Satellite for internet… Safe enough?How secure is SSL/TLS, explained in laymans terms?What would one need to do in order to hijack a satellite?Is it possible to decrypt a satellite TV signal without using a smart card?Can I use a satellite phone for 2 factor auth sms and such?Is my online account at a financial firm safe?Are six digit temporary numerical pins secure enough for online accounts?How to keep web traffic private with a satellite intenet connectionEmail/facebook account/internet protection service for private communityFind the way back to the safe mode
Is Schrodinger's Cat itself an observer?
How to protect my Wi-Fi password from being displayed by Android phones when sharing it with QR code?
Why is technology bad for children?
Should I avoid "big words" when writing to a younger audience?
Showing a limit approaches e: base of natural log
Will Schnorr Multi-signatures completely replace ECDSA?
Remove last letter 4 times, get a real word each time, starting word is a car model
Why do Computer Science degrees contain a high proportion of mathematics?
How to give a rationality-inducing drug to an entire software company?
Is it possible to unmount a partition table?
Usefulness of Nash embedding theorem
Disordered Cryptic Orders
Who can change WIP limit in DoW when urgent work emerges?
Can Superspeed Cause Illusions?
How can I learn to write better questions to test for conceptual understanding?
XDSL Internet Connection Over Optical Fibre Telephone Line?
Why is the empennage design of this Lockheed 1049E so complicated?
Is it possible to have 2 ports open on SSH with 2 different authentication schemes?
What are the branches of statistics?
Is there a push, in the United States, to use gender-neutral language and gender pronouns (when they are given)?
How to treat unhandled exceptions? (Terminate the application vs. Keep it alive)
In the comics, have any of the Robins called their costume "target attraction" for villains?
Is there a historical explanation as to why the USA people are so litigious compared to France?
Is anyone against the rational teachings of Maimonides?
Satellite for internet… Safe enough?
How secure is SSL/TLS, explained in laymans terms?What would one need to do in order to hijack a satellite?Is it possible to decrypt a satellite TV signal without using a smart card?Can I use a satellite phone for 2 factor auth sms and such?Is my online account at a financial firm safe?Are six digit temporary numerical pins secure enough for online accounts?How to keep web traffic private with a satellite intenet connectionEmail/facebook account/internet protection service for private communityFind the way back to the safe mode
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
Hope this is not off topic. We bought a house. We need internet for basic research, email and paying bills. There is NO INTERNET... Even a dedicated hotspot will not give us a stable connection. We are planning to get Satellite Internet. Is it safe to pay bills and access accounts through this? Specifically, should be be concerned that someone can just snag our signal out of the air and steal our information? I know ANYTHING is possible, but is it likely? My wife is concerned and I need some answers to assure her...
Keep in mind we are out in the middle of nowhere, there is not any other service providers out here and our cells have spotty reception...
account-security satellite
New contributor
add a comment
|
Hope this is not off topic. We bought a house. We need internet for basic research, email and paying bills. There is NO INTERNET... Even a dedicated hotspot will not give us a stable connection. We are planning to get Satellite Internet. Is it safe to pay bills and access accounts through this? Specifically, should be be concerned that someone can just snag our signal out of the air and steal our information? I know ANYTHING is possible, but is it likely? My wife is concerned and I need some answers to assure her...
Keep in mind we are out in the middle of nowhere, there is not any other service providers out here and our cells have spotty reception...
account-security satellite
New contributor
1
why do you think that internet in the middle of a city or on your phone is safer?
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
I don't... She doesn't want to use Cell-tower based service to pay bill either. We never use a hotspot that we didn't set-up. If you computer is configured correctly, I have always been led to believe that a wired connection is always safer than an "over the air" coinnection.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
1
Internet on satellite is not safe, neither is it safe on a phone or on broadband city ISPs. Signals can be stolen at any point.
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
I am not looking for an "absolute" answer. More of a likelihood answer.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
add a comment
|
Hope this is not off topic. We bought a house. We need internet for basic research, email and paying bills. There is NO INTERNET... Even a dedicated hotspot will not give us a stable connection. We are planning to get Satellite Internet. Is it safe to pay bills and access accounts through this? Specifically, should be be concerned that someone can just snag our signal out of the air and steal our information? I know ANYTHING is possible, but is it likely? My wife is concerned and I need some answers to assure her...
Keep in mind we are out in the middle of nowhere, there is not any other service providers out here and our cells have spotty reception...
account-security satellite
New contributor
Hope this is not off topic. We bought a house. We need internet for basic research, email and paying bills. There is NO INTERNET... Even a dedicated hotspot will not give us a stable connection. We are planning to get Satellite Internet. Is it safe to pay bills and access accounts through this? Specifically, should be be concerned that someone can just snag our signal out of the air and steal our information? I know ANYTHING is possible, but is it likely? My wife is concerned and I need some answers to assure her...
