Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 15:14 -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
I don't use hidden SSID much, as it only lends a tiny bit of security
It doesn't add *ANY* security.
It *does* add problems.
It doesn't hide your access point, at all. It still appears as an
access point that can be used. Anybody, and everybody, can see that
there's one there. It just doesn't have a name associated with it.
And the lack of a name doesn't prevent anyone from using it.
FUD. How can you hold two diametrically opposed ideas in your brain without your
head exploding? Look at your first two lines and reconcile "adds no security"
with "harder to use." The fact that problems come up regularly from legitimate
users indicates that it is harder to get working, how that can fail to "lend a
tiny bit of security" eludes me. I certainly didn't suggest that it was a
desirable practice, but I gave it an honest appraisal. The fact that it wouldn't
slow you down doesn't make it worthless.
However, those are your opinions, you're welcome to them. The second one
certainly is correct.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
