> From: "Paul Melson"
> To: ,
> Subject: RE: [fw-wiz] Hopefully not too OT
> Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 17:12:59 -0400
> I fear that a jammer would give you a false sense of security. For one,
> they're not totally effective, especially against ad-hoc networks in close
> proximity to each other. Sure, they kill performance, but they don't shut
> it down. Secondly, they can actually assist those airsnort-ing your space
> in collecting unique IV's should your rogue users be well-intentioned enough
> to use WEP. Thirdly, many jammers only operate in the 2.4GHz band - in the
> US alone you can buy WiFi products that operate at 915MHz and 5.8GHz, to say
> nothing of FHSS vs. DSSS. And, perhaps more importantly, jammers are not at
> all neighborly if your offices share space or proximity to businesses that
> do choose to use WiFi.
> Not to say that I have a better technical solution, but if you don't want
> *people* in or with your organization to use wireless, then you have a
> *people* problem that requires a people solution.
> PaulM


Actually, Paul Robertson, Ben, and Paul Melson hit the nail on the head.

You need a written policy saying, in effect, "no wireless access to the
company network", get the employees to sign off on it AFTER the
layer-8/9 people approve the policy. If anyone breaks the rules after
that, then you have an HR problem.

Gregory Hicks | Principal Systems Engineer
Cadence Design Systems | Direct: 408.576.3609
555 River Oaks Pkwy M/S 6B1 | Fax: 408.894.3400
San Jose, CA 95134 | Internet: ghicks@cadence.com

I am perfectly capable of learning from my mistakes. I will surely
learn a great deal today.

"A democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding on what to have for
lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the results of the
decision." - Benjamin Franklin

"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they
be properly armed." --Alexander Hamilton

firewall-wizards mailing list