Keep in mind we are out in the middle of nowhere, there is not any other service providers out here and our cells have spotty reception...
account-security satellite
account-security satellite
New contributor
New contributor
New contributor
asked 9 hours ago
Ben BatesBen Bates
132 bronze badges
132 bronze badges
New contributor
New contributor
1
why do you think that internet in the middle of a city or on your phone is safer?
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
I don't... She doesn't want to use Cell-tower based service to pay bill either. We never use a hotspot that we didn't set-up. If you computer is configured correctly, I have always been led to believe that a wired connection is always safer than an "over the air" coinnection.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
1
Internet on satellite is not safe, neither is it safe on a phone or on broadband city ISPs. Signals can be stolen at any point.
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
I am not looking for an "absolute" answer. More of a likelihood answer.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
add a comment
|
1
why do you think that internet in the middle of a city or on your phone is safer?
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
I don't... She doesn't want to use Cell-tower based service to pay bill either. We never use a hotspot that we didn't set-up. If you computer is configured correctly, I have always been led to believe that a wired connection is always safer than an "over the air" coinnection.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
1
Internet on satellite is not safe, neither is it safe on a phone or on broadband city ISPs. Signals can be stolen at any point.
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
I am not looking for an "absolute" answer. More of a likelihood answer.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
1
1
why do you think that internet in the middle of a city or on your phone is safer?
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
why do you think that internet in the middle of a city or on your phone is safer?
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
I don't... She doesn't want to use Cell-tower based service to pay bill either. We never use a hotspot that we didn't set-up. If you computer is configured correctly, I have always been led to believe that a wired connection is always safer than an "over the air" coinnection.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
I don't... She doesn't want to use Cell-tower based service to pay bill either. We never use a hotspot that we didn't set-up. If you computer is configured correctly, I have always been led to believe that a wired connection is always safer than an "over the air" coinnection.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
1
1
Internet on satellite is not safe, neither is it safe on a phone or on broadband city ISPs. Signals can be stolen at any point.
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
Internet on satellite is not safe, neither is it safe on a phone or on broadband city ISPs. Signals can be stolen at any point.
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
I am not looking for an "absolute" answer. More of a likelihood answer.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
I am not looking for an "absolute" answer. More of a likelihood answer.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
add a comment
|
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
Satellite is not safe. Neither is cell data, wifi, or cable Internet. None of it is safe at the layer that you are talking. And that's not the layer that needs to be safe.
It's the data that goes over satellite (or wifi, cell, or cable modems) that needs to be secured. That's why we have HTTPS, that little green lock on your browser (it's gone now on most browsers and just grey now because HTTPS is pretty much everywhere).
So your choice of internet provider's media is not what's important in your situation. It's whether you use encrypted sites over that media.
Thank you. That is what I was looking for. I'm not talking about absolute. The world is not black and white. Everything has risks. It is all about the likelihood of using X vs using Y. She is worried that (all else being equal) using a satellite based internet service is inherently less safe than a wired internet service provider. I just need to be able to explain to her whether that is true or false and why.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
2
And the answer, from a world-leading expert in cybersecurity, is that the choice of satellite over cable doesn't matter. It is all like sending postcards through the mail. Anyone along the path could read it all. That's why you need to encrypt the messages in secure envelopes and superglue; and that happens with encryption.
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
Are there are good articles online that I can send her? Or anything in particular that I should google about this? My word only has "some" weight. The web is so full of BS and people selling crap these days that it's hard to find good articles about anything...
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
1
@BenBates I don't think the question should be a matter of degree of which is "safer", but if it's "safe enough". It'd likely be safer to wear a helmet all the time too just walking around your house, but we deem walking around the house without a helmet "safe enough". It's the same with SSL/TLS. The security advantage of using SSL/TLS far exceeds any additional security gained by your initial hop being "over a wire".
– Steve Sether
8 hours ago
1
@BenBates As far as good websites to visit, I can't seem to find any good ones for layman. Even many of the answers on Stack Exchange, and Wikipedia on TLS/SSL assume you understand the degrees of risk involved, and could easily be misinterpreted. The Wikipedia article uses phrases like "insecure" for some variants of SSL, which can lead to confusion if you don't understand the specifics of the vulnerability. In the security world "insecure" largely means "don't use this, and move your infrastructure away from it.", but not necessarily "any fool with Google and a computer can hack you".
– Steve Sether
8 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
The physical support you use to transport the information doesn't make it more or less secure. Communications nowadays are all encrypted using protocols such as TLS. This means that the information cannot be read by anyone else than the receiver. You might want to read a little about Encryption.
Now while these protocols exists, it doesn't mean that everyone use them. While handling sensitive data, you have to verify yourself that they do. If you have doubts, you can probably contact your service providers for more information.
