Fine, if you know what you're doing. I hope you have a suitable level of encryption and MAC address filtering in use to stop all and sundry from gatecrashing your network?
But, IIRC, the OP had only one computer - which probably isn't readily portable - in which case, I certainly wouldn't regard wireless as an obvious - or even suitable - solution.
Yes. But more importantly, I regard the wireless network to be insecure, so all the machines have firewalls as well. If you regard the wireless network itself as no more secure than the internet, then you can't go far wrong.
I see no problem. It doesn't even appear to be his own house, so a solution that (a) causes less damage and (b) is more portable in the event of moving out may be appropriate. The amount of time or money to conceal cables may be a very real issue in some cases. On the other hand, some people don't mind surface mounted cables ruining the skirting boards.
Christian.
But the point is that a wireless network with internet access is a damn site
*less* secure than a wired network with internet access. With a wired network, no-one can connect to your LAN, other than from the internet - and the firewall then protects you.With a wireless network - unless properly secured - hackers within wireless range of your WAP can get straight into your LAN - and effectively *inside* the firewall!
You misunderstand. I regard being inside the wireless network as not being a safe place. OK, it has WEP (ha ha!) security, MAC address limitation and a firewall to the internet, but I don't rely on that. The individual computers connected have firewall settings (either Norton or XP SP2) that are appropriate for the computer's direct connection to the Internet as if the wireless network was not protected at all.
Breaking into my wireless network would get you a free Internet connection if NTL ever deign to provide any service, but won't allow you to access the computers within.
Christian.
Yes, I guess if you interpret 'third' like that...I just assumed the third wire was the bell wire..
That may be true in your particular case - but it certainly isn't true in the general case.
People in this situation will normally have File & Printer Sharing enabled - to enable the PCs on their LAN to talk to each other, and will have explicitly shared various drives/folders/what-have-you. The software firewalls will have been configured with a "trusted zone" which consists of the range of IP addresses used by the PC in the LAN. Unless you turn off the WAP/Router's DHCP server function and use fixed IP addresses throughout, any hacker will be allocated an IP address in the same range as the rest - and will end up inside the trusted zone, able to access *any* shared resource!
That should have been 2 and 5!
But the system in question has only one computer. If it has a modern operating system, like XP SP2, then network shares will have required several warning messages to be ignored to have disabled the firewall.
Christian.
see now you have hit the nail on the head.I dont have this type of master socket [called an NTE5 right?] i only seem to have the old style junction box - this is just a plastic white rectangular box with a single screw in the middle. the telephone cable from the telegraph pole comes into this and a line comes out of this from the bottom and is run all the way downstairs to the "main" plug sockt.
I phone BT to ask if i could have my junction box upgraded to an NTE5 and the intial woman i spoke to said yes in principle but then looked on the computer and said it might not be possible as i had my line hardwired in or something but an engineer would call me back to discuss it further. she said the charge would be £25 [but she was happy to put a note to waive this].
i [probably mistakenly] assumed the engineer would phone the same day so called back at 7pm to follow-up, spoke to someone else and we basically ran round and round in circles. She told me my "main socket" had alreadt been converted to a plug-in socket and so that junction box could probably be taken out and if i wanted an engineer coudl come out to do that: charge = hourly after £130 starting fee.
I explained that this surely could not be right [she didnt have a clue what an NTE5 was - admittedly i probably dont either] as the line from the telegraph pole comes into this box and when we used to get water in it the phone would start playing up; we went round and round with this debate and in the end she felt she had convinced me that i was talking about the wring this, that box is probably reduntant but an engineer could come round to "remove or upgrade" with the fees as explained; she [at my insistence] looked back at the previous lady's comment and said the £25 was to convert the master socket to a plug and mine already was so that pricedoesnt apply!
In the end we parted with her saying the topic would be "left open" and someone [not an engineer] woudl phone me within 48hours.
so what is the score then?
if i were to do it myself i would need a crimping tool wouldnt i [not withstanging that it seems i am not allowed to tamper with that junction box]??
Buy a new slave socket and wire it directly into the rectangular junction box. If it is only for broadband connection, then all you need is the main line to make it work. Connect the new slave socket to the White and Blue (or Orange and White in some cases) of the main junction box. White to number 5 and Blue connected to number 2 of the new slave box. It's that simple.
Riz1 wrote:
As a matter of your contract with BT, of the legal ownership of that section of wiring and the junction box, and of pragmatism (you don't have the skills and knowledge to make it look like a pukka BT job ;-) - no, don't tamper with that junction box. And no, it's not a crimping tool you'd need, anyway.
