4 ms·
Cryptography without authentication still provides protection against (non-MITM) eavesdroppers, which is very important with public wifi networks nowadays. Whi
by dtech 12y ago
Cryptography without authentication still provides protection against (non-MITM) eavesdroppers, which is very important with public wifi networks nowadays.
Which is why it's strange that self-signed connections are represented to the user as dangerous, while unencrypted connections do not have such a warning even though the former is strictly better.
- ryanlol 12y agoScenarios where the attacker is restricted to being a non-MITM eavesdropper are pretty rare, public wifi networks aren't an example of such.
- tveita 12y agoAttackers will always prefer passive attacks over active attacks, though. There is no reason to give them that convenience.
- MichaelGG 12y agoPublic WiFi is the anti example since if you can read to the WiFi, you can write to it and MITM connections. Passive is probably best, right now, against large scale fiber taps. And only as a stopgap.