Right. So if you are making a purchase on Amazon. And your computer is kept up to date and you run good firewall, etc. There shouldn't be an issue of someone snagging your data. The issue comes in if you are accessing a site that isn't properly secured, then your data could be vulnerable... That was always how I thought about it...
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
This is true when talking about communications only. There is many other risks, for example phishing or storage of the information. Your wife isn't wrong to be worried about online transactions. I'd say there is a minimum of research and knowledge to have to do sensitive things on the internet.
– Simon
8 hours ago
Concern is good. I don't mind the question. But conflating different things together makes it hard to explain why something is more or less safe. She hears horror stories of phones getting hacked, etc. I tell her that "usually" this requires a series of mistakes. Most of these hacks are from using a fake hotspot in public. WE NEVER USE PUBLIC WIFI, because of this very thing. We only use internet that we feel we can trust.
– Ben Bates
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
I would like to specifically address the question on why security of the underlying mode of communication is not as important as the encryption of the message.
You are communicating with your bank to request a transfer from one account to another. You might write a letter something like this, using an official form you picked up from the bank.
Dear Bank Manager at Acme Bank, Local Branch, 123 Fake St, My Town, USA Please transfer $1 from Account 00000 to Account 00001, signed me.
On the Internet, HTTPS and TLS, as described by @simon and @schroeder will take this message and transform it into something that only you and the bank can read (Among other technical things, including verifying your identity and message integrity like an old fashioned wax seal).
Perhaps your message becomes something like this (just an example)
s1IZBEfcLeDluY3Ni/2+qio2MHXKwlaka2OnGZFvwqUroGyxp+n9anhABX35cRlnyI1pkdstgvspA5fzNXWvM1Q1lLYnxslQJPhlsR+NtcFnj3r2t7MAB/R0qQZXLDBHGDhL3Y=
This message will now need to be sent to the bank via post (Internet).
Now you might have 3 choices.
- Walk into the post office and shout the message at the top of your lungs so the postmaster (and everyone else) can hear it
- Put it in an envelope (Address visible!) and hand it to the postal carrier that is going door to door every morning
- Send an armored car to deliver directly to the local post office.
All 3 will have different ways of being listened on or intercepted. All are insecure in their own way, since you rely on others to carry the letter. However, since the message itself is secure, you do not care.
Unlike sending physical mail, the message itself has no value, if it is lost or "stolen" you will just send it again, so an armored car is just extra expense and hassle, you only care if someone can read it, or can pretend to be you or the bank.
It is best to protect the message, and not rely on security of the method of transfer.
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "162"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Ben Bates is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsecurity.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f219216%2fsatellite-for-internet-safe-enough%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Satellite is not safe. Neither is cell data, wifi, or cable Internet. None of it is safe at the layer that you are talking. And that's not the layer that needs to be safe.
It's the data that goes over satellite (or wifi, cell, or cable modems) that needs to be secured. That's why we have HTTPS, that little green lock on your browser (it's gone now on most browsers and just grey now because HTTPS is pretty much everywhere).
So your choice of internet provider's media is not what's important in your situation. It's whether you use encrypted sites over that media.
Thank you. That is what I was looking for. I'm not talking about absolute. The world is not black and white. Everything has risks. It is all about the likelihood of using X vs using Y. She is worried that (all else being equal) using a satellite based internet service is inherently less safe than a wired internet service provider. I just need to be able to explain to her whether that is true or false and why.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
2
And the answer, from a world-leading expert in cybersecurity, is that the choice of satellite over cable doesn't matter. It is all like sending postcards through the mail. Anyone along the path could read it all. That's why you need to encrypt the messages in secure envelopes and superglue; and that happens with encryption.
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
Are there are good articles online that I can send her? Or anything in particular that I should google about this? My word only has "some" weight. The web is so full of BS and people selling crap these days that it's hard to find good articles about anything...
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
1
@BenBates I don't think the question should be a matter of degree of which is "safer", but if it's "safe enough". It'd likely be safer to wear a helmet all the time too just walking around your house, but we deem walking around the house without a helmet "safe enough". It's the same with SSL/TLS. The security advantage of using SSL/TLS far exceeds any additional security gained by your initial hop being "over a wire".
– Steve Sether
8 hours ago
1
@BenBates As far as good websites to visit, I can't seem to find any good ones for layman. Even many of the answers on Stack Exchange, and Wikipedia on TLS/SSL assume you understand the degrees of risk involved, and could easily be misinterpreted. The Wikipedia article uses phrases like "insecure" for some variants of SSL, which can lead to confusion if you don't understand the specifics of the vulnerability. In the security world "insecure" largely means "don't use this, and move your infrastructure away from it.", but not necessarily "any fool with Google and a computer can hack you".
– Steve Sether
8 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Satellite is not safe. Neither is cell data, wifi, or cable Internet. None of it is safe at the layer that you are talking. And that's not the layer that needs to be safe.
