On 2015/Apr/22, at 2:46 PM, jore wrote: > On 22/04/2015 12:55 PM, David Lochrin wrote: >> But I can't imagine any protection against the device other than biometrics >> (not worth it) or "something you know" as well as "something you have". > > On 22/04/2015 1:31 PM, Jim Birch wrote: >> It might be possible to develop signalling strategies that detect a >> repeater signal. It might also be possible to backrev a good old entry >> button (or an off switch) into the key. > > Or, you could, you know, just do away with this nonsense and have a good > fashioned key. No need to put that in the freezer or do all this whiz > bang computer checking or biometrics or fancy this or that. > > Ridiculous. > > The technoculture always seems to be an end in-and-of itself rather than > a means-to-an-end.
Have to agree with this. It's simple really. Just don't do it. What's the problem this was meant to fix? -- Kim Holburn IT Network & Security Consultant T: +61 2 61402408 M: +61 404072753 mailto:[email protected] aim://kimholburn skype://kholburn - PGP Public Key on request _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
