 tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3
 ·Comcast
| Perhaps a new law should be explored.. Just as swimming pools have their own regulations for fencing, because of the extreme hazard they represent, prehaps home/personal networking/network attached devices(including cell phones and wifi enabled tablets, laptops, etc.) may need an owner responsiblity clause.
You, the owner of a device MUST be sure it is reasonably secured.
I'd worry less about it being used as an avenue of theft (though that is a concern) and more about an injection point for malware.
If you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem. |
|
| said by tshirt: Just as swimming pools have their own regulations for fencing, because of the extreme hazard they represent, prehaps home/personal networking/network attached devices(including cell phones and wifi enabled tablets, laptops, etc.) may need an owner responsiblity clause.
You, the owner of a device MUST be sure it is reasonably secured.
I'd worry less about it being used as an avenue of theft (though that is a concern) and more about an injection point for malware.
If you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem.
If that were to come to pass, ALL devices manufactured before the date of the law are grandfathered to permit the factory-shipped condition, ie. wide open unsecured.
When seatbelt laws were brought in, older vehicles did not have to add seatbelts. Older cars don't have to meet today's emission standards, and so on.....
Unsecured routers are NOT weapons of mass destruction, despite what the xxPA says, and have no need of regulation in this regard. |
|
jjjacer
join:2004-05-07
Jefferson, WI | reply to tshirt
The biggest issue i see is that people are dumb idiots and dont know crap. (i do tech support for hotel internet)
most people dont know how to setup wireless, they think its all magic and is done for them by wireless computer gods. they plug in the linkskees device and they then click on it in there wireless utility, (or have their 3 yr old do it for them),
also these are the same people who keep clicking on every ad for free crap who get virus's and bots and make my life a living hell.
sad thing is this is probably 90% of internet users, at least in the USA |
|
Kamus
join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX | said by jjjacer:The biggest issue i see is that people are dumb idiots and dont know crap. (i do tech support for hotel internet)
most people dont know how to setup wireless, they think its all magic and is done for them by wireless computer gods. they plug in the linkskees device and they then click on it in there wireless utility, (or have their 3 yr old do it for them),
also these are the same people who keep clicking on every ad for free crap who get virus's and bots and make my life a living hell.
sad thing is this is probably 90% of internet users, at least in the USA
Exactly. And most of these people will never care for such geeky things, nor should they.
It's not their problem to police for IP trolls or the FBI. |
|
|
|
tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Comcast
| reply to tshirt
I agree that the first step is EDUCATION
so a required step in the instructions should point out the problem, the need for security, and instructions.
If they could use WPS (and nobody should now) they could certainly include a one button "follow these easy steps to attach securely to your home wireless network".
We have to start somewhere, and the sooner the better. |
|
tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Comcast
| reply to Kamus
said by Kamus:
It's not their problem to police for IP trolls or the FBI.
Protecting YOUR computer and sharing responsiblity for greater usablity of the internet, by reducing spam, virus, and botnet traffic is to everyone's* advanatage.
* Even fileshares would benefit, unless you are such a leech that you rely on other peoples open connections, in which case YOU are the problem. |
|
| said by tshirt:said by Kamus:
It's not their problem to police for IP trolls or the FBI.
Protecting YOUR computer and sharing responsiblity for greater usablity of the internet, by reducing spam, virus, and botnet traffic is to everyone's* advanatage. * Even fileshares would benefit, unless you are such a leech that you rely on other peoples open connections, in which case YOU are the problem. Wow, you give the general population more intercultural computer smarts and credit than they deserve.
Seriously, your in a forum of "smart" people who know about logs, dns and such.
Have you ever seen the shows where the interviewer asks people on the street to locate Iowa on a map and they point to Australia?
Some PERSONS might be smart on specific topics, but PEOPLE in general are not when it comes to computers and especially not about "logs" buried in a router. |
|
tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Comcast
3 edits | I don't see how and easy button and package insert would force anyone to check any logs, or DNS setting or even "such" (whatever that technical term means  ) and yes I've been helping companies and simple mind individuals learn basic (and advanced) computer and network setup, operation, and maintenance for 35 years so I do have an idea how lost some people are, but I've also seen good instructional design lead people through much more complex tasks then this, with very good results.
This is about manufactures needing to be directed (either by law or through their MFG associations) to develop simple standardized how to instructions.
It is very much to their benefit to have better informed consumers/customers with better secured networks. |
|
3 edits | said by tshirt: ....
It is very much to their benefit to have better informed consumers/customers with better secured networks.
I agree that it is better benefit to have all better informed, and in a perfect world that is how it should be.
My cynical experience is that a majority of people "just want it to work".
They (broad paint brush applied to the general population) don't care about the "internals" whether is a blender or their own car.
"I've got my job to worry about....I've got kids and soccer and homework....I paid $$$ for that piece of *whatever*, and it should just work. I don't have time to worry about *whatever*."
The general population have become "users" and are just fine with it.
The thing is that people "use" a computer daily the same way they use word processing, spread sheets, and use a car.