It's the data that goes over satellite (or wifi, cell, or cable modems) that needs to be secured. That's why we have HTTPS, that little green lock on your browser (it's gone now on most browsers and just grey now because HTTPS is pretty much everywhere).
So your choice of internet provider's media is not what's important in your situation. It's whether you use encrypted sites over that media.
Thank you. That is what I was looking for. I'm not talking about absolute. The world is not black and white. Everything has risks. It is all about the likelihood of using X vs using Y. She is worried that (all else being equal) using a satellite based internet service is inherently less safe than a wired internet service provider. I just need to be able to explain to her whether that is true or false and why.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
2
And the answer, from a world-leading expert in cybersecurity, is that the choice of satellite over cable doesn't matter. It is all like sending postcards through the mail. Anyone along the path could read it all. That's why you need to encrypt the messages in secure envelopes and superglue; and that happens with encryption.
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
Are there are good articles online that I can send her? Or anything in particular that I should google about this? My word only has "some" weight. The web is so full of BS and people selling crap these days that it's hard to find good articles about anything...
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
1
@BenBates I don't think the question should be a matter of degree of which is "safer", but if it's "safe enough". It'd likely be safer to wear a helmet all the time too just walking around your house, but we deem walking around the house without a helmet "safe enough". It's the same with SSL/TLS. The security advantage of using SSL/TLS far exceeds any additional security gained by your initial hop being "over a wire".
– Steve Sether
8 hours ago
1
@BenBates As far as good websites to visit, I can't seem to find any good ones for layman. Even many of the answers on Stack Exchange, and Wikipedia on TLS/SSL assume you understand the degrees of risk involved, and could easily be misinterpreted. The Wikipedia article uses phrases like "insecure" for some variants of SSL, which can lead to confusion if you don't understand the specifics of the vulnerability. In the security world "insecure" largely means "don't use this, and move your infrastructure away from it.", but not necessarily "any fool with Google and a computer can hack you".
– Steve Sether
8 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Satellite is not safe. Neither is cell data, wifi, or cable Internet. None of it is safe at the layer that you are talking. And that's not the layer that needs to be safe.
It's the data that goes over satellite (or wifi, cell, or cable modems) that needs to be secured. That's why we have HTTPS, that little green lock on your browser (it's gone now on most browsers and just grey now because HTTPS is pretty much everywhere).
So your choice of internet provider's media is not what's important in your situation. It's whether you use encrypted sites over that media.
Satellite is not safe. Neither is cell data, wifi, or cable Internet. None of it is safe at the layer that you are talking. And that's not the layer that needs to be safe.
It's the data that goes over satellite (or wifi, cell, or cable modems) that needs to be secured. That's why we have HTTPS, that little green lock on your browser (it's gone now on most browsers and just grey now because HTTPS is pretty much everywhere).
So your choice of internet provider's media is not what's important in your situation. It's whether you use encrypted sites over that media.
answered 9 hours ago
schroeder♦schroeder
87.2k35 gold badges195 silver badges234 bronze badges
87.2k35 gold badges195 silver badges234 bronze badges
Thank you. That is what I was looking for. I'm not talking about absolute. The world is not black and white. Everything has risks. It is all about the likelihood of using X vs using Y. She is worried that (all else being equal) using a satellite based internet service is inherently less safe than a wired internet service provider. I just need to be able to explain to her whether that is true or false and why.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
2
And the answer, from a world-leading expert in cybersecurity, is that the choice of satellite over cable doesn't matter. It is all like sending postcards through the mail. Anyone along the path could read it all. That's why you need to encrypt the messages in secure envelopes and superglue; and that happens with encryption.
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
Are there are good articles online that I can send her? Or anything in particular that I should google about this? My word only has "some" weight. The web is so full of BS and people selling crap these days that it's hard to find good articles about anything...
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
1
@BenBates I don't think the question should be a matter of degree of which is "safer", but if it's "safe enough". It'd likely be safer to wear a helmet all the time too just walking around your house, but we deem walking around the house without a helmet "safe enough". It's the same with SSL/TLS. The security advantage of using SSL/TLS far exceeds any additional security gained by your initial hop being "over a wire".
– Steve Sether
8 hours ago
1
@BenBates As far as good websites to visit, I can't seem to find any good ones for layman. Even many of the answers on Stack Exchange, and Wikipedia on TLS/SSL assume you understand the degrees of risk involved, and could easily be misinterpreted. The Wikipedia article uses phrases like "insecure" for some variants of SSL, which can lead to confusion if you don't understand the specifics of the vulnerability. In the security world "insecure" largely means "don't use this, and move your infrastructure away from it.", but not necessarily "any fool with Google and a computer can hack you".
