I read today on BBC News that — no real surprise here — WEP is broken. I suspect it has been hackable for some time, but the BBC tends to lag behind somewhat when it comes to sensational news about new hacked encryption protocols.
Anyway my point is that they go on to recommend the use of WPA or WPA-2, both of which are better alternatives to the WEP system of encryption, but appear to categorically state a series of system requirements that, as far as I can tell, are simply untrue:
Using either of these requires Windows XP fitted with Service Pack 2, Vista or OS X on the Mac.
Using WPA or WPA-2 within Windows' own wireless drivers/client probably requires SP2 or Vista, yes. However there's no reason one can't use the driver that comes with their brand new shiny PCMCIA wireless NIC: one that supports WPA/WPA-2.
I can't see any reason that the OS used would have much bearing on the capabilities of the client.
From what I can tell, this is yet another example of dumbed-down technology reporting giving the distinct impression that every functional possibility revolves around the basic features of Microsoft's operating system.
No wonder there's a monopoly.
