Wireless networking - any experts out there ?

[The Natural Philosopher]

No, that's why peole use ssh/https.

yes, its POSSIBLE to monitor packet level stuff IF the right kit is in place and IF you make some very obvious alterations to the hardware.

But you cant simply hook a sniffer on a ISP backbone. Its switches everywhere. You have to get to a main feed carrying ALL traffic (and that's usually optical) and insert a boxes in all traffic lines. It can be done..but its heavyweight kit.

More typically traffic monitoring is dine via invisible web proxies etc.

But they wont be intercepting e.g. ssh traffic and the like.

[Mark]

I disagree. If you need wireless then an separate access point is better than having everything combined. The ideal location for the access point is not always the same place as the best place for the router.

IME wireless does not work well for most people. I hear frequent cases of interrmittant operation, slow speeds and areas where no wireless access is possible.

Laying cable is not that difficult (this /is/ a DIY ng) and for those that can't there's always homeplug.

[Clive George]

Whereas I'm wondering why you're struggling quite so much with the idea that supplying a wireless router by default makes sense for the majority of people, and thus makes commercial sense for ISPs.

You're missing the point that you're a special snowflake. Yes, your needs are a bit different from the mainstream. Acknowledge that, accept that as a result you may not be using the default package mainstream providers give you, move on.

[Clive George]

How much work do you think there is to "consider" the security implications? IME the routers supplied by ISPs come with WPA turned on. One of them you have to press a button to allow the computer to connect as well. The password is written either on the box or a little piece of paper. It really isn't hard at all - and in many cases, easier than running a cable.

[Clive George]

You worked out how to hack HTTPS then?

[dennis]

I can, if I want to. Its just as easy on a wired network as it requires a hack on the target router and it makes no difference if its wireless or not.

[dennis]

Oh come off it, its dead easy as nobody puts any security on it as they think its safe. I bet you think linux is safe and don't bother with any extra security either.

[dennis]

Look up port mirroring.. how do you think we test the stuff and analyse traffic?

[dennis]

So if I want to hack in I just wait for an open door, walk in and plug in a wireless bridge somewhere and you are none the wiser and I can so what I like. Its just a matter of being worth the effort or do i just trick you into loading a keylogger program or put a keylogger hardware bit in while I am hacking the LAN. Its all easy to get stuff so be careful. Then there are the others you can do by hacking the targets router before you get onto what you can do to an ISPs links out there in the green cabinets.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Can be done allegedly.

[The Natural Philosopher]

and how do you propose to do that?

[MM]

DIY

A 10mm hole in the ceiling?

So I can pop into PC World and demand a free wireless router, yes?

I don't have a laptop.

That's eight cheeseburgers!

Neither is properly routed cable.

I don't. I don't even have a shed.

Whenever I use a friend's or relative's wireless network, it always stalls for a half-second, then recovers. A few minutes later it stalls again. Seems to be a feature, and one I can do without, as I do, in fact, with my wired network.

But it's obviously easier to gain access to a wireless network unless suitable measures are taken.

MM

[MM]

Fact is, hackers are very resourceful if they see a loophole. They will see less of a loophole in the case of a wired network, like a burglar will aim for houses where a window has been left open.

MM

[MM]

'Course it's easy! How is your house supplied with electricity and water? Cables and pipes.

MM

[Clive George]

'course, we do know how most hacking is done don't we? It's not through technology...

(though normally more subtle than

)

[MM]

It's extra work that isn't necessary with wired.

MM

[MM]

Mine works.

Never had that problem.

Never had that problem.

In what way? Perhaps you need to find solutions?

Win7? Is that Windows NT with more bells and whistles? What happened about that black screen of death problem (like BSOD, but now black, apparently)?

MM

[MM]

I chose Zen. They provided me with what I wanted. It worked straight off the bat. Since 2007.

MM

[Clive George]

True, but better doesn't necessarily mean worthwile. A separate access point will be another device to configure and also cost more. We're back to the commercial reality thing.

IME it works well for most people, but there is a loud minority of people who have problems with it. What I'm reading on this NG is entirely the opposite of what I see in real life.

There's always wireless, which is easy and works for the majority of people. The markets we're talking about aren't the readers of this NG.

[MM]

Someone tell Clive and Dennis, PLEASE! I have tried.

MM