Jamie_B Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 [quote name='T-Dub' timestamp='1342475934' post='1139129'] You still don't get it. Maybe stop sitting around "snickering" at people for and go talk to these network security friends of yours.. FFS dude "I have a friend that does this" doesn't make you an authority. I have a friend that has a PhD in neurochemistry; that doesn't mean I know wtf your problem is... Wireless, yes, not particularly secure. The point you are missing, even though it's been repeated several times, is that they don't have to broadcast that data in the clear. Yeh, it's fairly easy to hack someone's wireless password. But, oh no, it turns out they've encrypted all the data before they sent it.. In fact, the only time it's probably not encrypted is when it's being viewed in whatever front-end they have. Playbook 3.0, or whatever. Which has its own login/pw, I'm sure, and maybe even a keyfob or the like to go with it. Imagine it as tapping into someone's phone line.. Fairly easy right? But, oh no, they're speaking Croatian. Only it's not Croatian; it's a made-up language that changes every fraction of a second and, oh no, not only do you need 2 different keys to decrypt it into English, one is stored on the iPad (somewhere, it's not in "heythisismypassword.txt" - in fact, one of the features Apple is trumpeting about the new iPad is [i]how difficult it is to find this - [/i]didn't I point that out already, too?) and the other on a server that definitely isn't running some child-proofed bubblewrap Apple OS, and with its own separate, unique security (ie, a whole other login/pw & file structure to defeat.) So, once again, hacking someone's wifi does not give you unfettered access to all the data on their system. Go back and read that again, please, until it sinks in? [/quote] You know you shouldnt be so belligerent when you have no idea what your talking about. I dont just "have friends", I've spent time developing systems that need to be secure, and one of the number one requirements is we dont use wireless. Anyway for the part you quoted me on, once someone has someone else's data even encrypted, they have it, then it's just a matter of time spent running decryption algorithms. To use your example its not just listening in on the phone it's recording the conversation then having as much time as you need to have a translator or someone who can figure out your "own language" spend on it. Seriously since you keep showing your ass on this... Is the Ipad app have some level of security? Sure, is it more secure than a 3 ring binder, in terms of physical security slightly more, but in terms of data security its actually less secure, for the reason I stated that someone hacking the wireless connection doesnt need to actually physically touch the ipad. It only takes getting into the system once to be able to spend time getting into other parts of the system, or leave a worm that might give them access later. There is no such thing as a completely secure system, they dont exist, you can make things more secure and harder to get into than others, but nothing is completely secure outside of unplugging yourself from the internet. Do I think someone is going to take that much time to spend hacking an Ipad for an NFL playbook? Not unless there is a good deal of monetary value in it, no, so its not likely, but the possibility exists. I suppose I could have just laughed at the "Mr. Mitnick" comment ElFlocko said and let it go, but when your just so wrong and belligerent about it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squirrlnutz Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1342485453' post='1139155'] You know you shouldnt be so belligerent when you have no idea what your talking about. I dont just "have friends", I've spent time developing systems that need to be secure, and one of the number one requirements is we dont use wireless. Anyway for the part you quoted me on, once someone has someone else's data even encrypted, they have it, then it's just a matter of time spent running decryption algorithms. To use your example its not just listening in on the phone it's recording the conversation then having as much time as you need to have a translator or someone who can figure out your "own language" spend on it. Seriously since you keep showing your ass on this... Is the Ipad app have some level of security? Sure, is it more secure than a 3 ring binder, in terms of physical security slightly more, but in terms of data security its actually less secure, for the reason I stated that someone hacking the wireless connection doesnt need to actually physically touch the ipad. It only takes getting into the system once to be able to spend time getting into other parts of the system, or leave a worm that might give them access later. There is no such thing as a completely secure system, they dont exist, you can make things more secure and harder to get into than others, but nothing is completely secure outside of unplugging yourself from the internet. Do I think someone is going to take that much time to spend hacking an Ipad for an NFL playbook? Not unless there is a good deal of monetary value in it, no, so its not likely, but the possibility exists. I suppose I could have just laughed at the "Mr. Mitnick" comment ElFlocko said and let it go, but when your just so wrong and belligerent about it... [/quote] This conversation has taken a ridiculous turn. Yes Anonymous could probably hack the Bengals playbook, the Steelers can't and certainly not with