– Steve Sether
8 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Thank you. That is what I was looking for. I'm not talking about absolute. The world is not black and white. Everything has risks. It is all about the likelihood of using X vs using Y. She is worried that (all else being equal) using a satellite based internet service is inherently less safe than a wired internet service provider. I just need to be able to explain to her whether that is true or false and why.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
2
And the answer, from a world-leading expert in cybersecurity, is that the choice of satellite over cable doesn't matter. It is all like sending postcards through the mail. Anyone along the path could read it all. That's why you need to encrypt the messages in secure envelopes and superglue; and that happens with encryption.
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
Are there are good articles online that I can send her? Or anything in particular that I should google about this? My word only has "some" weight. The web is so full of BS and people selling crap these days that it's hard to find good articles about anything...
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
1
@BenBates I don't think the question should be a matter of degree of which is "safer", but if it's "safe enough". It'd likely be safer to wear a helmet all the time too just walking around your house, but we deem walking around the house without a helmet "safe enough". It's the same with SSL/TLS. The security advantage of using SSL/TLS far exceeds any additional security gained by your initial hop being "over a wire".
– Steve Sether
8 hours ago
1
@BenBates As far as good websites to visit, I can't seem to find any good ones for layman. Even many of the answers on Stack Exchange, and Wikipedia on TLS/SSL assume you understand the degrees of risk involved, and could easily be misinterpreted. The Wikipedia article uses phrases like "insecure" for some variants of SSL, which can lead to confusion if you don't understand the specifics of the vulnerability. In the security world "insecure" largely means "don't use this, and move your infrastructure away from it.", but not necessarily "any fool with Google and a computer can hack you".
– Steve Sether
8 hours ago
Thank you. That is what I was looking for. I'm not talking about absolute. The world is not black and white. Everything has risks. It is all about the likelihood of using X vs using Y. She is worried that (all else being equal) using a satellite based internet service is inherently less safe than a wired internet service provider. I just need to be able to explain to her whether that is true or false and why.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
Thank you. That is what I was looking for. I'm not talking about absolute. The world is not black and white. Everything has risks. It is all about the likelihood of using X vs using Y. She is worried that (all else being equal) using a satellite based internet service is inherently less safe than a wired internet service provider. I just need to be able to explain to her whether that is true or false and why.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
2
2
And the answer, from a world-leading expert in cybersecurity, is that the choice of satellite over cable doesn't matter. It is all like sending postcards through the mail. Anyone along the path could read it all. That's why you need to encrypt the messages in secure envelopes and superglue; and that happens with encryption.
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
And the answer, from a world-leading expert in cybersecurity, is that the choice of satellite over cable doesn't matter. It is all like sending postcards through the mail. Anyone along the path could read it all. That's why you need to encrypt the messages in secure envelopes and superglue; and that happens with encryption.
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
Are there are good articles online that I can send her? Or anything in particular that I should google about this? My word only has "some" weight. The web is so full of BS and people selling crap these days that it's hard to find good articles about anything...
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
Are there are good articles online that I can send her? Or anything in particular that I should google about this? My word only has "some" weight. The web is so full of BS and people selling crap these days that it's hard to find good articles about anything...
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
1
1
@BenBates I don't think the question should be a matter of degree of which is "safer", but if it's "safe enough". It'd likely be safer to wear a helmet all the time too just walking around your house, but we deem walking around the house without a helmet "safe enough". It's the same with SSL/TLS. The security advantage of using SSL/TLS far exceeds any additional security gained by your initial hop being "over a wire".
– Steve Sether
8 hours ago
@BenBates I don't think the question should be a matter of degree of which is "safer", but if it's "safe enough". It'd likely be safer to wear a helmet all the time too just walking around your house, but we deem walking around the house without a helmet "safe enough". It's the same with SSL/TLS. The security advantage of using SSL/TLS far exceeds any additional security gained by your initial hop being "over a wire".
– Steve Sether
8 hours ago
1
1
@BenBates As far as good websites to visit, I can't seem to find any good ones for layman. Even many of the answers on Stack Exchange, and Wikipedia on TLS/SSL assume you understand the degrees of risk involved, and could easily be misinterpreted. The Wikipedia article uses phrases like "insecure" for some variants of SSL, which can lead to confusion if you don't understand the specifics of the vulnerability. In the security world "insecure" largely means "don't use this, and move your infrastructure away from it.", but not necessarily "any fool with Google and a computer can hack you".
– Steve Sether
8 hours ago
@BenBates As far as good websites to visit, I can't seem to find any good ones for layman. Even many of the answers on Stack Exchange, and Wikipedia on TLS/SSL assume you understand the degrees of risk involved, and could easily be misinterpreted. The Wikipedia article uses phrases like "insecure" for some variants of SSL, which can lead to confusion if you don't understand the specifics of the vulnerability. In the security world "insecure" largely means "don't use this, and move your infrastructure away from it.", but not necessarily "any fool with Google and a computer can hack you".
