On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 13:32 -0500, Adam Maloney wrote: > On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Matthew S. Hallacy wrote: > > > Because it's not a gaping security hole. > > So, your home or business wireless network is open to all then? And > Sendmail shouldn't have disabled promiscuous relay by default starting in > 8.9 either, right? Since you couldn't root the box, it's not really a > problem... > There's a certain barrier to entry there when they have to be outside of your physical location. You shouldn't be letting unscanned/unauthenticated email out of your network anyway. > > unencrypted that just means that someone can drive up and (attempt) to > > exploit the bug of the week on his Windows PC. > > Exploiting the PC is only half the concern. What about random people > using your Internet access? The originating IP is yours. There's no > physical wire to tie back to some dude driving through your neighborhood > sending death threats to the pres. Or saturating your WAN connection. Or > sharing copyrighted files. See above. > > > I think you're concerned as an ISP who doesn't want customers sharing > > their Internet connection accidently (or purposely =), that's fine, but > > don't try to claim it's for their security. > > Wow, an ad hominem attack. My argument is wrong because I work for an > ISP. Except, I've been out of the ISP industry for well over a year... > > What kind of network administrator allows "the helpdesk" to recommend a > > consumer wireless device like this to a "remote site". If you don't have > > Another personal attack. Did you even read what I said? I did not allow > the helpdesk to do anything. You have no idea of the size, scope, or even > the nature of my business. You're just fanning your ego by attacking > everyone else. Like you do on TCLUG. Like you do on NANOG. You haven't > contributed anything useful to this thread, so why do you keep talking? > [poptix at momentum(~)]: dict 'ad hominem' >From WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn]: ad hominem adj : appealing to personal considerations (rather than to fact or reason); "ad hominem arguments" I believe you started the personal attacks, I was trying to better understand the root problem (security vs. public access vs. RF interference) When troubleshooting with people who are not terribly clued in it's always best to find the root problem and work from there. You would be amazed at the number of people who bring their car to a mechanic because it's out of gas. <snip drivel>