It's "Passpoint" and uses certificate based 802.11x auth, there's really nothing to worry about except calls dropping due to Wifi switchover.
Whitepaper from Aruba here:
Solving the Indoor Wireless Coverage Problem: Passpoint and Wi-Fi Calling https://www.arubanetworks.com/assets/wp/WP_Passpoint_Wi-Fi.p...
> What analytics can a network extracxt [sic] from
Passpoint traffic?
> Generally speaking, the local network will have visibility of
the same client traffic it would see on any guest network,
but it will not have visibility of the subscriber identity or any persistent identifiers other than the associated device’s MAC address
> From an analytics perspective, the major
benefits of Passpoint are that it creates a much larger and
more complete picture of visitor activity. Since a much higher percentage of visitors will be automatically associated with the network and their behavior and traffic will be visible to the local network, the value of any location, business, and security analytics in use will be improved.
... so the temporary host can theoretically MITM the connection and that's a feature? They don't just VPN everything from the phone to the ISP? :/
Sure, most traffic should be encrypted, but your neighbour could still see (and block) e.g. traditional DNS requests. Are DoH or DoTLS enabled by default yet under iOS?
I'm pretty sure this kills all the MAC address randomisation and anonymized WiFi scanning features built into iOS when walking across a covered area. They've put all this effort in not being able to trace single phones through buildings and squares with randomised identifiers and then decided to automatically associate with magical networks, solidifying the MAC address for an extended period of time, bringing back the real-time tracking of unsuspecting people. Quite disappointing, in my opinion.
> there's really nothing to worry about except calls dropping due to Wifi switchover
When this happens: (my = family)
1) my devices are no longer behind my firewall or pihole
2) my devices can no longer access PLEX
3) my devices can no longer access my security system, cameras, etc
4) airdrop will fail
My network is my network, when I’m at home I want my devices to be on my network, not randomly dropping out and connecting to random hotspots multiple floors/houses away
This is of course completely untrue. Neuroscience has been major branch of science for thousands of years, and funded pretty much constantly in human memory.
hah! i love it. But i think he is tripping his opposition up with the concept of fish not being aware they are wet since that's all they know, with the actual concept of "covered or saturated with water". He's even laughing at some point because he knows he's trying to pull one over his friends and its working :)
"Moisture is the essence of wetness" - Derek Zoolander
To really see why this stuff is cool you should watch the videos of people sticking their fingers in water mixed with dry water and not getting their hands wet:
One could make an argument for why it might be acceptable to describe that cup as "wet", but in day-to-day parlance with normal people, it would be confounding to refer to a full cup as "wet". "Full" would be a much more salient description of the state of the cup. Describing it as "wet" would only cause people to go "huh?" and you'd have to explain your reasoning.
Save for mathematical terms like "isosceles triangle", words don't have inherent meaning. They're shortcuts for us to more conveniently refer to a swath of individual things or events that share some common characteristics.
This is easier to see with really abstract words. Imagine trying to define whether a specific action is or isn't "honorable", or "moral", or "meaningful". There are no axioms from which we can derive a universal litmus for whether an action fits under any of those categories. Different cultures have their own interpretations, and the peoples comprising those cultures would have differing interpretations, and even for the same person, their interpretations of a word may change from one moment to another.
With more physical terms like "wet", or "Scotsman", or "Ship of Theseus", it can be less obvious that words are abstractions for individual instances of things, and that abstractions fray at the edges. There never was such a thing as the Ship of Theseus; there were certain configurations of atoms that people thought of as "the ship" that bore a certain relationship with another configuration of atoms that people thought of as "Theseus", that was referred to as the "Ship of Theseus" for the sake of convenience, and most of the time, it sufficed.
I've seen arguments that water is a form of ash, since it is already oxidized and cannot be combusted (I guess in pure flourine it can). So I guess one could argue that fish are covered in ashes.
Until someone can find a definition of "wet" from a respectable source that states an object cannot be fully submerged in a liquid, the guy sitting down has no argument. He seems to be trying to make the argument that to be wet means a liquid is clinging to you, rather that you occupying the liquid's space. Anyone?
Yup. Don't argue about defining terms, just ask the defining terms people.
Merriam-Webster:
a : consisting of, containing, covered with, or soaked with liquid (such as water)
American Heritage:
1. Covered or soaked with a liquid, such as water: a wet towel.
OED:
1. Covered or saturated with water or another liquid.
Ironically, most dictionaries have fish and submarines easily wet, but don't do a great job of handling the situation where you just get a few drops of rain on you, when you're a little bit wet. They use "covered with," which to me suggests they're only talking about when you're thoroughly wet or submerged.
He laid out what he believes to be the defining term/condition of wet in his mind, and that's what I'm saying is bogus. He's saying completely submerging something means it's not wet. That makes no sense and there is not a single definition I could find that supports that assertion.
