mirumu Posted July 14, 2009 Report Posted July 14, 2009 To be faked, don't they need to know my MAC addresses first? Otherwise they have to guess a huge number of possibilities. It's only 48-bits to brute force. Besides, before it can get a valid encrypted connection your computer needs to first tell your router what your MAC address is. i.e. it is sent unencrypted in plain-text over the wireless link. Anyone snooping the traffic with something like tcpdump or NetStumbler can see the MAC addresses plain as day in the packets.
Augsburger Posted July 14, 2009 Author Report Posted July 14, 2009 Y'all lost me after "Congrats", all I know is I can read your posts so life is good!
HeadphoneAddict Posted July 14, 2009 Report Posted July 14, 2009 Y'all lost me after "Congrats", all I know is I can read your posts so life is good! LOL! I went back and read it, and it did look a little gobbledygooky to some. Sorry. Something the nerd herd geeks would say.
Augsburger Posted July 14, 2009 Author Report Posted July 14, 2009 It's only 48-bits to brute force. Besides, before it can get a valid encrypted connection your computer needs to first tell your router what your MAC address is. i.e. it is sent unencrypted in plain-text over the wireless link. Anyone snooping the traffic with something like tcpdump or NetStumbler can see the MAC addresses plain as day in the packets. So how would one with limited 'puter skills scramble or otherwise hide their MAC address to protect their network?
mirumu Posted July 14, 2009 Report Posted July 14, 2009 So how would one with limited 'puter skills scramble or otherwise hide their MAC address to protect their network? Unfortunately that just isn't the way MAC addresses work. Using a MAC address list to restrict connectivity doesn't provide security against anyone who knows a little networking or has the right tools. Generally the way to achieve the best security is to simply use the strongest encryption. Currently that's WPA2. If all your hardware supports it there's really no reason to not use WPA2.
HeadphoneAddict Posted July 15, 2009 Report Posted July 15, 2009 Unfortunately that just isn't the way MAC addresses work. Using a MAC address list to restrict connectivity doesn't provide security against anyone who knows a little networking or has the right tools. Generally the way to achieve the best security is to simply use the strongest encryption. Currently that's WPA2. If all your hardware supports it there's really no reason to not use WPA2. So, how do you tell three kids that they can no longer go online with their Gameboy DS's?
Augsburger Posted July 15, 2009 Author Report Posted July 15, 2009 Start with this--- Usually works in my house anyway.
Augsburger Posted July 15, 2009 Author Report Posted July 15, 2009 Agreed. Once the Airport Extreme could find the ISP, I was easily able to connect my Micro$oft computers to it. As part of the router upgrade, I switched from WEP to WPA. Greg, let me know if you have trouble tomorrow. If necessary, I'll drive to Westlake and help you with it. So with the new Airport Extreme is it an automatic upgrade to WPA or do I need to go in and reconfigure it for that? I looked around on the set up but did not notice that option at setup.
guzziguy Posted July 15, 2009 Report Posted July 15, 2009 So with the new Airport Extreme is it an automatic upgrade to WPA or do I need to go in and reconfigure it for that? I looked around on the set up but did not notice that option at setup. I bought a used one, so I can't say for sure what a new router would mean. Generally when changing the security protocol it's a two step process: 1. On the router, you have to configure the new protocol (wpa2 in this case). Generally this means means setting the new protocol and giving a new connection password. 2. For each computer/device that attaches to the network, you have to find and connect to the new wireless network that you created in step one. This will require you to enter the new connection password. If you have a lot of computers/devices to attach to the network, step 2 is a bit of a pain. But everything is pretty straightforward. When I upgraded, I had 3 laptops and a printer to add to the network. It only took 15 minutes to add them. Later I bought a PS3. It was trivial to add to the network. So you can do this.
Augsburger Posted July 15, 2009 Author Report Posted July 15, 2009 Eh I'd rather drink Pinot, and I like Jacob's point. Sunset in eight hours, time to get ready and stop worrying.
mirumu Posted July 15, 2009 Report Posted July 15, 2009 So, how do you tell three kids that they can no longer go online with their Gameboy DS's? You don't. Hence why I said "if all your hardware supports WPA2". If you can use WPA2 you should because it's more secure and allows faster transfers, but if you can't, you can't. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. I'm sure Jacob's right when he says most crackers don't care about our personal data and would probably get in anyway if they really wanted to. The only reason I really care about security at all is that I don't want people downloading illegal stuff on my connection and getting the police on my case or using my precious overpriced bandwidth.
tkam Posted July 15, 2009 Report Posted July 15, 2009 I can't see why anyone would still be using WEP. If you have a device that only works with WEP time to trash it or upgrade. WPA2 is the only thing worth running and pretty much everything made in the last 4-5 years should work fine with it. I didn't read this thread in detail by why didn't the OP just turn off the wireless on the d-link and only use the wireless on the airport? The thing I don't like about the airport (aside from it being an apple product ) is the lack of a web based config. It's stupid as hell that you need to install an app to set it up.
grawk Posted July 16, 2009 Report Posted July 16, 2009 I don't mind the app to configure it, I'm not a huge fan of web based java apps.
guzziguy Posted July 16, 2009 Report Posted July 16, 2009 I'm curious Dan, why not? They are pretty standard now and work reasonably well with all browsers. Anyway, I'm glad not everybody feels the same way as I make my "toy money" writing them.
grawk Posted July 16, 2009 Report Posted July 16, 2009 Because there are so many versions of java out there, and they're huge processor and memory hogs.
Hopstretch Posted July 16, 2009 Report Posted July 16, 2009 Yep, they can use a lot of memory. And it's not like that stuff is getting any cheaper!
Augsburger Posted July 16, 2009 Author Report Posted July 16, 2009 I can't see why anyone would still be using WEP. If you have a device that only works with WEP time to trash it or upgrade. WPA2 is the only thing worth running and pretty much everything made in the last 4-5 years should work fine with it. I didn't read this thread in detail by why didn't the OP just turn off the wireless on the d-link and only use the wireless on the airport? The thing I don't like about the airport (aside from it being an apple product ) is the lack of a web based config. It's stupid as hell that you need to install an app to set it up. For two very important reasons- 1) I have no frigin idea what the hell I am doing 2) When I started the thread all I had was the legacy crappy D-Link router,I have since converted to the Apple clan and Airport Express. This thread has increased my computer knowledge 100 percent, unfortunately I still know jack shit about 'puters.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now