– Steve Sether
8 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
The physical support you use to transport the information doesn't make it more or less secure. Communications nowadays are all encrypted using protocols such as TLS. This means that the information cannot be read by anyone else than the receiver. You might want to read a little about Encryption.
Now while these protocols exists, it doesn't mean that everyone use them. While handling sensitive data, you have to verify yourself that they do. If you have doubts, you can probably contact your service providers for more information.
Right. So if you are making a purchase on Amazon. And your computer is kept up to date and you run good firewall, etc. There shouldn't be an issue of someone snagging your data. The issue comes in if you are accessing a site that isn't properly secured, then your data could be vulnerable... That was always how I thought about it...
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
This is true when talking about communications only. There is many other risks, for example phishing or storage of the information. Your wife isn't wrong to be worried about online transactions. I'd say there is a minimum of research and knowledge to have to do sensitive things on the internet.
– Simon
8 hours ago
Concern is good. I don't mind the question. But conflating different things together makes it hard to explain why something is more or less safe. She hears horror stories of phones getting hacked, etc. I tell her that "usually" this requires a series of mistakes. Most of these hacks are from using a fake hotspot in public. WE NEVER USE PUBLIC WIFI, because of this very thing. We only use internet that we feel we can trust.
– Ben Bates
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
The physical support you use to transport the information doesn't make it more or less secure. Communications nowadays are all encrypted using protocols such as TLS. This means that the information cannot be read by anyone else than the receiver. You might want to read a little about Encryption.
Now while these protocols exists, it doesn't mean that everyone use them. While handling sensitive data, you have to verify yourself that they do. If you have doubts, you can probably contact your service providers for more information.
Right. So if you are making a purchase on Amazon. And your computer is kept up to date and you run good firewall, etc. There shouldn't be an issue of someone snagging your data. The issue comes in if you are accessing a site that isn't properly secured, then your data could be vulnerable... That was always how I thought about it...
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
This is true when talking about communications only. There is many other risks, for example phishing or storage of the information. Your wife isn't wrong to be worried about online transactions. I'd say there is a minimum of research and knowledge to have to do sensitive things on the internet.
– Simon
8 hours ago
Concern is good. I don't mind the question. But conflating different things together makes it hard to explain why something is more or less safe. She hears horror stories of phones getting hacked, etc. I tell her that "usually" this requires a series of mistakes. Most of these hacks are from using a fake hotspot in public. WE NEVER USE PUBLIC WIFI, because of this very thing. We only use internet that we feel we can trust.
– Ben Bates
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
The physical support you use to transport the information doesn't make it more or less secure. Communications nowadays are all encrypted using protocols such as TLS. This means that the information cannot be read by anyone else than the receiver. You might want to read a little about Encryption.
Now while these protocols exists, it doesn't mean that everyone use them. While handling sensitive data, you have to verify yourself that they do. If you have doubts, you can probably contact your service providers for more information.
The physical support you use to transport the information doesn't make it more or less secure. Communications nowadays are all encrypted using protocols such as TLS. This means that the information cannot be read by anyone else than the receiver. You might want to read a little about Encryption.
Now while these protocols exists, it doesn't mean that everyone use them. While handling sensitive data, you have to verify yourself that they do. If you have doubts, you can probably contact your service providers for more information.
answered 9 hours ago
SimonSimon
4181 gold badge3 silver badges8 bronze badges
4181 gold badge3 silver badges8 bronze badges
Right. So if you are making a purchase on Amazon. And your computer is kept up to date and you run good firewall, etc. There shouldn't be an issue of someone snagging your data. The issue comes in if you are accessing a site that isn't properly secured, then your data could be vulnerable... That was always how I thought about it...
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
This is true when talking about communications only. There is many other risks, for example phishing or storage of the information. Your wife isn't wrong to be worried about online transactions. I'd say there is a minimum of research and knowledge to have to do sensitive things on the internet.
– Simon
8 hours ago
Concern is good. I don't mind the question. But conflating different things together makes it hard to explain why something is more or less safe. She hears horror stories of phones getting hacked, etc. I tell her that "usually" this requires a series of mistakes. Most of these hacks are from using a fake hotspot in public. WE NEVER USE PUBLIC WIFI, because of this very thing. We only use internet that we feel we can trust.
– Ben Bates
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
Right. So if you are making a purchase on Amazon. And your computer is kept up to date and you run good firewall, etc. There shouldn't be an issue of someone snagging your data. The issue comes in if you are accessing a site that isn't properly secured, then your data could be vulnerable... That was always how I thought about it...
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
This is true when talking about communications only. There is many other risks, for example phishing or storage of the information. Your wife isn't wrong to be worried about online transactions. I'd say there is a minimum of research and knowledge to have to do sensitive things on the internet.
