4-Chan 'Anonymous' web-site hackers arrested.

stockhausen said:
Very little Googling will suggest that you hide your SSID
Click to expand...

no no no no :)

Ok, it'll deter a chancer wondering by, but technically it's more of a security risk to your client pcs to have them connect up to an access point that's hiding it's SSID due to your machine then 'leaking' the SSID of said access point.

http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/2865...hiding-your-wireless-ssid-really-more-secure/

http://blogs.technet.com/b/steriley/archive/2007/10/16/myth-vs-reality-wireless-ssids.aspx
 
Last edited:
x22ovb.jpg
 
Ev0 said:
no no no no :)

Ok, it'll deter a chancer wondering by, but technically it's more of a security risk to your client pcs to have them connect up to an access point that's hiding it's SSID due to your machine then 'leaking' the SSID of said access point.

http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/2865...hiding-your-wireless-ssid-really-more-secure/

http://blogs.technet.com/b/steriley/archive/2007/10/16/myth-vs-reality-wireless-ssids.aspx
Click to expand...
Having briefly read both the articles to which you linked, I can't really say that I accept your assertion that hiding your SSID makes your WiFi LESS secure.

It may not deter a knowledgeable and determined hacker but it certainly makes it more tedious for the average user. You almost get the impression that the poster(s) believe that someone will hide their SSID and not bother with anything else. One of them also suggests that you shouldn't bother with MAC address filtering because it can be defeated - so what? Locks can be picked, is that a good reason not to lock your front door?

I am all in favour of people using WPA2 but I'm yet to be convinced that hiding your SSID & MAC address filtering are counter-productive.
 
stockhausen said:
Correctomundo - 10/10.

It is wise to assume that whatever you do on t'Internet or on a mobile 'phone, you CAN be caught, assuming someone is sufficiently concerned.


Frankly, I don't believe that claim, it may be true across the millions across the UK, but I don't believe that you will find that many.
Click to expand...

IFAIK

The thing is that if you were behind several proxies in different parts of the world it would be very difficult (read not worth it) for law enforcement agencies to get correct clearance to request the logs for each of these proxy hosts.
 
What i don't get with stuff like this is how they know who is responsible?

Is an IP alone even enough evidence to charge someone, how do they know which individual is guilty if any in a house of many?

Then theres issues like whether the attack even originated from from that IP or acted as a proxy by some trojan or wireless access, there's so many possibilities i don't see how anyone can be caught based on such weak evidence, heck even if they have the software on their pc there's reasonable doubt they were responsible.
 
Radiation said:
What i don't get with stuff like this is how they know who is responsible?

Is an IP alone even enough evidence to charge someone, how do they know which individual is guilty if any in a house of many?

Then theres issues like whether the attack even originated from from that IP or acted as a proxy by some trojan or wireless access, there's so many possibilities i don't see how anyone can be caught based on such weak evidence, heck even if they have the software on their pc there's reasonable doubt they were responsible.
Click to expand...

Which is what makes it so easy. I'm willing to bet I could easily get someone jail time, ruin their career and relations just through gaining access to their computer. Quite scary, eh?
 
steve-h said:
Which is what makes it so easy. I'm willing to bet I could easily get someone jail time, ruin their career and relations just through gaining access to their computer. Quite scary, eh?
Click to expand...

Given this current backlash from Anonymous, its likely that some Anons will be doing just that.

http://anonops.webs.com/ANONYMOUS-PRESS-RELEASE_27-01-2011.pdf

Link taken from The Register article here:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/01/28/anonymous_hacklash_warning/

If I had enemies... I'd consider it! :p
 
stockhausen said:
Having briefly read both the articles to which you linked, I can't really say that I accept your assertion that hiding your SSID makes your WiFi LESS secure.

It may not deter a knowledgeable and determined hacker but it certainly makes it more tedious for the average user. You almost get the impression that the poster(s) believe that someone will hide their SSID and not bother with anything else. One of them also suggests that you shouldn't bother with MAC address filtering because it can be defeated - so what? Locks can be picked, is that a good reason not to lock your front door?

I am all in favour of people using WPA2 but I'm yet to be convinced that hiding your SSID & MAC address filtering are counter-productive.
Click to expand...

I also am in favour of MAC address filtering as I see it as an alright layer of security.

End of the day it's a personal choice, yes SSID was not designed as a security method, but arguably can be used as a very weak layer.

And as I said, hiding your SSID increases the risk for clients connecting to your wifi, not your wifi itself, which is what I'd be more concerned with :)
 
UK government websites have been warned to brace themselves for website attacks in the wake of the arrest of five Britons as part of an investigation into Anonymous this week.
Click to expand...

Well putting it like that is just asking for it...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom