Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Mike Easter Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: Re: Bruce Schneier runs an open wireless network Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 07:07:44 -0700 Lines: 27 Message-ID: References: <20140520123331.80c3bede.rsw@therandymon.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net idVokm/2OhK+vC7Etn+1sQmX+//Lty4XCxgfQ5UFtLN/1qaM0x Cancel-Lock: sha1:47IMhBvWKeEXzzbn/ETZZ+8MrwE= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 In-Reply-To: <20140520123331.80c3bede.rsw@therandymon.com> Xref: csiph.com comp.misc:2910 RS Wood wrote: > Interesting writing: > https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/01/my_open_wireles.html > > Check at the bottom for the explosion of tech sites commenting on it. > The Internet is soon to collapse under the weight of its own comments. Schneier does a fairly good job of presenting the arguments /against/ his open network; and the articles at the links he provided which rebut his position also do a good job of disagreeing with his policy. I don't think his arguments /for/ opening his network are at all persuasive. He says "To me, it's basic politeness. Providing internet access to guests is kind of like providing heat and electricity, or a hot cup of tea." The provision of access to house guests is not the same as 'permanent'/continuous provision of access to anyone in the neighborhood/ wifi range. My belief is that he has a responsibility to secure his network access limited to his family and his invited house guests (who he has also 'invited' to share his network access, but not any of those he has not). -- Mike Easter