Edited by author 07-27-2003 06:05 PM
No -- what I'm saying is that warnings about drive-by spammers are:

1. Hysterical, because there are no published accounts of this occurring in the wild, and so it consitutes a marginal threat today (Ebola is a genuine threat, but if no one has ebola for 15,000' mile around, there's no sense worrying about it)

2. Nonsensical, because it's no skin off my dick if someone uses my node to send spam, so long as I'm not the recipient -- this is a threat to OTHER PEOPLE, not people who operate hotspots

3. Disingenous, because this amounts to an attack not on WiFi, but on anonymity, a value that is central to American democracy. Saying, "allowing people to connect to the Internet without keeping track of who they are is a 'risk' because they might send spam" is the same as saying, "Anonymity is wrong."

Er, you've misunderstood me on WEP. I've been making fun of WEP for years.

Meanwhile, every single ISP customer whose ISP requires SSL is using strong crypto to fetch mail. ISPs could accomplish universal, across-the-board secure mail by simply insisting on this. And they should.