REDUCING Range

[Guest]

Archived from groups: (More info?)

Pat Henry Wrote:
> A good example and it has an easy answer. If person A is using WPA with
> a strong passphrase, their data are secure. If person B is using WPA
> with a strong passphrase, their data are also secure.
>
> Why do you believe when data are encrypted, that the range the data are
> transmitted has anything to do with data security?The argument has NOTHING to do with encryption. It has to do with the
visibility of your network.
I'm not saying run without encryption, restricted MAC access etc just
try to see this one issue of range that we are discussing here.

Here it is again in even simpler terms for you Pat.
Greater coverage by your network = More people see it
More people see your network = more chance one of them may hack it


PS.
In reply to your -'If- -person A is using WPA with a strong pass
phrase, their data are secure.'-, your words. If that were true then
WPA is an unbreakable system which is a bold and stupid statement. The
only truly secure encryption system I know of is a one time pad which
is just not practical on a network system.


--
Entropy1024
brought to you by http://www.wifi-forum.com/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: (More info?)

PPS.
"If person A is using WPA with a strong passphrase, their data are
secure." Yes, those are my words and I stand by them. Tell me, in what
cup of tea did you derive the formula secure=unbreakable?

If you have a formula to show an underlying weakness in WPA, believe me,
I and several thousand mathematicians working at the NSA would love to
see it.


Entropy1024 wrote:

> PS.
> In reply to your -'If- -person A is using WPA with a strong pass
> phrase, their data are secure.'-, your words. If that were true then
> WPA is an unbreakable system which is a bold and stupid statement. The
> only truly secure encryption system I know of is a one time pad which
> is just not practical on a network system.
>
>