[bcab] Re: Computer security
- From: "Tristram Llewellyn" <tris-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bcab@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:47:18 +0100
Wireless is a classic example of user convenience verses security. It is
convenient and all we like it, we can go round the house without it etc. but it
is not as secure as copper wire. Wireless if anything is less secure because
it would be possible to get access to the traffic (between you and a wireless
router) if you happen to be sitting within range, and had time to pursue a
brute force attack on the data to break the encryption. This has certainly
happened with WEP and may possibly happen with WPA at some stage if it hasn't
already.
Wireless also leaks other information is is a direct result of some of the
default behaviours of Windows which for example allow a PC to broadcast what
networks it has connected to previously, and also the default to connect ad hoc
(between PC to PC) rather than use infrastructure mode. Such promiscuous
behaviour initiated by Windows is dodgy from a security point of view. This
apsect of wireless security and particularly this update has been very poorly
advertised by Microsoft who don't make this update available through the
Windows Update portal. Unfortunately I haven't the time to go into this right
now here, but anyone wishing to read up on this specific problem should go here
as a starting off point:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=2726F32F-D52B-4F84-ACE8-F7FC20195769
NAT stands for Network Address Translation, in essence your router provides
only public face to the internet in one I/P address whilst your computers
behind the router have private I/P addresses. In between it is possible to
process and block certain information (eg. a firewall) that gives you some
measure of protection.
Regards.
Tristram Llewellyn
Sight and Sound Technology
Technical Support
www.sightandsound.co.uk
- Follow-Ups:
- [bcab] Re: Computer security
- From: Dorothy Ingram-Gorban
- [bcab] Re: Computer security
- From: Dj Paddy
- [bcab] Re: Computer security
- From: Dj Paddy
- [bcab] Re: Computer security
- From: Dj Paddy
- References:
- [bcab] Computer security
- From: Charles Crisp
- [bcab] Re: Computer security
- From: Tristram Llewellyn
- [bcab] Re: Computer security
- From: Dorothy Ingram-Gorban
Other related posts:
- » [bcab] Computer security
- » [bcab] Re: Computer security
- » [bcab] Re: Computer security
- » [bcab] Re: Computer security
- » [bcab] Re: Computer security
- » [bcab] Re: Computer security
- » [bcab] Re: Computer security
- » [bcab] Re: Computer security
- » [bcab] Re: Computer security
- » [bcab] Re: Computer security
- » [bcab] Re: Computer security
- » [bcab] Re: Computer security
- » [bcab] Computer security
- [bcab] Re: Computer security
- From: Dorothy Ingram-Gorban
- [bcab] Re: Computer security
- From: Dj Paddy
- [bcab] Re: Computer security
- From: Dj Paddy
- [bcab] Re: Computer security
- From: Dj Paddy
- [bcab] Computer security
- From: Charles Crisp
- [bcab] Re: Computer security
- From: Tristram Llewellyn
- [bcab] Re: Computer security
- From: Dorothy Ingram-Gorban