RE: We are not alone.....

RE: We are not alone..... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Termyn8or -> RE: We are not alone..... (8/1/2011 8:39:01 AM)
Given that, wire is looking pretty good about now. T^T

LaTigresse -> RE: We are not alone..... (8/1/2011 9:14:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: baddaddy2009 LaTigresse, and everyone else, be aware that sometimes an "open wireless access point" is open on purpose. Connecting to "free wifi" may sound like a good idea at the airport or your local coffee shop, but these open connections can be used to grab YOUR personal information; things like, oh, say, your CM ID and password! I didn't say I use them...........just that they exist.

RapierFugue -> RE: We are not alone..... (8/1/2011 9:35:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or Given that, wire is looking pretty good about now. Hard-wiring is generally safer, yes, for the obvious reasons, but a) it's not immune from tampering, oddly (though it's miles more difficult and your average modern script kiddie wouldn't have a clue where to start) and b) Wi-Fi is just so much more convenient and, when you secure the network, still very secure. It's people running around with open or low-security networks that are the issue, not the technology per se.

SirPumpy -> RE: We are not alone..... (8/2/2011 4:59:13 AM)
I used to do this for a living and dealt with multinationals, and the golden rule is IF you were happy to share then wireless was fine. If not then its nothing bar a cable connection. I know wireless routers are cool but they can be bypassed either through the router or via malware on your Lappy or PC. I run both Mac and PC and I find Mac to be fairly secure but............ Even your laptop/netbook etc can become a wireless internet provider via its WiFi, yes direct from your laptop not your router and im not even going to start on Android platform. So a good rule of thumb is don't trust wireless networking.

Watersport -> RE: We are not alone..... (8/2/2011 5:00:02 AM)
Trust no one agent Moulder. :)

SirPumpy -> RE: We are not alone..... (8/2/2011 5:06:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or Given that, wire is looking pretty good about now. T^T It is yep although it too can be physically tapped or through inductive coupling sampled or intercepted although this is now much more difficult. I've even seen hacks via the AC power grid way back when and I can guarantee you none of the security software vendors can protect against that. Software too has backdoors, some exploitable and some not so much so if you crank paranoia from Stun to get me the fuck into a faraday cage and bolt the door mode no digital information is ever truly safe. Then again I dont store important stuff on my PC's. As a science though, comms security is an interesting one bearing in mind that a lot of the tools i use day to day to test defences originally were developed for military use. or in short the spooks are usually a few years ahead of us.

SirPumpy -> RE: We are not alone..... (8/2/2011 5:08:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Watersport Trust no one agent Moulder. :) Or be prepared to not give a rats and keep backups lol

RapierFugue -> RE: We are not alone..... (8/2/2011 6:35:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SirPumpy So a good rule of thumb is don't trust wireless networking. Don't agree at all, and I work (as in now, today) in some very "security minded" sites; for the average home user, assuming they've got a) a current system or close to it, b) decent security software and c) an encrypted router setup, then all should be well. It's just not worth the average script kiddie bothering with it half the time, and they won't. Some muppet in my apartment block has been trying to penetrate my setup for about the last 6 months; every week or so he tries something new, only to come up against what looks like nothing, but he's got no access. I think he's tearing his hair out :) Obviously, if you want corporate & security-site level security then hardwires have their advantages, but I've heard the likes of MI5/6 and others are happy to use Wi-Fi, mostly because it’s easier to detect and log when someone is having a pop at it. No idea if that's true but it sounds plausible.

SirPumpy -> RE: We are not alone..... (8/3/2011 4:36:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RapierFugue quote: ORIGINAL: SirPumpy So a good rule of thumb is don't trust wireless networking. Don't agree at all, and I work (as in now, today) in some very "security minded" sites; for the average home user, assuming they've got a) a current system or close to it, b) decent security software and c) an encrypted router setup, then all should be well. It's just not worth the average script kiddie bothering with it half the time, and they won't. Some muppet in my apartment block has been trying to penetrate my setup for about the last 6 months; every week or so he tries something new, only to come up against what looks like nothing, but he's got no access. I think he's tearing his hair out :) Obviously, if you want corporate & security-site level security then hardwires have their advantages, but I've heard the likes of MI5/6 and others are happy to use Wi-Fi, mostly because it’s easier to detect and log when someone is having a pop at it. No idea if that's true but it sounds plausible. Ok, let me explain a little further. You are aware of Cisco systems I assume? Touted as one of the safest most secure brands of networking hardware and software. They do an excellent job of securing networks and firewalling and Ive used their stuff extensively in all sots of situations, and yet their certified network engineers and above have access to diagnostic tools that can circumvent security with very little modification. And script kiddies is IMO a bad term because they mostly use GUI software and just push the buttons or pingflood and wait for a hole. Anyway these "Kids" use the same networking tools we do, some modified and some not.. downloaded from Torrent files with instructions and even web sites showing how to breach. Hell I found Android software for my phone that cracks WiFi and it works fine. Anyway, My point is this. A visible wireless presence invites attempts. I have a gigabyte router and cat 5 at home with fibre capability for the Mac, My internet is provided by my mobile phone company via 850 meg 3.5 g service and the last time anyone even bothered to sniff my ports (Im not making that joke) was 4 years ago. Why do we need wireless anyway?

