Re: Which is more secure: wireless connection versus ethernet?
In either case the most likely route of security compromise is malware you
have installed on your computer. Or the bogus alerts allegedly from your bank
which you click on in your e-mail program.
Re: Which is more secure: wireless connection versus ethernet?
On 2011-12-12, A. Deguza <deguza@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hello All:
>
> At home when I am doing banking I use an ethernet cable to connect to
> Internet and disable my laptop's wi-fi connection.
>
> A friend told ne that I do have to worry about security on modern wi-
> fi.
>
> Is he right?
Perhaps. It depends. (did you mean "do not" in there, since it seems
like you and your friend agree)
Re: Which is more secure: wireless connection versus ethernet?
"A. Deguza" <deguza@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:23888bc9-90e9-4a63-b391-68dfee867d38@f39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> A friend told ne that I do have to worry about security on modern wi-
> fi.
Vulnerabilities in WLAN technology have been found over the years.
Similarly, what is now considered modern may become obsolete as research
continues. If you use Ethernet rather than a WLAN, someone may be able to
sniff your traffic off the wire instead, but this may be easier to prevent
and detect.
One always has to worry about security and choose the most appropriate
risk exposure under one's particular circumstances.
Re: Which is more secure: wireless connection versus ethernet?
In article <0BBFq.481$SP1.157@uutiset.elisa.fi>,
"Thor Kottelin" <thor@anta.net> wrote:
> "A. Deguza" <deguza@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:23888bc9-90e9-4a63-b391-68dfee867d38@f39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>
> > A friend told ne that I do have to worry about security on modern wi-
> > fi.
>
> Vulnerabilities in WLAN technology have been found over the years.
> Similarly, what is now considered modern may become obsolete as research
> continues. If you use Ethernet rather than a WLAN, someone may be able to
> sniff your traffic off the wire instead, but this may be easier to prevent
> and detect.
Wouldn't they need physical access to your home to sniff the Ethernet?
--
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
Re: Which is more secure: wireless connection versus ethernet?
"Barry Margolin" <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote in message
news:barmar-57713C.03351013122011@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <0BBFq.481$SP1.157@uutiset.elisa.fi>,
> "Thor Kottelin" <thor@anta.net> wrote:
>> Vulnerabilities in WLAN technology have been found over the years.
>> Similarly, what is now considered modern may become obsolete as
>> research
>> continues. If you use Ethernet rather than a WLAN, someone may be able
>> to
>> sniff your traffic off the wire instead, but this may be easier to
>> prevent
>> and detect.
>
> Wouldn't they need physical access to your home to sniff the Ethernet?
Yes, at least once.
(Wire sniffing may be more difficult to prevent and detect outside the
home, such as between the home and the house MDF, but that is, of course,
irrelevant in terms of the WLAN/Ethernet comparison.)
Re: Which is more secure: wireless connection versus ethernet?
"Thor Kottelin" <thor@anta.net> wrote in message
news:GAEFq.493$SP1.32@uutiset.elisa.fi...
> "Barry Margolin" <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote in message
> news:barmar-57713C.03351013122011@news.eternal-september.org...
>> In article <0BBFq.481$SP1.157@uutiset.elisa.fi>,
>> "Thor Kottelin" <thor@anta.net> wrote:
>
>>> Vulnerabilities in WLAN technology have been found over the years.
>>> Similarly, what is now considered modern may become obsolete as
>>> research
>>> continues. If you use Ethernet rather than a WLAN, someone may be able
>>> to
>>> sniff your traffic off the wire instead, but this may be easier to
>>> prevent
>>> and detect.
>>
>> Wouldn't they need physical access to your home to sniff the Ethernet?
>
> Yes, at least once.
>
> (Wire sniffing may be more difficult to prevent and detect outside the
> home, such as between the home and the house MDF, but that is, of
> course, irrelevant in terms of the WLAN/Ethernet comparison.)
Oh, and since the OP mentioned banking: using an end-to-end-encrypted
(https)connection to an authenticated (certificate checks out) bank
website would obviously provide increased security.
Re: Which is more secure: wireless connection versus ethernet?
