From: Paul Louden <paulthenerd_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 07:47:23 -0600

>
> True, but WPA or WPA2 is good enough for Wifi right now at least. I
> doubt something that complicated is feasible, but it would be nice.
"Good enough" does not mean "secure". It means "people will pay for it
because it makes their network less insecure." If you want security, use
a wire. As I said, bluetooth (or any wireless) would be disabled
whenever not in use anyway. It's only a vector if you're not careful
while using, and then you're silly enough to say "Hey, what's this
mysterious file here on my player that wasn't there before, I think I'll
run it."

Bluetooth was designed for portable use. It was engineered to be cheap,
it's reasonably secure, it is designed for communication between
multiple types of devices rather than simply as a networking protocol,
and it's designed to be low power. Weighed against "I don't think it's
secure enough for protecting my MP3s for the short time I have it turned
on while syncing", I think it definitely still has the advantage.
Received on 2008-02-18