From: unruh@invalid.ca   
      
   On 2012-06-13, Adam  wrote:   
   > unruh wrote:   
   ...   
   >   
   >>> For security, I use my "theory of relativity" -- my system doesn't have   
   >>> to be 100% secure, it just has to be more secure than most.  And of   
   >>> course, even the most elaborate software precautions won't help if   
   >>> somebody breaks into my home and steals a system.   
   >>   
   >> That should be pretty obvious and allow you to take mitigating actions.   
   >> The problem with a software breakin is that it can be completely   
   >> non-obvious and you do not realise that  you have been broken into for   
   >> years.   
   >   
   > Oh, definitely.  I'm not ignoring software break-ins, but if for example   
   > my wi-fi is 90% secure (by some measurement) while my neighbor's is 10%   
   > secure, mine might be "secure enough" for most crackers to ignore mine   
   > and go for my neighbor's instead.  We all know nothing is 100% secure,   
   > so part of the problem is determining what's "secure enough" for an   
   > ordinary home system like mine.  I don't think I need quite the level of   
   > paranoia that a network admin ought to have.   
      
   That assumes that the breakins are just random people. Your wireless   
   means that the person is close (eg your neighbor) since wifi does not   
   travel that far. Probably you would notice someone sitting in their car   
   with a laptop outside your house day after day. The bigger problem is   
   that when you connect to the net, you are connected and now people can   
   attack you from all around the world ( and they have no idea who your   
   neighbor is). Also, if you are the target for some reason (neighbory   
   disputes, former wife, business associate) then the fact that someone   
   else may be more vulnerable is irrelevant.   
   >   
   > Adam   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)