From: /m 

On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 10:31:47 -0400, "Geo"  wrote:

>"/m"  wrote in message
>news:nfgid2psqnh4hligoa6tgnlj115qs6g9o1{at}4ax.com...
>
>> Do you say that with a specific knowledge of the relative security of
>> WEP compared to WPA/2, or do you say that with the concept of "it's
>> wireless, therefore it is insecure"?
>
>Define "secure". I can take down any wireless network.

"Secure" is relative.

With regard to my home wireless network, I think of two main things when I
say secure:

1) the ability to intercept my communications

2) the ability to become a node on my network.


Your "take down a network" is a different matter entirely.  My
microwave oven can take down my 802.11g network with ease.


I know that nothing is completely secure, it's all relative.  Just like I
cannot make my house completely secure from someone who wants to get in, I
cannot make my wireless network completely secure from someone who wants to
break into it.

I can, however, make my wireless network and/or house more difficult to
break into than my neighbors' house and/or network.   That's my reason
for going with WPA/2 instead of WEP.

 /m

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5