RE: RE: Wireless Security

["Herman Frederick Ebeling, Jr." <hfebelingjr () lycos com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

- ----Original Message----
From: Another User [mailto:another () roundcube net]
Sent: Monday, 17 October, 2005 19:14
To: hfebelingjr () lycos com
Subject: Re: RE: Wireless Security

: this is cool. I think I like this.
:
: On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 23:01:36 -0400, "Herman Frederick Ebeling, Jr."
: <hfebelingjr () lycos com> wrote:
::
:: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
:: Hash: SHA1
::
:: G. Allen,
::
::      Using your analogy of someone putting their outgoing snail mail into "your"
:: mailbox and how their return address is
:: personal information that they've released into the public.  Then couldn't a
:: person (or their lawyer) who has had their
:: wireless network (or even a wired network) hacked make the same claim about
:: the information that their computer is
:: providing to Windows explorer?
::
::      I mean we all know that there is a certain amount of information that can be
:: gleaned from a computer hooked to the
:: network without actually opening said computer.
::
::      And as I am sure as we all know now all "hackers" are bad.  As we would not
:: have a lot of the admin/security tools
:: that we now enjoy IF it weren't for "hackers."  Nor would people know about
:: the security problems that are present in
:: some systems/software.  But sadly the media (at present) "likes" to call
:: anyone and everyone who commits a crime with a
:: computer a "hacker" whether they are or not.  All that matters to the media
:: is that a crime was committed and that a
:: computer was used to commit that crime, so ergo the person who committed said
:: crime "MUST" be a "hacker. . ."
::
::      I mean using the way the media uses the term hacker the dumpster diver who
:: compiles a database of names and CC numbers
:: and mail order catalogs that they've ordered from is also a "hacker." Even
:: though s/he could do the same thing with a
:: notebook and a pen/pencil. . .
::
::      Using your own analogy admin/security tools are just admin/security tools
:: until someone uses them to gain unauthorized
:: access to a computer that they wouldn't normally have access to. . . Correct?
::
:: Herman

Does this mean that I've gotten something "right" here???

Herman

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.3

iQA/AwUBQ1RhWR/i52nbE9vTEQJSlQCg3go8K4NADzO/YYmIpAotPzyDcCAAnRJw
KFTQ9Avz9SAK71+E0jKYPZ56
=50k9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----