But in a world where the attacker can leak out a whole 16-bit integer, monitoring that 0.003% for two-port states may be irrelevant. Not saying you shall not, but you will miss 99.997%. Agree? On 13 Dec 2021, at 15:22, Joe Greco wrote:
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 01:49:07PM +0100, J??rg Kost wrote:
I understand what you want to say, but I disagree in this point. When you have a cup full of water and someone remotely can drill holes into the out shell, just checking the bottom for leaks won't help. You may want a new mug instead. :-) The initial posting was about looking at the bottom only.
Maybe I'm the only one who puts cheap wireless leak sensors near toilets, drains, and other less-likely sources of water, in addition to the big alarm system hardwired ones in all the usual places.
Of course, then again, we also have two AC sump pumps and one that is battery backup, all protected by generator and ATS.
I prefer to know. You, of course, are free to disregard as you see fit.