RE: WIRELESS THEFT
From: ONEILL David J (David.J.Oneill@state.or.us)Date: 10/19/02
- Previous message: Clement Dupuis: "RE: Wireless Networks Encryption"
- Maybe in reply to: Amit P. Gandre: "WIRELESS THEFT"
- Next in thread: Leon Ward: "RE: WIRELESS THEFT"
- Next in thread: Steve Bremer: "Re: Firewall options- which way to go"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: 18 Oct 2002 15:30:44 -0700 From: ONEILL David J <David.J.Oneill@state.or.us> To: alaric@cowboy.net (IPM Return requested) (Receipt notification requested), mdresser@windsormachine.com (IPM Return requested) (Receipt notification requested)
A M E N !
David J. O'Neill
NEDSS - IS7
Parkway Bldg., 2nd Floor
Phone: (503) 378-2101 ext. 364
FAX: (503) 378-2102
>>> mdresser@windsormachine.com 10/18/02 02:57PM >>>
On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, Alaric Darconville wrote:
> Receiving the signal itself is not the problem-- it's the broadcasting
> back into that network that is the problem. You can passively receive all
> the signal you want without having to do a thing about it, but in order to
> make use of that signal you will have to actively communicate with that
> network. There's where they could "get you."
What about the FCC rules under Class 15 A and B, stating that the
device(their access point) must accept any interference, etc, etc? Your
wireless card just happens to radiate "interference" in a highly coherent
pattern. The wireless frequency falls into the unlicensed spectrum after
all.
:D
Mike
- Previous message: Clement Dupuis: "RE: Wireless Networks Encryption"
- Maybe in reply to: Amit P. Gandre: "WIRELESS THEFT"
- Next in thread: Leon Ward: "RE: WIRELESS THEFT"
- Next in thread: Steve Bremer: "Re: Firewall options- which way to go"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
