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

"N2EY" == n2ey writes:

[... wireless is cheap and portable but needs to be secured ...]

Jack If someone truly sets up their network in this manner, they are
Jack truly running a serious risk, as you describe. I've just moved,
Jack so I have to reinstall my network, and it will actually be set
Jack up with two wireless access points: one for the "inside", which
Jack will be MAC-restricted and locked down with WEP (until my
Jack operating system fully supports TKIP in which case I'll go up to
Jack that protocol), and one which is "outside" for any and all
Jack comers to sit in the nearby park and reach the internet. No
Jack traffic goes to the inside from the outside, and both sides can
Jack see the internet, so life is good.

N2EY Are WEP and TKIP sufficiently secure?

For my purposes, they are. WEP is known to be breakable, and TKIP
hasn't yet been properly tested, but those are the link-level
encrypted layers. 95% of what I do is done through a VNC session
tunneled through SSH -- the combination of WEP/TKIP and SSH is such
that I'm comfortable typing my GPG passphrase over the link.

Jack.
- --
Jack Twilley
jmt at twilley dot org
http colon slash slash www dot twilley dot org slash tilde jmt slash
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFBKoi+GPFSfAB/ezgRAsx9AKDK6xFnjYZ8U27Pg28NiU9/R0YGzQCgzKc9
Roj2Viq0ikK3biziUqByKSE=
=jRtj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----