enough turnaround time for it to be useful. It's very safe and secure. I imagine it's much like the network security and remote access capabilities the multi billion dollar pharmaceutical company I work for uses. The sensitive information that is accessible remotely is worth tens to hundreds of entire NFLs in the wrong hands...and yet they don't seemed to worried. The Bengals playbook doesn't have to be as secure as Jamie thinks it need to be. Honestly the way people talked about it in here sounds like some believe they can hack it themselves or atleast know someone who could. I got cash that says they're full of shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 [quote name='Squirrlnutz' timestamp='1342488896' post='1139170'] This conversation has taken a ridiculous turn. Yes Anonymous could probably hack the Bengals playbook, the Steelers can't and certainly not with enough turnaround time for it to be useful. It's very safe and secure. I imagine it's much like the network security and remote access capabilities the multi billion dollar pharmaceutical company I work for uses. The sensitive information that is accessible remotely is worth tens to hundreds of entire NFLs in the wrong hands...and yet they don't seemed to worried. [color=#ff0000]The Bengals playbook doesn't have to be as secure as Jamie thinks it need to be.[/color] Honestly the way people talked about it in here sounds like some believe they can hack it themselves or atleast know someone who could. I got cash that says they're full of shit. [/quote] No it doesnt, and I wasnt arguing that it has to be extremely secure, I was arguing security in general and people who think "oh well it's completely ok", which is where I think the confusion is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squirrlnutz Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1342489027' post='1139171'] No it doesnt, and I wasnt arguing that it has to be extremely secure, I was arguing security in general and people who think "oh well it's completely ok", which is where I think the confusion is. [/quote] Point taken...but in all likelihood it's probably completely ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 I hacked the Brat iPad. Shovel pass on 3rd and long. Any team can get the other teams playbook without this fancy fancy it nerd pissing match. It's called film study. Paul Brown the original nfl hacker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 [quote name='scharm' timestamp='1342491096' post='1139178'] I hacked the Brat iPad. Shovel pass on 3rd and long. [/quote] Well played Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dub Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1342485453' post='1139155'] I suppose I could have just laughed at the "Mr. Mitnick" comment ElFlocko said and let it go, but when your just so wrong and belligerent about it... [/quote] Yeh yeh, you are all-knowing. I've been around here long enough to know better. Back on ignore with the rest of the trolls. Still can't believe you're a mod on here, but why don't you move this to the geek forum where it belongs? Do work, nerd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 [quote name='T-Dub' timestamp='1342501621' post='1139197'] Yeh yeh, you are all-knowing. I've been around here long enough to know better. Back on ignore with the rest of the trolls. Still can't believe you're a mod on here, but why don't you move this to the geek forum where it belongs? Do work, nerd. [/quote] No, I'm not all knowing, however in this topic I do happen to know more than you do. And for somebody who loves to complain about trolls you might be this boards biggest. Lolz@you thinking that nerd stuff bothers me. What are you gonna give me a cyber wedgie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1342519991' post='1139202'] No, I'm not all knowing, however in this topic I do happen to know more than you do. And for somebody who loves to complain about trolls you might be this boards biggest. Lolz@you thinking that nerd stuff bothers me. What are you gonna give me a cyber wedgie? [/quote] The thing is, you are making a big deal about the security of military grade encryption with multiple pass codes for access and remote wipe, when the previous system was a 3 ring binder. Seems kinda silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 Can we not differentiate between "picking up a wi-fi signal" and actually "cracking the password(s) therein"? Jamie, the military uses tons of wireless technology. It HAS to with the programs it has (thinking UAV's here). I don't know why you say that a wireless network is any less secure than a hard wired one. There are encryptions upon encryptions, plus passwords...and that's even if you hack the WEP key or whatever the secure wireless network uses. I guess I just don't get it. Its like all of us are arguing in circles. Nothing is infallible like you say....but how often do military encryptions get hacked without outside help (treason?)