On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 10:02, Phillip Hellewell wrote:
> I know 40-bit WEP is pretty lousy, but what about 128 bit?  Is it just
> as insecure?  Well, it wouldn't surprise me...

The only current way to secure wireless is to turn off wep, make the
wireless network a complete dmz (no access to anything anywhere) and
then establish a vpn to a vpn server within the dmz that bridges you
through into the real network.

Michael


> 
> Hopefully that new one they are talking about gets standardized pretty
> soon.  I can't remember what it is called.
> 
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 09:52:56AM -0700, Carl Youngblood wrote:
> > >
> > >Now you just need to figure out how to connect to an AP that used a
> > >password to calculate the WEP key.  I don't know what kind of hashing
> > >algorithm or what linksys uses when you type in a password for your AP
> > >and it converts it into a key.
> > >
> > WEP is so insecure that, if you can at all avoid using it, you should.  
> > It provides no additional security and just slows down your connection. 
> >  But I guess you would still want to connect to an AP that has this 
> > turned on, even if it is a bad idea.
> > 
> > Carl
> 
> 
> 
> > ____________________
> > BYU Unix Users Group 
> > http://uug.byu.edu/
> > ___________________________________________________________________
> > List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
-- 
Michael L Torrie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

____________________
BYU Unix Users Group 
http://uug.byu.edu/ 
___________________________________________________________________
List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list

Reply via email to