The problem with WEP is it usually lowers the quality of your wireless connection and the range as well. It sucks to share wireless within 2 stories house. So I only turn on MAC filtering and disable ssid broadcast. I'm not too paranoid to think someone will drive around my neighborhood looking for free wireless.
MrChad
Lifer
- Aug 22, 2001
- 13,507
- 3
- 81
I had WPA-PSK configured on my Linksys WRT54G, but I had to downgrade to WEP when I set up a Linksys WPRT54UG print server (which, while 802.11g, only supports WEP
). I'm hoping that Linksys decides to update the print server firmware so that it can use WPA.
rh71
No Lifer
- Aug 28, 2001
- 52,844
- 1,049
- 126
so when you guys are able to see these other WAPs... you can get into any share they have as well, correct ? Or just using their Internet capability ?
reason why I'm asking
reason why I'm asking
We have to understand that the number of people that can/want to do any of these actions are very low. But if your hardware supports it, then why not? Especially if you have shared drives/and or personal information that could be compromised.
KeyserSoze
From what I've read, it's not just about security flaws. Once you have shared drives on your network, the data is a lot easier to access. This is something I'm not sure about, and still have yet to read up on. There's also something about using NetBeui for your shares instead of TCP/IP. I dunno what I'm talking about here, but it's worth reading into.
KeyserSoze
novasatori
Diamond Member
- Feb 27, 2003
- 3,851
- 1
- 0
Oops, I hit enter to start a new paragraph and it posted, so now I edit and put my post:
I pose you this question.
I have a laptop with an Intel Pro Wireless 2200, now the hardware on it switches to the best available network within range of a certain SSID, it can't be disabled from what I read.
Now I've had this happen, I have a linksys router, and left it default just to use for a bit, and noticed my laptop jumps between my router, and two neighbor routers because it gets 100% signal on all of them. Which one it uses varies pretty much all the time.
Who would be responsible in a situation like this, if the neighbors noticed and filed against me? Can I be held responsible since technically its neither parties fault, but perhaps linksys and intel?
Intel since I cant disable the network switching, linksys for the good old advertisment of plug it in and turn it on, I never knew I had to change the name.
Of course, I'm smarter than this and changed the name, I just had the thought tho, how can anyone be to blame for using an unsecure network for free internet. If you don't want people on it you should secure it.
I think that showing that the above could happen to anyone who owns a laptop with an Intel card, you can't just say that some normal computer user would know that they aren't on their own network.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,581
- 984
- 126
Classic. I don't see any other wireless networks in my neighborhood.
I have WEP enabled on mine though.
Well, the dumbass neighbor just put a 6 pack of beer on my stairs. Is it legal for me to drink it?
Since he isn't locking down his network..... grey zone.
Platypus
Lifer
- Apr 26, 2001
- 31,046
- 321
- 136
Originally posted by: KeyserSoze
I hate it when people say this. Upgrade your firmware, and it sends out less "Level 4" frames, required to capture the required data to crack. And even then, very few people have the know how, OR desire to do it.
That being said....I have WPA (PSK)
KeyserSoze
Just because it sends out less doesn't mean it's not possible. With 200,000 packets for a 64 bit key and 500,000 for a 128 bit key (unique IV of course) it's possible with software (aircrack is one decent example) to crack it within a few seconds, this is highly dependent on how many unique IV packets you can acquire, but it's dangerous to say that it's reliable and secure. It may not be something a typical wardriver could/would pull off, but I've beaten 128 bit keys pretty damn easily, enough that it's a risk. Even with MAC filtering and non-broadcasted SSIDs, wireless is still a very vulnerable area, ESPECIALLY considering most people have no fvcking clue what they're doing when they set these things up.
Originally posted by: CorporateRecreation
Originally posted by: KeyserSoze
I hate it when people say this. Upgrade your firmware, and it sends out less "Level 4" frames, required to capture the required data to crack. And even then, very few people have the know how, OR desire to do it.
That being said....I have WPA (PSK)
KeyserSoze
Just because it sends out less doesn't mean it's not possible. With 200,000 packets for a 64 bit key and 500,000 for a 128 bit key (unique IV of course) it's possible with software (aircrack is one decent example) to crack it within a few seconds, this is highly dependent on how many unique IV packets you can acquire, but it's dangerous to say that it's reliable and secure. It may not be something a typical wardriver could/would pull off, but I've beaten 128 bit keys pretty damn easily, enough that it's a risk. Even with MAC filtering and non-broadcasted SSIDs, wireless is still a very vulnerable area, ESPECIALLY considering most people have no fvcking clue what they're doing when they set these things up.
If someone is capable of spoofing MAC he should be able to sniff and break the WEP too. The key here is whether someone will be insistent enough to do it around your neighborhood. Applying WEP, non-broadcast SSID and MAC filtering to your wireless network in a typical residential house will slow it down to the point that you can't even use it.
Nocturnal
Lifer
- Jan 8, 2002
- 18,927
- 0
- 76
I received a phone call at work, this lady said "Do I have wireless internet?"
I looked at her account and she didn't. I asked her if she picked up a wireless router and she was like hmm no. She said, "My daughter is on the internet with her laptop but we don't have wireless, I don't think."
I was like hahah, you are probably using your neighbor's internet connection.
I looked at her account and she didn't. I asked her if she picked up a wireless router and she was like hmm no. She said, "My daughter is on the internet with her laptop but we don't have wireless, I don't think."
I was like hahah, you are probably using your neighbor's internet connection.
I thought that I remember reading that using NetBEUI for a small home network isn't very secure. Though, I did use a HUB (heheh) and NetBEUI for quite a while as a network at home without any issues ever.
Yeah, it was something like that. But the reason that I remember was that since NetBeui was it's own protocol in itself, and NOT TCP/IP, that it couldn't be transferred over the web? Or something like that. I really need to do some more reading. I've only been getting into this lately since I went wireless at my house.
KeyserSoze
Originally posted by: Attrox
Why do I get the feeling that you know MORE than what you are talking about here
haha, I wish. I just don't like to spread misinformation, that's all. Trust me, I'm still at Noobness levels.
KeyserSoze
i remember doing that on my machines sometime ago. somthing about severing the communication between tcp/ip and netbeui or netbios. this is what i'm talking about http://grc.com/su-bondage.htm anyone know if this is true for XP as well?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
Facebook
Twitter