Re: Wireless insecurity at NANOG meetings

[Dave Crocker <dhc2 () dcrocker net>]

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 () tribalwise com>
TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850