[brlug-general] Help with PEAP, TKIP, WPA and wpa_supplicant

[Dustin Puryear]

I disagree. Kind of.

Obviously, end-to-end encryption is the only way to be [mostly]
secure. Certainly. But, the last 100 feet in a wireless network is
VERY INSECURE AND VERY EASY TO INTERCEPT. The same cannot be said of
wired networks or even of most traffic on the Internet. If I had $10
to spend on a solution, I'd rather spend it on encrypting my wireless
traffic than spend it elsewhere. Now, if I had $20, I'd encrypt
everything. :)

---
Puryear Information Technology, LLC
Baton Rouge, LA * 225-706-8414
http://www.puryear-it.com

Author:
  "Best Practices for Managing Linux and UNIX Servers"
  "Spam Fighting and Email Security in the 21st Century"

Download your free copies:
  http://www.puryear-it.com/publications.htm


Thursday, February 1, 2007, 4:13:35 PM, you wrote:

> On Thu, 1 Feb 2007, willhill wrote:

>> The political part of the battle has been pushed very far into negative
>> territory by the bad guys.  The usefulness of encrypting the last 100 feet of
>> network is laughable in the larger battle for user privacy, but that's what
>> is being pushed for.

> I agree 100%.  Encrypting the last 100 feet of your unsecured 
> POP/IMAP/HTTP connection is silly.  While wireless security is important,
> the big push for it is just FUD to give people warm fuzzies that they are
> "secure".  You have to look at the entire transmission, and secure all
> points of interception to be "secure".  I have always told people, even
> before wireless, that you need end-to-end encryption.  Use ssh, SSL, TLS,
> and VPNs to secure your data transmission.

> Never trust that port in the wall.  By the same token, never trust that
> radio on the ceiling.

> ray