– Simon
8 hours ago
Concern is good. I don't mind the question. But conflating different things together makes it hard to explain why something is more or less safe. She hears horror stories of phones getting hacked, etc. I tell her that "usually" this requires a series of mistakes. Most of these hacks are from using a fake hotspot in public. WE NEVER USE PUBLIC WIFI, because of this very thing. We only use internet that we feel we can trust.
– Ben Bates
8 hours ago
Right. So if you are making a purchase on Amazon. And your computer is kept up to date and you run good firewall, etc. There shouldn't be an issue of someone snagging your data. The issue comes in if you are accessing a site that isn't properly secured, then your data could be vulnerable... That was always how I thought about it...
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
Right. So if you are making a purchase on Amazon. And your computer is kept up to date and you run good firewall, etc. There shouldn't be an issue of someone snagging your data. The issue comes in if you are accessing a site that isn't properly secured, then your data could be vulnerable... That was always how I thought about it...
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
This is true when talking about communications only. There is many other risks, for example phishing or storage of the information. Your wife isn't wrong to be worried about online transactions. I'd say there is a minimum of research and knowledge to have to do sensitive things on the internet.
– Simon
8 hours ago
This is true when talking about communications only. There is many other risks, for example phishing or storage of the information. Your wife isn't wrong to be worried about online transactions. I'd say there is a minimum of research and knowledge to have to do sensitive things on the internet.
– Simon
8 hours ago
Concern is good. I don't mind the question. But conflating different things together makes it hard to explain why something is more or less safe. She hears horror stories of phones getting hacked, etc. I tell her that "usually" this requires a series of mistakes. Most of these hacks are from using a fake hotspot in public. WE NEVER USE PUBLIC WIFI, because of this very thing. We only use internet that we feel we can trust.
– Ben Bates
8 hours ago
Concern is good. I don't mind the question. But conflating different things together makes it hard to explain why something is more or less safe. She hears horror stories of phones getting hacked, etc. I tell her that "usually" this requires a series of mistakes. Most of these hacks are from using a fake hotspot in public. WE NEVER USE PUBLIC WIFI, because of this very thing. We only use internet that we feel we can trust.
– Ben Bates
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
I would like to specifically address the question on why security of the underlying mode of communication is not as important as the encryption of the message.
You are communicating with your bank to request a transfer from one account to another. You might write a letter something like this, using an official form you picked up from the bank.
Dear Bank Manager at Acme Bank, Local Branch, 123 Fake St, My Town, USA Please transfer $1 from Account 00000 to Account 00001, signed me.
On the Internet, HTTPS and TLS, as described by @simon and @schroeder will take this message and transform it into something that only you and the bank can read (Among other technical things, including verifying your identity and message integrity like an old fashioned wax seal).
Perhaps your message becomes something like this (just an example)
s1IZBEfcLeDluY3Ni/2+qio2MHXKwlaka2OnGZFvwqUroGyxp+n9anhABX35cRlnyI1pkdstgvspA5fzNXWvM1Q1lLYnxslQJPhlsR+NtcFnj3r2t7MAB/R0qQZXLDBHGDhL3Y=
This message will now need to be sent to the bank via post (Internet).
Now you might have 3 choices.
- Walk into the post office and shout the message at the top of your lungs so the postmaster (and everyone else) can hear it
- Put it in an envelope (Address visible!) and hand it to the postal carrier that is going door to door every morning
- Send an armored car to deliver directly to the local post office.
All 3 will have different ways of being listened on or intercepted. All are insecure in their own way, since you rely on others to carry the letter. However, since the message itself is secure, you do not care.
Unlike sending physical mail, the message itself has no value, if it is lost or "stolen" you will just send it again, so an armored car is just extra expense and hassle, you only care if someone can read it, or can pretend to be you or the bank.
It is best to protect the message, and not rely on security of the method of transfer.
add a comment
|
I would like to specifically address the question on why security of the underlying mode of communication is not as important as the encryption of the message.
You are communicating with your bank to request a transfer from one account to another. You might write a letter something like this, using an official form you picked up from the bank.
Dear Bank Manager at Acme Bank, Local Branch, 123 Fake St, My Town, USA Please transfer $1 from Account 00000 to Account 00001, signed me.
On the Internet, HTTPS and TLS, as described by @simon and @schroeder will take this message and transform it into something that only you and the bank can read (Among other technical things, including verifying your identity and message integrity like an old fashioned wax seal).
Perhaps your message becomes something like this (just an example)
s1IZBEfcLeDluY3Ni/2+qio2MHXKwlaka2OnGZFvwqUroGyxp+n9anhABX35cRlnyI1pkdstgvspA5fzNXWvM1Q1lLYnxslQJPhlsR+NtcFnj3r2t7MAB/R0qQZXLDBHGDhL3Y=
This message will now need to be sent to the bank via post (Internet).