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 [quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1342565273' post='1139332'] The thing is, you are making a big deal about the security of military grade encryption with multiple pass codes for access and remote wipe, when the previous system was a 3 ring binder. Seems kinda silly. [/quote] I think your still missing the point. In a 3 ring binder system, one can not take the data without physically touching the binder, in an Ipad system, they can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 [quote name='Bunghole' timestamp='1342571094' post='1139345'] Can we not differentiate between "picking up a wi-fi signal" and actually "cracking the password(s) therein"? Jamie, the military uses tons of wireless technology. It HAS to with the programs it has (thinking UAV's here). I don't know why you say that a wireless network is any less secure than a hard wired one. There are encryptions upon encryptions, plus passwords...and that's even if you hack the WEP key or whatever the secure wireless network uses. I guess I just don't get it. Its like all of us are arguing in circles. Nothing is infallible like you say....but how often do military encryptions get hacked without outside help (treason?)? [/quote] Can we differentiate between a UAV and a network that runs over the internet using IP, because I'm fairly certian those drones arent being run using IP. Let me put it this way bung. We have a "mobile" version of the software we created, it was expressly said they didnt want that mobile version to be able to directly connect using wireless because of the lack of security on it, even with encryption, that they wanted the data stored locally on the laptop and wanted the ability to upload that data at the end of the day when they connected hardwired. .... The military expressed this to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1342578918' post='1139369'] I think your still missing the point. In a 3 ring binder system, one can not take the data without physically touching the binder, in an Ipad system, they can. [/quote] But the level of sophistication required to do anything with it is greater than what is required to lift a binder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 [quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1342579423' post='1139371'] But the level of sophistication required to do anything with it is greater than what is required to lift a binder. [/quote] Sure. Never argued it wasnt. But I am arguing there is a risk involved that isnt involved with a 3 ring binder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1342579500' post='1139372'] Sure. Never argued it wasnt. But I am arguing [b]there is a risk involved that isnt involved with a 3 ring binder.[/b] [/quote] i completely disagree.. I still think an encrypted Ipad is more secure.. It's not hard to steal a binder, and once stolen anyone can read it. I can pretty much guarantee it would be harder to hack and crack this system in a manner timely enough to be worthwhile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 [quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1342579647' post='1139373'] i completely disagree.. I still think an encrypted Ipad is more secure.. It's not hard to steal a binder, and once stolen anyone can read it. I can pretty much guarantee it would be harder to hack and crack this system in a manner timely enough to be worthwhile. [/quote] disagree all you want, that doesnt make it true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1342580858' post='1139377'] disagree all you want, that doesnt make it true [/quote] You act as if these binders aren't floating around already. I think your argument would hold more merit if they were being kept in a secure area. I think someone determined to steal the data could "intercept" it pretty much as easily whether it be wireless or sitting in a players backpack at the gym/in their car. The main difference is with a binder there is no encryption and no remote wipe. Besides which, it's not just the Bengals using this system.. It's half the NFL.. I wonder what it is you know, that these multibillion dollar businesses don't understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 [quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1342590131' post='1139387'] You act as if these binders aren't floating around already. I think your argument would hold more merit if they were being kept in a secure area. I think someone determined to steal the data could "intercept" it pretty much as easily whether it be wireless or sitting in a players backpack at the gym/in their car. The main difference is with a binder there is no encryption and no remote wipe. Besides which, it's not just the Bengals using this system.. It's half the NFL.. I wonder what it is you know, that these multibillion dollar businesses don't understand? [/quote] The businesses probably understand that the playbook they certainly don't want to lose it and if for the taking another team would certainly look at it, but the desire to use measures beyond random bad luck to get a team's strategy via play book is inherently low. There are certainly easier and more productive ways to get the strategy. Using resources to determine probability of plays being called is probably time better spent than hacking an ipad playbook. Studying a coordinators trends against certain looks is a more worthwhile effort. I was joking above with Brat. But the point remains a team's playbook is publicly displayed each week of the season. A team can get that information via film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol_Bengal Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 [quote name='Bunghole' timestamp='1342571094' post='1139345'] I don't know why you say that a wireless network is any less secure than a hard wired one. [/quote] I'm staying out of the other conversation... He's saying it because it is true. Wireless technology allows a would be hacker to intercept traffic as far as 200-300 yards away (potentially) without you ever seeing that person and that