It sounds as if the existing "junction box" is just that: a transition between the outdoor cable (gel-filled, maybe) and the cheaper one used indoors, but is *not* the "demarcation point", where BT's wiring ends and yours begins. That, it seems, is your "main plug sockt" downstairs - and that may already be an NTE5. (The distinguishing cunning characteristic of the NTE5 is that it presents a modern-BT-style socket on the main faceplate; when you undo the two screws holding the faceplate to the back box, you find the faceplate itself "unplugs" from an inner socket of the same style. The BT incoming wiring is fixed to the back of that "inner" socket - and those are the connections you don't monkey with. The "inner" socket acts as a test point - you can plug any phone into that, and if that works while extensions don't, you've demonstrated the fault lies in the extension wiring rather than in the BT line, as the idea of the NTE5 is that any extension wiring is wired to the handy little "pushdown" connectors on the NTE5 faceplate - so "unplugging" the faceplate also unplugs all the extension wiring. Cunning, eh?)
Now, that's how new BT installs of ordinary voice lines (and now ADSL) have been done for the last 15-20 years. BT will change older wiring to this new scheme on request - and as you've found, there's a published scale of charges for such work, which in practice you might find is reduced or waived if you're getting sthg else done at the time, or just because you say "I'm about to get NTL/Telewest in since they'll give me a new line with cable modem and no installation fee". You've got two separate interactions with the BT machine to go through: one is with their call centre people, where your aim is to get them to send out an engineer to do something the BT charging machine won't charge you too much for - e.g. "conversion of existing installation to modern master socket". Quite separate is your interaction with the nice BT engineer who turns up: this person should be on the receiving end of tea/coffee, biscuits, friendliness, and possibly tales of the apparent cluelessness of the call centre people who may have misclassified the little job you have in mind. Given a reasonable householder - and suggestions/request which don't increase the amount of work - few engineers would, for example, baulk at putting a new NTE5 in place of your existing junction box, leaving you to use the old wire from there to the existing master as part of your extension wiring (and to snip the existing bell capacitor to change that from a master to a secondary socket), even if the letter of what they've been called out to do might've been to replace the existing downstairs socket with a new master socket.
HTH - Stefek
In our discussion, we've rather wandered away from the OP's question!
I said a wireless solution wasn't a good idea in this case because wireless connections are more temperamental than wired and because you needed a wired a connection to configure the router. I also mentioned security issues in passing.
Between us, we have broadened this to a discussion on multi PC LANs, rather than just the OP's single computer.
My previous reply was addressing your assertion that a software firewall on each PC (in a multi-PC setup) would stop a wireless hacker from doing anything other than getting a free internet connection. I admit that by this time I had lost sight of the OP's question, and was talking in more general terms.
Do you understand what I'm getting at, in the general sense?
Yes, but I still think a properly implemented wireless solution could be appropriate for the OP.
Christian.
That's interesting. I deliberately have my network manually configured for other reasons, so nice to hear it is more secure that way. I have set MAC filtering and also 64 bit encryption on the wireless adapter. The router has been setup in "stealth" mode, so it doesn't respond to any probes from the Internet side. I am tempted to disable the wireless adapter when I'm not at home, but hope I have done enough to prevent any but the most determined hacker as it is!
OK, I don't think we're going to agree, but it was an interesting discussion - if a bit OT!
Thankyou.
More secure, but only by a small amount. Lack of DHCP would only be an extremely minor distraction to a hacker. They can easily determine the subnet in use and assign themselves a suitable IP address.
Christian.
Interesting! How would they actually do that - particularly if the network is using a set of totally non-standard IP addresses, like mine is, and if SSID broadcasting is turned off?
One also hears about 'spoofing' MAC addresses. How's that done?
Just analysing network traffic to see what others are using.
Network cards can be assigned a MAC address to override the built in one. You need to listen to existing traffic again to snatch an allowed address.
Christian.
yes my plug sockets were definately put in within the last "15-20 years" so then i take it the 2nd woman was correct and my "master" is not the "junction box" but the plug socket downstairs? darn it. I also then take it the junction box CAN be taken out [as she kept suggesting]? i still assume not as the phone did start playing up when water got into it.
I take on board all you have said above - engineers have invariably been friendly and helpful - the only question is [short of another "water-condensation in junction box episode"] how to get the engineer out for a low-charge/no-charge job? they already have it on file that my installation has been "converted from hardwired"
if the junction box really is "surplus to reqiurements" and i have an NTE5 master downstairs, am i "alright" to attempt wiring an additional extension socket into that box myself or am i likely to cause havoc? i am not fazed by the actually wiring dilemma but litle things like the correct tools needed and losing all phone signal :-)
How about if that address was already in use, wouldn't there be collisions?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.