View Single Post
Old 05-04-2012, 02:30 PM   #86
wodin
Illiterate
wodin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wodin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wodin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wodin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wodin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wodin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wodin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wodin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wodin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wodin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wodin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
wodin's Avatar
 
Posts: 10,279
Karma: 37848716
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Sandwich Isles
Device: Samsung Galaxy S10+, Microsoft Surface Pro
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT View Post
Your IP connection, your responsibility to ensure its legal use. That's been the approach in the British courts, and it's one that I entirely agree with. To do otherwise is to give an open invitation to piracy (IMHO).
While wireless encryption techniques, hiding your SSID, MAC filtering, etc. are best practice and will usually keep you safe from the casual hacker or your neighbors, it is not proof against a dedicated hacker, organization or government intent on stealing your information, identity, or bandwidth. In most (but not all) cases, a risk analysis will reveal that the benefits of a minimally secured wireless LAN will far outweigh the risk.

I am a Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP), and I cannot say with certainty that my personal wireless system has not been compromised; only that it probably hasn’t. How then would the average person insure against misuse of his/her IP address? I, with my fancy certificate on the wall can’t!

In this case the Judge is right on.

Last edited by wodin; 05-04-2012 at 02:34 PM. Reason: typo
wodin is offline   Reply With Quote