WarDriving F.U.D.

[lil_freak]

What exactly is so wrong with that book. I'm a certified CISSP and I thought it was pretty well written and informative. It wasn't just a whole lotta shiznit like most of those kind of books are.

There's nothing wrong with the book, it was written by the same Chris you'll see here on the forums. ASTcell was stating that it would not have been pretty if they pimped Chris' s book that's all.

*You may want to re-read the whole thread again*

[Floydr47]

Although I personally found the article to be moronic and "old news". I am sure that a lot of "sheeple" who use wireless networks without understanding them will learn something from the article. You don't have to understand a telephone system to dial a number. I found the end of the article to be the most informative part:

"There are professionals who can encrypt your wireless network that hackers likely won't be able to break."

The article does promote business (and jobs) for the security community. How many of those "sheeple" would you imagine began looking for those "professionals" shortly after being scared out of their wits by the article. Without a need for security, there would be no need for security personnel.

[astcell]

Spotting a security hole does not make one an expert. Just like buying a Nikon camera does not make you a photographer. Computers, especially wireless features, are like quantum physics. The more you learn, the more you realize you do not know. Anyolne who claims to be able to fix and patch everything is scary, and anyone who can set up a Nintendo and therefore feels they can skip the MCSE classes is dfownright dangerous. The problem is that the public does not know exactly what is involved, they only want their systems to be secure.

[Floydr47]

Spotting a security hole does not make one an expert. Just like buying a Nikon camera does not make you a photographer. Computers, especially wireless features, are like quantum physics. The more you learn, the more you realize you do not know. Anyolne who claims to be able to fix and patch everything is scary, and anyone who can set up a Nintendo and therefore feels they can skip the MCSE classes is dfownright dangerous. The problem is that the public does not know exactly what is involved, they only want their systems to be secure.

I never meant to imply that there were people around that could fix and patch everything. No matter how much a person tries to secure their system there will always be someone able to find a hole. Locks only keep honest men honest. What I wanted to point out was that people who don't know their ass from their elbow and write scare tactic articles are actually good for the security profession. They drum up business so to speak. So in essence, the idiot that wrote the article did everyone a service. You are 100% right when you say that the public doesn't know exactly what is involved, they don't need to. When they buy a car they don't go to mechanics school either...they depend on professionals when something goes wrong.

[astcell]

When they drum up business I am sure they are trying to drum it up for themselves, then when they fail, the customer feels doubley ripped off, once for getting an insecure product and again for not getting it fixed.

[Floydr47]

When they drum up business I am sure they are trying to drum it up for themselves, then when they fail, the customer feels doubley ripped off, once for getting an insecure product and again for not getting it fixed.

Rather than continue this circular discussion on residual benefits, I will concede. Tip of the hat to you, Astcell, I shall return to lurking.

:D