From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 12 23:31:39 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3238F37B401 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 23:31:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from heron.mail.pas.earthlink.net (heron.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.189]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92C6643FA3 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 23:31:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert2@mindspring.com) Received: from user-38lc156.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.4.166] helo=mindspring.com) by heron.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (SSLv3:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 3.33 #1) id 19mpAS-0004Z6-00; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 23:31:32 -0700 Message-ID: <3F39DB0B.626A0457@mindspring.com> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 23:30:35 -0700 From: Terry Lambert X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chip Morton <2m5mefx02@sneakemail.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20030812103946.01a5f008@threespace.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ELNK-Trace: b1a02af9316fbb217a47c185c03b154d40683398e744b8a4f6a28877877a05a0d6c68ede4847d5c7666fa475841a1c7a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c cc: FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security Advisory FreeBSD-SA-03:09.signal X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 06:31:39 -0000 Chip Morton wrote: > If I ever take my home wireless, I will probably start out with an insecure > network. I just think it would be interesting to see if anybody could > benefit from it. Of course, I doubt there are many wireless computer users > around here, but I think it would be an interesting experience > nonetheless. And I'll be sure to chalk up the sidewalks appropriately. ;-) > > Besides, as frustrating as it is the get WEP from multiple vendors working > on a network, I can easily understand the appeal of "open wireless." So... how much SPAM will need to be sent from behind your NAT, making it look like it's you who's SPAM'ming, before you close the thing down? -- Terry