Now you might have 3 choices.
- Walk into the post office and shout the message at the top of your lungs so the postmaster (and everyone else) can hear it
- Put it in an envelope (Address visible!) and hand it to the postal carrier that is going door to door every morning
- Send an armored car to deliver directly to the local post office.
All 3 will have different ways of being listened on or intercepted. All are insecure in their own way, since you rely on others to carry the letter. However, since the message itself is secure, you do not care.
Unlike sending physical mail, the message itself has no value, if it is lost or "stolen" you will just send it again, so an armored car is just extra expense and hassle, you only care if someone can read it, or can pretend to be you or the bank.
It is best to protect the message, and not rely on security of the method of transfer.
add a comment
|
I would like to specifically address the question on why security of the underlying mode of communication is not as important as the encryption of the message.
You are communicating with your bank to request a transfer from one account to another. You might write a letter something like this, using an official form you picked up from the bank.
Dear Bank Manager at Acme Bank, Local Branch, 123 Fake St, My Town, USA Please transfer $1 from Account 00000 to Account 00001, signed me.
On the Internet, HTTPS and TLS, as described by @simon and @schroeder will take this message and transform it into something that only you and the bank can read (Among other technical things, including verifying your identity and message integrity like an old fashioned wax seal).
Perhaps your message becomes something like this (just an example)
s1IZBEfcLeDluY3Ni/2+qio2MHXKwlaka2OnGZFvwqUroGyxp+n9anhABX35cRlnyI1pkdstgvspA5fzNXWvM1Q1lLYnxslQJPhlsR+NtcFnj3r2t7MAB/R0qQZXLDBHGDhL3Y=
This message will now need to be sent to the bank via post (Internet).
Now you might have 3 choices.
- Walk into the post office and shout the message at the top of your lungs so the postmaster (and everyone else) can hear it
- Put it in an envelope (Address visible!) and hand it to the postal carrier that is going door to door every morning
- Send an armored car to deliver directly to the local post office.
All 3 will have different ways of being listened on or intercepted. All are insecure in their own way, since you rely on others to carry the letter. However, since the message itself is secure, you do not care.
Unlike sending physical mail, the message itself has no value, if it is lost or "stolen" you will just send it again, so an armored car is just extra expense and hassle, you only care if someone can read it, or can pretend to be you or the bank.
It is best to protect the message, and not rely on security of the method of transfer.
I would like to specifically address the question on why security of the underlying mode of communication is not as important as the encryption of the message.
You are communicating with your bank to request a transfer from one account to another. You might write a letter something like this, using an official form you picked up from the bank.
Dear Bank Manager at Acme Bank, Local Branch, 123 Fake St, My Town, USA Please transfer $1 from Account 00000 to Account 00001, signed me.
On the Internet, HTTPS and TLS, as described by @simon and @schroeder will take this message and transform it into something that only you and the bank can read (Among other technical things, including verifying your identity and message integrity like an old fashioned wax seal).
Perhaps your message becomes something like this (just an example)
s1IZBEfcLeDluY3Ni/2+qio2MHXKwlaka2OnGZFvwqUroGyxp+n9anhABX35cRlnyI1pkdstgvspA5fzNXWvM1Q1lLYnxslQJPhlsR+NtcFnj3r2t7MAB/R0qQZXLDBHGDhL3Y=
This message will now need to be sent to the bank via post (Internet).
Now you might have 3 choices.
- Walk into the post office and shout the message at the top of your lungs so the postmaster (and everyone else) can hear it
- Put it in an envelope (Address visible!) and hand it to the postal carrier that is going door to door every morning
- Send an armored car to deliver directly to the local post office.
All 3 will have different ways of being listened on or intercepted. All are insecure in their own way, since you rely on others to carry the letter. However, since the message itself is secure, you do not care.
Unlike sending physical mail, the message itself has no value, if it is lost or "stolen" you will just send it again, so an armored car is just extra expense and hassle, you only care if someone can read it, or can pretend to be you or the bank.
It is best to protect the message, and not rely on security of the method of transfer.
answered 34 mins ago
crasiccrasic
1413 bronze badges
1413 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
Ben Bates is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Ben Bates is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Ben Bates is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Ben Bates is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Information Security Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsecurity.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f219216%2fsatellite-for-internet-safe-enough%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
why do you think that internet in the middle of a city or on your phone is safer?
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
I don't... She doesn't want to use Cell-tower based service to pay bill either. We never use a hotspot that we didn't set-up. If you computer is configured correctly, I have always been led to believe that a wired connection is always safer than an "over the air" coinnection.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago
1
Internet on satellite is not safe, neither is it safe on a phone or on broadband city ISPs. Signals can be stolen at any point.
– schroeder♦
9 hours ago
I am not looking for an "absolute" answer. More of a likelihood answer.
– Ben Bates
9 hours ago