From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnt Karlsen Subject: Re: iptables and wifi access point Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 02:27:15 +0200 Sender: netfilter-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <20030728022715.4ed85d7e.arnt@c2i.net> References: <09B04A55822EFF4DA48D2E0BB2941D4A15BFD0@wardrive.citadelcomputer.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <09B04A55822EFF4DA48D2E0BB2941D4A15BFD0@wardrive.citadelcomputer.com.au> Errors-To: netfilter-admin@lists.netfilter.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 08:04:18 +1000, "George Vieira" wrote in message <09B04A55822EFF4DA48D2E0BB2941D4A15BFD0@wardrive.citadelcomputer.com.au >: > 1. Security = Forget WEP (or even 128bit WEP.. it sucks.). Use IPSEC > tunnels over wifi. ..ok, a dumb question: which tunnelling gives best signal security per cpu omph expenditure? > 4. Remember in some/most/all countries that subleasing internet > access is illegal without a carrier license (it is in Australia, dunno > about anywhere else).. ..huh? I thought it was the isp's who put stuff like that in their service contracts? (Usually to protect their own network and business.) ..and, logging _is_ wise, so you can show "who did what when", whenever the cops etc get nosy. .._after_ they produce the search warrant, of course. ;-) -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case.