"Thor Kottelin" <thor@anta.net> writes:
>"A. Deguza" <deguza@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:23888bc9-90e9-4a63-b391-68dfee867d38@f39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>> A friend told ne that I do have to worry about security on modern wi-
>> fi.
>Vulnerabilities in WLAN technology have been found over the years.
>Similarly, what is now considered modern may become obsolete as research
>continues. If you use Ethernet rather than a WLAN, someone may be able to
>sniff your traffic off the wire instead, but this may be easier to prevent
>and detect.
Note that the traffic goes over the write at one point anyway; In principle,
Internet Banking will use SSL and as such it doesn't really matter if
the traffic can be intercepted.
The bigger risk is malware, phishing, as noted, and also how well the
certificate authorities do their work.
Re: Which is more secure: wireless connection versus ethernet?
On 2011-12-13, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article <0BBFq.481$SP1.157@uutiset.elisa.fi>,
> "Thor Kottelin" <thor@anta.net> wrote:
>
>> "A. Deguza" <deguza@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:23888bc9-90e9-4a63-b391-68dfee867d38@f39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > A friend told ne that I do have to worry about security on modern wi-
>> > fi.
>>
>> Vulnerabilities in WLAN technology have been found over the years.
>> Similarly, what is now considered modern may become obsolete as research
>> continues. If you use Ethernet rather than a WLAN, someone may be able to
>> sniff your traffic off the wire instead, but this may be easier to prevent
>> and detect.
>
> Wouldn't they need physical access to your home to sniff the Ethernet?
>
Nope. If you are cable, then apparently your traffic is open to anyone
else on that cable as well. One of the advantages, I suppose, of ADSL
over cable. (Here in vancouver, bad service seems to be another
"advantage" of ADSL).
Re: Which is more secure: wireless connection versus ethernet?
"unruh" <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote in message
news:OVLFq.25438$cN1.5960@newsfe12.iad...
> On 2011-12-13, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> In article <0BBFq.481$SP1.157@uutiset.elisa.fi>,
>> "Thor Kottelin" <thor@anta.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "A. Deguza" <deguza@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:23888bc9-90e9-4a63-b391-68dfee867d38@f39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> > A friend told ne that I do have to worry about security on modern
>>> > wi-
>>> > fi.
>>>
>>> Vulnerabilities in WLAN technology have been found over the years.
>>> Similarly, what is now considered modern may become obsolete as
>>> research
>>> continues. If you use Ethernet rather than a WLAN, someone may be able
>>> to
>>> sniff your traffic off the wire instead, but this may be easier to
>>> prevent
>>> and detect.
>>
>> Wouldn't they need physical access to your home to sniff the Ethernet?
> Nope. If you are cable, then apparently your traffic is open to anyone
> else on that cable as well.
However, if the OP uses a cable modem for all his or her Internet traffic,
cable-related threats do not matter when comparing Ethernet to WLAN in the
home.
Of course, Ethernet frames could also be sniffed e.g. by an ISP or IX at
their facilities.
Re: Which is more secure: wireless connection versus ethernet?
In article <OVLFq.25438$cN1.5960@newsfe12.iad>,
unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
> On 2011-12-13, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> > In article <0BBFq.481$SP1.157@uutiset.elisa.fi>,
> > "Thor Kottelin" <thor@anta.net> wrote:
> >
> >> "A. Deguza" <deguza@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:23888bc9-90e9-4a63-b391-68dfee867d38@f39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >> > A friend told ne that I do have to worry about security on modern wi-
> >> > fi.
> >>
> >> Vulnerabilities in WLAN technology have been found over the years.
> >> Similarly, what is now considered modern may become obsolete as research
> >> continues. If you use Ethernet rather than a WLAN, someone may be able to
> >> sniff your traffic off the wire instead, but this may be easier to prevent
> >> and detect.
> >
> > Wouldn't they need physical access to your home to sniff the Ethernet?
> >
>
> Nope. If you are cable, then apparently your traffic is open to anyone
> else on that cable as well. One of the advantages, I suppose, of ADSL
> over cable. (Here in vancouver, bad service seems to be another
> "advantage" of ADSL).
