Yup. What's the emoticon for embarrassed? :-)
WEP is not brilliant, but it's a lot better than WPA (which it replaced). The main problem with WEP is that it is tarred with the same brush as WPA -- at least WEP has had some sort of security review.
I think you've got this reversed. WPA has been designed to replace WEP.
The only problem you have is someone stealing your WiFi access authentication, after that you can use SSL/SSH to your heart's content. If you're using an ISP for mail, you rarely (if ever) get encrypted access, ISPs simply aren't interested in that level of protection.
Actually, ISPs just aren't interested in the support nightmares that would go hand in hand with having to repeatedly and constantly hold the hands of the multitudes of users who would need to be restepped through the process of resetting encryption, etc, every time they needed to reinstall Windows.
You're right, of course. ISPs could charge a fortune for encrypted access, but at that level there's no point because those people (people like me) run mail servers at home.
jch
-- Shrike-list mailing list Shrike-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/shrike-list
