On Jun 24, 2010, at 1:10 AM, JD wrote:
>
>
> On 06/23/2010 01:24 AM, Joel Rees was caught red-handed while
> writing::
>> On Jun 23, 2010, at 11:14 AM, JD wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On 06/22/2010 07:27 PM, Darr was caught red-handed while writing::
>>>
On Tuesday, 22 June, 2010 @22:00 zulu, JD s
On 06/23/2010 01:24 AM, Joel Rees was caught red-handed while writing::
> On Jun 23, 2010, at 11:14 AM, JD wrote:
>
>
>>
>> On 06/22/2010 07:27 PM, Darr was caught red-handed while writing::
>>
>>> On Tuesday, 22 June, 2010 @22:00 zulu, JD scribed:
>>>
>>>
>>>
WPA2-PSK + AE
On Jun 23, 2010, at 11:14 AM, JD wrote:
>
>
> On 06/22/2010 07:27 PM, Darr was caught red-handed while writing::
>> On Tuesday, 22 June, 2010 @22:00 zulu, JD scribed:
>>
>>
>>> WPA2-PSK + AES : I thought it is not possible for inter-customer
>>> traffic to figure out the keys because once the con
On 06/22/2010 07:27 PM, Darr was caught red-handed while writing::
> On Tuesday, 22 June, 2010 @22:00 zulu, JD scribed:
>
>
>> WPA2-PSK + AES : I thought it is not possible for inter-customer
>> traffic to figure out the keys because once the connection is
>> established,
>> keys change dynam
On Tuesday, 22 June, 2010 @22:00 zulu, JD scribed:
> WPA2-PSK + AES : I thought it is not possible for inter-customer
> traffic to figure out the keys because once the connection is
> established,
> keys change dynamically per the protocol. Perhaps a an expert on the
> WPA2-PSK protocl can shed s
On 06/22/2010 03:17 PM, Tim was caught red-handed while writing::
> On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 13:23 -0700, JD wrote:
>
>> Choose WPA2 with AES (aka CCMP), and you're safe
>> (until someone comes along and exposes to the world
>> that it is breakable).
>>
> Well, to be pedantic, if someone c
On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 13:23 -0700, JD wrote:
> Choose WPA2 with AES (aka CCMP), and you're safe
> (until someone comes along and exposes to the world
> that it is breakable).
Well, to be pedantic, if someone cracks it but doesn't publicly prove
it, you're still unsafe. ;-)
You really have to won
hey guys...
time to change the subject/name.. give that the initial OP thread has diverged!!
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht
wrote:
>
> Bruno Wolff III writes:
>> That depends on your threat model. If you don't trust the wireless operator
>> the wireless encryption isn't
On 06/22/2010 02:01 PM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht was caught red-handed
while writing::
> Bruno Wolff III writes:
>
>> That depends on your threat model. If you don't trust the wireless operator
>> the wireless encryption isn't that big of a deal since you need to use an
>> encrypted tunnel in
bruce wrote:
> hey guys
>
> if you're using starbucks, or nay other public access, aren't you
> pretty much constrained to having to deal with an open network. or are
> you implying that you can implement an encrypted connection on the nic
> setup?
>
Not clear to me if you can or not, because
Bruno Wolff III writes:
> That depends on your threat model. If you don't trust the wireless operator
> the wireless encryption isn't that big of a deal since you need to use an
> encrypted tunnel in any case.
No kidding. You should use some form of end-to-end encryption any time
you are on the
On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 09:25 -0700, JD wrote:
>
> On 06/22/2010 04:40 AM, Tim was caught red-handed while writing::
> > On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 11:31 -0700, JD wrote:
> >
> >> Also, WPA encryotion can be broken by a notebook PC in under 1 minute.
> >> WPA (and WPA2) encryption that uses TKP can
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 13:23:06 -0700,
JD wrote:
>
> Right! That's why I said even if you choose WPA2
> along with TKIP, you're toast!
