From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Mar 26 14:00:15 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4810337B404
	for <net@freebsd.org>; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 14:00:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fubar.adept.org (fubar.adept.org [63.147.172.249])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E57E643F93
	for <net@freebsd.org>; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 14:00:14 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from mike@adept.org)
Received: by fubar.adept.org (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id C45E01522A; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 14:00:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by fubar.adept.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C39F315227
	for <net@freebsd.org>; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 14:00:03 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 14:00:03 -0800 (PST)
From: Mike Hoskins <mike@adept.org>
To: net@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <200303260956.21266.wes@softweyr.com>
Message-ID: <20030326135337.R4957-100000@fubar.adept.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-19.5 required=5.0
	tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,
	      REPLY_WITH_QUOTES
	autolearn=ham	version=2.50
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp)
Subject: Re: AirportExtreme with FreeBSD HostAP
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 22:00:18 -0000

On Wed, 26 Mar 2003, Wes Peters wrote:
> Yup, mac address filtering is even less useful than WEP.  At least WEP
> takes *some* effort to crack. ;^)

It all takes ``some'' effort.  That's the point, sort of like car
alarms that are easily bypassed...  The burgler will usually choose to hit
the car parked beside yours without an alarm.

I never argued wireless was secure, but using a blend of available options
to lock things down as much as possible never hurt.  Although I
freely admit 802.11 has a long way to go.  Besides, rad_auth is overkill
for a home proxy.  ;)

-mrh