Actually, no it's not illegal, and no, it's not especially dangerous.
While FCC regs require Ham operators to use the "lowest practical
power" in their communications, that is something that's open to
interpretation. Hams on some freqs crank out 1500 watts quite
readily - and safely. We're not talking about a WiFi card in your
laptop, or a cell phone next to your head - there are safety
considerations and limits of exposure and such. But your statement
that it's illegal and dangerous is patently untrue for the amature
radio crowd.
Hams are, incidently, the Primary Users for the lower 6 channels (US
spec) used by WiFi.
Cheers, L4J
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 09:50:43AM -0300, James Tucker wrote:
Of course the power ranges you quote are also illegal, not to
mention extremely dangerous.
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:21:49 -0500, Michael Williamson
<michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Using 802.11 for anything remotely critical is outright STUPID.
FCC regulations are such that these part 15 devices (802.11,
cordless phones, baby monitors) have no legal protection from
interference from licensed services (amateur radio, TV stations,
etc). If I'm running a high powered (10-100 watt) maybe signal
at 2.4 ghz for amateur radio TV and happen to be living across
the street from an election center, they're basically screwed.
As a matter a fact, if their 802.11 is interfering with my
licensed operation, it is they who must shut down.
-Michael
Without even commenting on the "security" of WEP, it seems to
me that a massive DDOS attack against the voting machines could
prevent vote tallies from being counted in a timely manner.