Wireless Hotspot Access vs. Direct Internet Connection 2

[slyride]

Hello,
I am curious to find out what other think of the potential for security breaches when a laptop user uses an unsecured wireless connection vs. connecting to an unsecured wired LAN or directly to the internet.

I am arguing that when you are out in the world with your laptop, that it is no more of a security risk to connect to a Wi-Fi access point then it is to connect directly to the internet via something like a Verizon EVDO card or a hotel network or a home network with no firewall. My reasoning is that if someone is able to compromise your machine via wireless access, then they would also be able to do the same via the internet or a hotel LAN.

I hope that I clarified well enough, thanks in advance for the feedback.

 

[3wsparky]

whats the difference , its just media type the end result is the same !

if the wirless was in your home then theres a difference but in public theres no difference

 

[slyride]

What would the difference be if the wireless was in my home?

 

[Diancecht]

The main difference for me is physical access to the resource. A wireless LAN can be accessed from everywhere around. To acess a typical LAN, you need to get a cable and plug it.

But after that, both are LANs, so with the same security constraints, both are equal.

Cheers,
Dian

 

[Grenage]

Provided you're using an up-to-date authentication (WPA2-PSK rather than WPA-PSK etc.) then there should be no problem with using wireless. Anything old can easily be broken in a relatively short period of time.

Carlsberg don't run I.T departments, but if they did they'd probably be more fun.

 

[slyride]

I think my intial post needs some clarification.
I am looking at this purely from the perspective of "Should we let laptop users use wireless connections when they are travelling or at home?"
They would connect to a VPN once the internet connection has been established.

 

[Roadki11]

This is a company policy issue. You have risks when letting laptop users connect to networks outside the protected company network. These risks can be mitigated by keeping machines up2date with windows/software patches, using firewalls, limiting user authority, strong understood and enforced acceptable use policies, and by not using split tunnel vpn's. You need to weight the risks to benifits and base your decisions on that.

RoadKi11

 

[slyride]

So would it be easier to compromise the computer if the computer is connected to a public Wi-Fi hotspot with the computer getting a private ip, or if it is connected to a wired connection with a public ip?

 

[3wsparky]

arr so your infact looking at a public (real ) ip address on a pc Vs a wireless connection using a Class of address.
cabled or wireless it all comes down to the hacker,but ....

if you using the theory of real ip with no firewall and wireless connection with no firewall then i would say the greatest risk is the real ip setup by along way ! only because the capture group that can probe that real ip vs an internal wireless setup which is only at risk as far as the unit will transmit.

BTW the home setup i mentioned above is a result of you knowing whats plugged into your DJUs corprate setups its harder to keep an eye on that.

 

[Roadki11]

To many variables. All things considered i would say both connection types are equally safe and dangerous. I know that is ambiguous but so is the question, it boils down to your safeguards. An unpatched, non-firewalled laptop on a wireless connection is more likely to get hacked/spywared before a patched up, firewalled laptop connected directly to the internet. See my point?

RoadKi11