That's the WAN, which is the same regardless of which LAN technology you
use. We're comparing security of LAN architectures.
--
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
Re: Which is more secure: wireless connection versus ethernet?
On 2011-12-13, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article <OVLFq.25438$cN1.5960@newsfe12.iad>,
> unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 2011-12-13, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> > In article <0BBFq.481$SP1.157@uutiset.elisa.fi>,
>> > "Thor Kottelin" <thor@anta.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> "A. Deguza" <deguza@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:23888bc9-90e9-4a63-b391-68dfee867d38@f39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>> >>
>> >> > A friend told ne that I do have to worry about security on modern wi-
>> >> > fi.
>> >>
>> >> Vulnerabilities in WLAN technology have been found over the years.
>> >> Similarly, what is now considered modern may become obsolete as research
>> >> continues. If you use Ethernet rather than a WLAN, someone may be able to
>> >> sniff your traffic off the wire instead, but this may be easier to prevent
>> >> and detect.
>> >
>> > Wouldn't they need physical access to your home to sniff the Ethernet?
>> >
>>
>> Nope. If you are cable, then apparently your traffic is open to anyone
>> else on that cable as well. One of the advantages, I suppose, of ADSL
>> over cable. (Here in vancouver, bad service seems to be another
>> "advantage" of ADSL).
>
> That's the WAN, which is the same regardless of which LAN technology you
> use. We're comparing security of LAN architectures.
We are? Exactly what in the OP post gave you that idea?
For most people they really do not care where they got hacked. And for
most people, they use the LAN almost exclusively to access the WAN.
>
Re: Which is more secure: wireless connection versus ethernet?
unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> writes:
>On 2011-12-13, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> Wouldn't they need physical access to your home to sniff the Ethernet?
(or just compromise a machine of yours which is already on that same ethernet,
but anyway...)
>Nope. If you are cable, then apparently your traffic is open to anyone
>else on that cable as well.
Something which bears remembering is that when you don't see certain traffic
on certain wires, that's a bandwidth optimization, not a security guarantee.
The smartest ethernet switch has no choice when seeing a packet addressed to
an unknown MAC address but to send it down all wires. So long as it doesn't
do this too often, it's meeting the bandwidth optimization objectives.
But one shouldn't rely on it for security, if possible.
Re: Which is more secure: wireless connection versus ethernet?
In article <h%PFq.15606$cG.14572@newsfe14.iad>,
unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
> On 2011-12-13, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> > In article <OVLFq.25438$cN1.5960@newsfe12.iad>,
> > unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2011-12-13, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> >> > In article <0BBFq.481$SP1.157@uutiset.elisa.fi>,
> >> > "Thor Kottelin" <thor@anta.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> "A. Deguza" <deguza@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:23888bc9-90e9-4a63-b391-68dfee867d38@f39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com..
> >> >> .
> >> >>
> >> >> > A friend told ne that I do have to worry about security on modern wi-
> >> >> > fi.
> >> >>
> >> >> Vulnerabilities in WLAN technology have been found over the years.
> >> >> Similarly, what is now considered modern may become obsolete as
> >> >> research
> >> >> continues. If you use Ethernet rather than a WLAN, someone may be able
> >> >> to
> >> >> sniff your traffic off the wire instead, but this may be easier to
> >> >> prevent
> >> >> and detect.
> >> >
> >> > Wouldn't they need physical access to your home to sniff the Ethernet?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Nope. If you are cable, then apparently your traffic is open to anyone
> >> else on that cable as well. One of the advantages, I suppose, of ADSL
> >> over cable. (Here in vancouver, bad service seems to be another
> >> "advantage" of ADSL).
> >
> > That's the WAN, which is the same regardless of which LAN technology you
> > use. We're comparing security of LAN architectures.
>
> We are? Exactly what in the OP post gave you that idea?
He said "don't need to worry about security on modern WiFi". That
implies to me that he's concerned with the security difference between
WiFi and the alternative, which is wired Ethernet.
There may indeed be security issues with the WAN, but that's independent
of the use of WiFi.
--
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
Which is more secure: wireless connection versus ethernet? 
Linear Mode