RapierFugue -> RE: We are not alone..... (8/3/2011 4:47:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SirPumpy Why do we need wireless anyway? You and Termy should marry. Match made in heaven :) And as for the Cisco back doors; the first thing any competent network admin does is scramble those and then make the wireless router dark. They're based on a single encryption key nowadays (or at least every one I've seen has been) and it's the work of moments to eliminate that hole. If you need to get at a locked one you have to hard-wire a diagnostic lappy into it and override via wires, so not much chance of getting at it wirelessly. The MI5/6 building has a wireless system. Now I don't know WTF they do with it, but I can't imagine they'd use something that could be penetrated so easily by back doors. Wouldn't make a lot of sense. Same goes for Coutts & Co HQ in London. Android I can well believe though - all the phone OS have holes ATM. But again, the chances of it actually happening are minimal, and what do they get if they do get in? In my case, a few pics of the river, taken from my balcony. They can't spoof the IMEI numeric, nor the mobile network code, so they can't even get free calls from me. I'll stick with a wired PC as my server and a lappy on wireless - it's convenient, and the chances of penetration if you set it up correctly are close to zero.

PeonForHer -> RE: We are not alone..... (8/3/2011 6:16:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RapierFugue And as for the Cisco back doors; the first thing any competent network admin does is scramble those and then make the wireless router dark. They're based on a single encryption key nowadays . . . Yes, but not in the south.

SirPumpy -> RE: We are not alone..... (8/3/2011 6:17:53 PM)
Sometimes its not what you do know, but what you dont that gets you in trouble. As for British Military Intelligence? BWAHAHAHAHAAAA!

Termyn8or -> RE: We are not alone..... (8/3/2011 8:18:16 PM)
"You and Termy should marry. Match made in heaven :) " Not with a name that starts with "Sir". But thanks for thinking about me. T^T

RapierFugue -> RE: We are not alone..... (8/4/2011 2:41:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SirPumpy Sometimes its not what you do know, but what you dont that gets you in trouble. As for British Military Intelligence? BWAHAHAHAHAAAA! MI5/6 aren't the military. Neither are Coutts. I do know one military installation that uses wireless, but I would (being an honest sort of chap) admit that their installation isn't intended for sensitive material. It did, however, pass a Class Two penetration test, and they don't give those away free with cornflakes. I'm perfectly happy to believe you've worked with wireless systems in the past. But the market changes very quickly, and I work in this sector now, today, among other sectors (i.e. it isn't the only thing I do). My tech teams have installed wireless systems that are subject to blind/anonymous penetration testing by 3rd party companies, and of the 7 large-scale ones I've so far managed, only one failed, and that on something the tech team concerned was able to learn from, and implement change to, in order to pass second time around. I do also recall very strongly from my time in Aus some 20 years ago that, at the time, the technology (hard and soft) used in commercial Aus deployments was a good 3 years, and sometimes more, behind the curve, so that may be a factor, or of course things may have changed for the better there - my knowledge in that sector isn't current. I agree fully that current smartphone design, both firmware, wireless and apps, isn’t perfect, but as with all security systems you have to ask yourself what the degree of risk is, and what the result of a successful penetration is; with a smartphone the best they're going to manage is to copy a few MP3s, download my pics (big whoop) or possibly brick my phone temporarily (although I've yet to see a practical demo of that outside of a highly specious lab environment). None of it is a big security risk, unless you're in the habit of leaving documents on your smartphone containing full details of your online banking; I repeat, they can't spoof the IMEI numeric, nor can they leverage my call ID or SIM card ID merely by penetrating the Android (or Win7, but iPhone I don't know about) platform - if they did there would be an epidemic of phone cloning, and there isn't, at least not by that method. Wireless networks are not themselves inherently un-secure, and given the number of large-scale, commercially sensitive sector companies using wireless these days, it would be a reasonable assumption that the technology has come of age. Is it 100% secure? Of course not. But then, neither is a hard-wired system either. And for home users, so long as they install basic protection (excellent examples of which are now available for free) to prevent Trojan or other breeches, make sure their systems are current as far as updates are concerned, and secure their wireless networks with encryption and access control, then the average home body using anything from XP onwards is not going to be any more at risk from wireless penetration by average class crackers than they would be if they used the far less convenient method of hard wiring.

RapierFugue -> RE: We are not alone..... (8/4/2011 2:45:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: RapierFugue And as for the Cisco back doors; the first thing any competent network admin does is scramble those and then make the wireless router dark. They're based on a single encryption key nowadays . . . Yes, but not in the south. <narrows eyes> Are you taking the piss you cheeky monkey? :)

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625