Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UN Advised on Wireless Insecurity

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the wireless-tapping dept.

otisaardvark writes "There's an article on the BBC about how the UN is being briefed on the problems of wireless networks. Predictable conclusions - security is mainly compromised through human, not technological factors."

3 of 81 comments (clear)

  1. Hmm... by MarvinMouse · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Well, let's look at these conclusions...

    Humans err,
    But Computers don't.

    Makes sense.. considering a computer only does what it is told to do. If a human messes up in the programming of the computer, the security is broken. If a human messes up with a social engineer, the security is broken...

    The only way that a computers encryption and security could be beaten (assuming the programming , and hardware is good, and there is no human interference at all) is if someone breaks the encryption.

    So... what's the solution here...

    kill all humans, and we'll have a perfectly secure computer system that no one can break into!

    wait... isn't that's what the Bush and the americans are doing anywaiz?

    j/k (just a friendly poke at my southern neighbours). :-)

    --
    ~ kjrose
    1. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait



      Obviously americans hold the mod points today, and don't have much of a sense of humour.

      Oh well.. it's the first -1 I've ever gotten, so I guess now I have done everything on Slashdot. :-)

  2. Re:Most in secure os? Yep its linuX! by lvdrproject · · Score: -1, Flamebait
    Ok, i know i'm responding to a troll, but i just want to say something about this article (since it probably won't make it past here anyway).

    It's all fine and well of course that they've discovered this, but the article gives absolutely NO BACKING WHATSOEVER for their claims. What the Hell, they go on for a whole page about how UNIX is insecure, and Windows isn't, just rewording it a dozen times. The only example they give is the trojan one, which doesn't even work to their side, really. Windows had six trojans during its peak; Linux had one, and now -- GASP!! -- it has TWO!! I may not be a math professor here, sir, but i do believe six is four more than two. Saying that Linux had two trojan alerts and Windows had six does not back up the claim that UNIX is "the most insecure OS".

    And so ends my reply to the troll. If any of you higher-ups are considering accepting this as a Slashdot article, i urge you not to; if the article had more information, i'd say go for it, but this is just flamebait waiting to happen.

    :Lav