person never having to physically "touch" any part of your physical network. This is why when buildings are built security for network / servers, etc. are taken into consideration... Tapping in to a physical network is much more cumbersome and difficult (due to having to physically get into the "pipe" so to speak) than a wireless network is. I'm not saying either is likely... but one is simpler than the other. You can run the same encryption on both methods so that is essentially a non-factor. If a hacker can get a set of data packets and store those they have forever to pound away at the encryption without concern for time forwarding issues, 3 attempt lockouts, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 [quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1342590131' post='1139387'] You act as if these binders aren't floating around already. I think your argument would hold more merit if they were being kept in a secure area. I think someone determined to steal the data could "intercept" it pretty much as easily whether it be wireless or sitting in a players backpack at the gym/in their car. The main difference is with a binder there is no encryption and no remote wipe. Besides which, it's not just the Bengals using this system.. It's half the NFL.. I wonder what it is you know, that these multibillion dollar businesses don't understand? [/quote] Youre a smart guy, how do you not get this? Sure a player can leave the notebook lying around unsecured but you still have to touch the notebook to get the contents in it. You dont have to do that over wireless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 [quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1342590131' post='1139387'] Besides which, it's not just the Bengals using this system.. It's half the NFL.. I wonder what it is you know, that these multibillion dollar businesses don't understand? [/quote] worth repeating... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 [quote name='Bengals1181' timestamp='1342615764' post='1139403'] worth repeating... [/quote] We've gone over this. It's a conversation of likelihood vs impossibility. Is it likely that hackers are going to go after an NFL playbook? Not unless there is monetary value in it (or the ones that do it for fun) but for the love of God people need to stop acting like its an impossibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 [quote name='Vol_Bengal' timestamp='1342612919' post='1139397'] I'm staying out of the other conversation... He's saying it because it is true. Wireless technology allows a would be hacker to intercept traffic as far as 200-300 yards away (potentially) without you ever seeing that person and that person never having to physically "touch" any part of your physical network. This is why when buildings are built security for network / servers, etc. are taken into consideration... Tapping in to a physical network is much more cumbersome and difficult (due to having to physically get into the "pipe" so to speak) than a wireless network is. I'm not saying either is likely... but one is simpler than the other. You can run the same encryption on both methods so that is essentially a non-factor. If a hacker can get a set of data packets and store those they have forever to pound away at the encryption without concern for time forwarding issues, 3 attempt lockouts, etc. [/quote] Thank you. I'm not giving away any big national secret here but this is why buildings that have highly sensitive data have areas in the buildings that are built to make safe guards against wireless attacks. Ever been in a "vault" of one of those buildings or one where the whole building is taking those safeguards? I have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1342616048' post='1139404'] We've gone over this. It's a conversation of likelihood vs impossibility. Is it likely that hackers are going to go after an NFL playbook? Not unless there is monetary value in it (or the ones that do it for fun) but for the love of God people need to stop acting like its an impossibility. [/quote] its also naive to think billion dollar companies don't know what the hell they're doing. For argument's sake, how long do you think it would take a hacker to crack it, assuming they were good enough to crack military grade security? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squirrlnutz Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1342616048' post='1139404'] We've gone over this. It's a conversation of likelihood vs impossibility. Is it likely that hackers are going to go after an NFL playbook? Not unless there is monetary value in it (or the ones that do it for fun) but for the love of God [b]people need to stop acting like its an impossibility.[/b] [/quote] Umm has that been happening? I think some people need to stop shouting off the soapbox that represents a 1 in a trillion chance everyone else is wrong. Certainly there is a chance that the next time someone measures the rate of a falling object it will turn out different than 9.8 m/s and all we know about gravity will have to be re-evaluated...but who wastes their time championing the idea that gravity is "just a theory?" Yes they added another "risk" by transferring data wirelessly, but the benefit of this technology FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR outweighs that risks. I'd rather risk having Anonymous crack the playbook if it gives our entire offense an extra 24-48 hours of film study and breakdown per week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.