64 "Emerald" GM (Elessar))