|
|
Wireless Security
Bruce doesn't secure his wireless Jun 17 2008 09:54PM Robin Wood (dninja gmail com) (2 replies) Re: Bruce doesn't secure his wireless Jun 18 2008 02:40AM The Dark Sniper (thedarksniper gmail com) (2 replies) Re: Bruce doesn't secure his wireless Jun 18 2008 06:57PM Blaine Fleming (groups digital-z com) (1 replies) Re: Bruce doesn't secure his wireless Jun 18 2008 10:20PM Rob Fuller (jd mubix gmail com) (1 replies) Re: Bruce doesn't secure his wireless Jun 18 2008 02:21PM Dave Hull (dphull trustedsignal com) (1 replies) Re: Bruce doesn't secure his wireless Jun 18 2008 07:01PM jesse michael (jesse michael comcast net) (2 replies) RE: Bruce doesn't secure his wireless Jun 18 2008 09:48PM Jag Mohan Singh Kalkal (jag kalkal gmail com) |
|
Privacy Statement |
intrusion (Bruce is god at maths). It's difficult to strike a good
balance between security and usability of system. Bruce found it for
his home network. Attack on desktop from Internet is more probable
than script-kiddie-wardriver in neighborhood so it's not worth a
thing. Ithink it's about ideology also (Linux vs Windows, close vs
open).
Regards
Zacheusz
2008/6/18 jesse michael <jesse.michael (at) comcast (dot) net [email concealed]>:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 09:21:17AM -0500, Dave Hull wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 9:40 PM, The Dark Sniper
>> <thedarksniper (at) gmail (dot) com [email concealed]> wrote:
>> > And what do you suppose might happen if I take my laptop, connect to his
>> > network, type in 192.168.1.1 (or do a host scan and look for a dhcp server)
>> > login useing the default router password ( a quick google search), enable
>> > WPA TKIP, add a password and enable MAC address filtering so only my laptop
>> > could use it? What happens then
>>
>> Bruce pushes the "reset to factory defaults" button. Physical access trumps.
>
> Doesn't necessarily help if the attacker has flashed the device with
> malicious firmware.
>
[ reply ]