> Right. As long as we understand that it sucks, it's OK to use? I know > when I think about securing my data I'm interested in keeping only the > average joes out.
I don't know about you, but I use wireless security as an extra layer. It might suck, but it keeps the next door neighbour's laptop from authenticating on my network without his (or my) permission. I just tunnel a VPN over the top and route that through to the wired side. Safe, secure, and it keeps average joe schmuck from always logging onto my network then coming and complaining that i am "hacking his laptop" when he sees it log onto my network. WEP/WPA have their uses, just not in security. If you understand that you dont' get any security you can add another layer! If you don't understand it, then you're probably not qualified to be deploying a wireless network anyway. > Maybe it's OK to run telnetd so long as it's on port 10023 too? Not funny: I've seen people advise moving the port number of all sorts of services for "security" then recommending turning off all of the inconvenient security options in the daemon now that it is "securly on another port that nobody will ever think to look at, and if they do they won't know what server is there anyway". This was from a supposed IT security expert.. A