If they were to pop the hood, they would have no idea what they are looking at. And rightly so. Cars, like computers, have become so technical that I don't even work on my car anymore. I would end up doing more harm than good working on my car. That is why Admins take care of the back end and Technicians take care of my car.
If they are lucky they set up a router once.
If the router works then great, and gathers dust for years to come.
What incentive is there for them to check some mystery "log" on a piece of equipment buried in a closet when the you tube video of their favorite cat is playing just fine.
I certainly don't have the answers, but I disagree with laws piled upon laws. I don't believe that is the answer. |
|
zerog
join:2002-02-10
Carrollton, TX
kudos:1 | reply to tshirt
said by tshirt: Just as swimming pools have their own regulations for fencing, because of the extreme hazard they represent, prehaps home/personal networking/network attached devices(including cell phones and wifi enabled tablets, laptops, etc.) may need an owner responsiblity clause.
You, the owner of a device MUST be sure it is reasonably secured.
I'd worry less about it being used as an avenue of theft (though that is a concern) and more about an injection point for malware.
If you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem.
I would be the first to agree that everyone should be educated about the dangers of running an open wifi hotspot.
But what if I am a business owner who WANTS to open this up for my coffeeshop or whatever. (Agreed they should really be secure with WPA2+)
However, your analogy is quite flawed. How is requiring a swimming pool to have a fence around it, or seatbelts on a car, or grounding on electrical systems (NEC etc), anything like an unsecured wireless connection. The former are for safety of life or severe personal injury hazards. Leaving a wifi hotspot is not the same. It would be more akin to having 1234 as your ATM pin.
I think legislation isnt necessary the right answer here. If there is any legislation it should be for manufacturers to ship devices with secure configurations (WPA2+), randomly assigned keys/passwords (as opposed to defaults), etc, all the while requiring there be an option for the user to disable, if he/she so desires.
User education campaigns, as well as manufacturers being smarter about default security is the right answer. Sadly, it seems that we are still a long way from that. |
|
tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Comcast
| reply to averagedude
said by averagedude: I certainly don't have the answers, but I disagree with laws piled upon laws. I don't believe that is the answer.
In theory, Laws are what society does when enough people can't be relied on to do the right thing in the first place.
I too wish we didn't have/need so many laws, but we have some stupid ignorant people, a lot of lazy people, and a few (hopefully just a few) greedy people (from all parts of the economic spectrum) who take without contributing back.
I'm just hoping we can educate the ignorant and encourage the lazy to help block the greedy, be they bot masters or infringers, or uninformed script-kiddies. |
|
 BogdenPremium
join:2000-07-11
Richmond, VA | reply to tshirt
How come it can't be like any any other appliance? I come home and turn on my cable box and POOF! I have TV! |
|
tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Comcast
1 edit | Umm! because it's a router? not a tv.
(are you a category one and two?)
It certain could be that simple, if you went to the Apple (or similar 'pay for handholding' ) store, and asked them to setup an airport and an iPhone and an apple tv and so on as a secure network so you can just plug it in. Or you could pay and installer/consultant to come to your home,.
But many don't want to drop a days pay on such a simple task or we want more configuration choices, and more ongoing control.
So we get it as a DIY install, but it is incumbent on each of us to
READ, UNDERSTAND, AND FOLLOW the safety instructions before we turn it on. Just because it doesn't have a giant buzzing blade of death, doesn't mean it can hurt you. Ask someone who had their ID stolen, or had their ISP cut them off for something a wardriver downloaded. |
|
 Simba7I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT | reply to tshirt
Ya.. A new law requiring that the firmware of the device have a backdoor to a "monitoring facility" where they can monitor the traffic and MAC address to your router.
Hey, one stop further.. Make ALL computers have TPM enabled so it's easier to track. If the computers don't have TPM, they have to install a piece of software to comply to the new law and/or have a "patch" for the OS to include such capabilities. If the hardware/software is removed or tampered with, will result in jail/prison time and a rediculously large fine (RIAA/MPAA style).
Almost forgot, bring back Pentium III-style SN tracking that can't be turned off. That way they have your CPU Serial number, the TPM information, and the snitch-ware that you can't remove whenever you visit a site or do anything on the internet or even within your own intranet.
Hey, we could go further.. You don't need your constitutional rights after all.
--
Bresnan 30M/5M | CenturyLink 5M/896K
MyWS[PnmIIX3@3.3G,8G RAM,500G+1.5T+2T HDDs,Win7]
WifeWS[A64@2G,2G RAM,120G HDD,Win7]
Router[2xP3@1G,2G RAM,18G HDD,Allied Telesyn AT2560FX,2xDigital DE504,Sun X1034A,2xSun X4444A,SMC 8432BTA,Gentoo] |
|
| reply to tshirt
said by tshirt: Just as swimming pools have their own regulations for fencing, because of the extreme hazard they represent, prehaps home/personal networking/network attached devices(including cell phones and wifi enabled tablets, laptops, etc.) may need an owner responsiblity clause.
You, the owner of a device MUST be sure it is reasonably secured.
So you're equating a child drowning with someone illegally downloading an episode of Here Comes Honey Boo Boo? |
|
