<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Wireless is not a defense for clueless in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r8892853</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 01:14:42 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 01:14:42 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Wireless is not a defense for clueless</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8896102</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/799140"><b>Budman1018</b></A> : For a number of years I have been installing computers and computer networks for people who still cannot figure out how to program their VCR.  Recently, some of my 'customers' have been requesting wireless networks installed.  I will only install them if they agree to sit down with me and hear my lesson about basic wireless network security.  I will not install a network without, at a minimum WEP encryption, and MAC filtering.  The customer realizes if they do not pay attention to my little lesson about how to access the router and enter MAC addresses and WEP keys they are not going to be able to add any more computers or get back on if the network goes down.  I don't install a lot of wireless because most customers don't have the time to hear me out, or they are not savvy enough to comprehend what I'm saying.  Some are so ignorant they tell me to F**** off they will find someone else to do it.  The majority of computer users don't care.  Their computers are full of virus and malware.  What's one other thing like giving a hacker a free ride on your IP.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8896102</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2003 18:21:43 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wireless is not a defense for clueless</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8894499</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/0"><b>anon</b></A> : Totally agree. If they had bothered to even read the manuals, they would know. And if they did read the manual and did nothing to secure their networks, shame on them.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8894499</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2003 14:21:28 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wireless is not a defense for clueless</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8894252</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/793106"><b>doppler</b></A> : Personal responsibility.<br><br>I am a member of the NRA.  I will not leave a loaded gun<br>laying around for anybody to use.  I use a wireless<br>connection.  IT'S SECURE.<br><br>I can't get my boss to realize how bad it is to leave<br>an open connection via wireless.  Things that could<br>happen because of an unsecured connection.<br><br>1. Lawsuit from RIAA/MPAA etc etc because someone<br>was out front of the business protesting RIAA tactics.<br>"Gee, your honour.  I didn't know about those 10,000<br>illegal music files offered on my T1".<br><br>2. FBI/Local enforcement sting for child porn.<br>"Gee, your honour.  I didn't know about those 1,000,000<br>illegal child porn files offered on my T1".<br><br>3. Getting blacklisted from every spam block list.<br>"Gee, I didn't know about those billions of spam messages<br>being passed through my T1".<br><br>Even if there is no legal standpoint.  There is a point<br>where you must take responsibility.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8894252</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2003 13:48:42 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wireless is not a defense for clueless</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8894168</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/549697"><b>J D McDorce</b></A> : 17 USC 512(a) only refers to Copyright Infringement and is certainly not a <I>Get Out of Jail Free Card</I> for those providing (intentionally or not) wireless access.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8894168</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2003 13:37:25 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Wireless is not a defense for clueless</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8892883</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/214274"><b>russotto</b></A> : On what grounds?  17 USC 512(a) removes liability for those who are deliberately providing access.  If the access is being provided accidentally or even against the wishes of the provider (e.g. by someone hacking WEP), there's no grounds in the first place.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8892883</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2003 09:55:21 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Wireless is not a defense for clueless</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8892853</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/793106"><b>doppler</b></A> : Secure it or lose everything]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8892853</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2003 09:46:50 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