> Choose WPA2 with AES (aka CCMP), and you're safe
> (until someone comes along and exposes to the world
> that it is breakable).
That depends on your threat
On 06/22/2010 12:54 PM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht was caught red-handed
while writing::
> Tim writes:
>
>> On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 11:31 -0700, JD wrote:
>>
>>> Also, WPA encryotion can be broken by a notebook PC in under 1 minute.
>>> WPA (and WPA2) encryption that uses TKP can also be bro
On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 07:06 -0700, bruce wrote:
> hey guys
>
> if you're using starbucks, or nay other public access, aren't you
> pretty much constrained to having to deal with an open network. or are
> you implying that you can implement an encrypted connection on the nic
> setup?
>
> thank
Tim writes:
> On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 11:31 -0700, JD wrote:
>> Also, WPA encryotion can be broken by a notebook PC in under 1 minute.
>> WPA (and WPA2) encryption that uses TKP can also be broken in under 1
>> minute. So far AES seems to be invulnerable (as far whatever has been
>> printed publicl
On 06/22/2010 04:40 AM, Tim was caught red-handed while writing::
> On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 11:31 -0700, JD wrote:
>
>> Also, WPA encryotion can be broken by a notebook PC in under 1 minute.
>> WPA (and WPA2) encryption that uses TKP can also be broken in under 1
>> minute. So far AES seems to
On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 07:06 -0700, bruce wrote:
> if you're using starbucks, or nay other public access, aren't you
> pretty much constrained to having to deal with an open network. or are
> you implying that you can implement an encrypted connection on the nic
> setup?
That had nothing to do with
right
just wanted to make sure this was/is clarified in case others see this
in the future...
or.. you can always ssh into a secure system, and go from there..
but at the same time.. even if you are on an open network.. accesing
secure "https" sites on your browser on your machine will be sa
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 07:06:40AM -0700, bruce wrote:
> hey guys
>
> if you're using starbucks, or nay other public access, aren't you
> pretty much constrained to having to deal with an open network. or are
> you implying that you can implement an encrypted connection on the nic
> setup?
Ye
hey guys
if you're using starbucks, or nay other public access, aren't you
pretty much constrained to having to deal with an open network. or are
you implying that you can implement an encrypted connection on the nic
setup?
thanks
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 4:40 AM, Tim wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-
On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 11:31 -0700, JD wrote:
> Also, WPA encryotion can be broken by a notebook PC in under 1 minute.
> WPA (and WPA2) encryption that uses TKP can also be broken in under 1
> minute. So far AES seems to be invulnerable (as far whatever has been
> printed publicly).
I'd heard that
On 06/21/2010 09:09 AM, Bill Davidsen was caught red-handed while writing::
> bruce wrote:
>
>> hey.
>>
>> looking at using the wifi at starbucks, given that it's going to be
>> free in july!
>>
>> i'm looking for detailed steps from anyone who's actually used a
>> public starbucks wifi acces
bruce wrote:
> hey.
>
> looking at using the wifi at starbucks, given that it's going to be
> free in july!
>
> i'm looking for detailed steps from anyone who's actually used a
> public starbucks wifi access.
>
> my system is fedora, running network-setup. i don't have/use/want
> networkmanager!
On 06/19/2010 01:34 PM, bruce wrote:
> hey.
>
> looking at using the wifi at starbucks, given that it's going to be
> free in july!
>
> i'm looking for detailed steps from anyone who's actually used a
> public starbucks wifi access.
>
> my system is fedora, running network-setup. i don't have/use
hey.
looking at using the wifi at starbucks, given that it's going to be
free in july!
i'm looking for detailed steps from anyone who's actually used a
public starbucks wifi access.
my system is fedora, running network-setup. i don't have/use/want
networkmanager!
so i'm looking for the actual s
26 matches
Mail list logo
