Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.misc |
| Subject | Re: Bruce Schneier runs an open wireless network |
| Date | 2014-05-20 15:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bu246dFqr3U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <20140520123331.80c3bede.rsw@therandymon.com> <bu15tgForfpU1@mid.individual.net> <slrnlnnjrm.qo4.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
Lewis wrote: > Mike Easter >> 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." > > That's always been my attitude. > >> 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). > > I (and he) disagree. The essays which Schneier links which support his argument say: - the first linked, who has greater experience than Schneier in terms of countries and locations says that he has never encountered the risks/disadvantages which Schneier lists, and he says his personal motivation is "the more open wireless I provide to the world, the more people I'll turn on to providing their own open wireless access, and the more open WiFi I'm likely to find." I find that a trivial, short-sighted, and ineffective argument. - the second supporting article's major argument is that opening your network isn't that much of a risk. To me, that isn't really the point, the risk. The point is something different from the risk. Maybe Schneier and his supporters don't get it; my point. - the third supporting article says his arguments are different from Schneier's. Oh good. Maybe he has something. He says his setup is harder to use than Schneier's. "I don't have a DHCP server running, so anyone who wants to use my wireless needs to configure a static address on the correct subnet. I'm happy to do this for guests who don't know how, but drive-bys are strictly on the do-it-yourself system." Well that 3rd one is certainly a quaint solution, but maybe it is more supportive/ in-line/ of my argument about allowing invited guests into my home which includes internet access than providing a wide-open-door to the internet for anyone within range of the wifi signal. -- Mike Easter
Back to comp.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Bruce Schneier runs an open wireless network RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-20 12:33 +0000
Re: Bruce Schneier runs an open wireless network Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2014-05-20 07:07 -0700
Re: Bruce Schneier runs an open wireless network Randy Westlund <Vorzakir@invalid.invalid> - 2014-05-20 16:58 +0000
Re: Bruce Schneier runs an open wireless network Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-20 21:56 +0000
Re: Bruce Schneier runs an open wireless network Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2014-05-20 15:44 -0700
Re: Bruce Schneier runs an open wireless network Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-21 09:09 +0200
Re: Bruce Schneier runs an open wireless network RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-21 18:58 +0000
csiph-web