Wireless insecurity at NANOG meetings
Dave Crocker
dhc2 at dcrocker.net
Sun Sep 22 02:21:48 UTC 2002
At 08:46 PM 9/21/2002 -0400, Sean Donelan wrote:
>Is the Nanog confernce network really insecure for its purpose?
...
>I don't see much of a need to rely on a volunteer network operator to
>provide what I think is the appropriate level of security for my
>communications.
exactly.
seems like the same situation as we have for walk-by hot-spot wireless
nets. is anyone suggesting that they should have some special, local
privacy mechanisms, rather than each user relying on providing their own,
end-to-end mechanisms?
>ICANN had armed guards at its meeting to keep the rif-raff out.
In fact there was a public disclosure of a trivial circumvention of that
mechanism.
It was never clear what actual benefit the guards were supposed to provide,
either.
d/
----------
Dave Crocker <mailto:dave at tribalwise.com>
TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850
More information about the NANOG
mailing list