people with unsecured internet networks?
- Thread starter beachBOYken
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Apr 2010
- Posts
- 909
- Location
- Devon
Get the shot gun out, nice bit of target practice.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 8,436
- Location
- Kent
So we decide to secure our wireless network, safe in the knowledge that since most of us here are just your random men and women who own a router and a computer we're not famous enough or rich enough to warrant the attention of a truly skilled attacker. Therefore any security we use is to deter opportunists, right? So they can sod off and attack our neighbour's network?
With that in mind, someone mentioned WPA2 as being good as unbreakable, but then stipulated it needs a long alphanumeric key. How do we define "long"? 10 chars? 20?
With that in mind, someone mentioned WPA2 as being good as unbreakable, but then stipulated it needs a long alphanumeric key. How do we define "long"? 10 chars? 20?
For passwords i use this site, just refresh the page and it will generate a new key.
https://www.grc.com/passwords.htm
As with all security it's all about putting the appropriate controls in for the situation.
In this case, if it is just the neighbours you're wanting to keep out then you're not going to need a massively long key, but personally if you've gone through the bother of enabling it why not have a 'long' randomised key anyway.
If you want a short easy to remember key then go ahead, but accept the risk that you could be more open to a dictionary type attack which is nicely explained in the guide here: http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-howto/30278-how-to-crack-wpa--wpa2
And depending on how densely populated your immediate area is you might not know who is around, one of these expert hackers in this thread could be within range cracking your WPA2 keys as we speak
Last edited:
Thats how I used to do mine too, but it was a pain when mates came roun d with laptops or wanted to connect their phones to the network so I gave up and its just straight up WPA-PSK now.
I just use Mac filtering. Any secure transactions are done on a wired machine and all my confidential files are on an external drive that is only powered on when i need it to be.
Plus I know the only two neighbours that are close enough to reach and since they both asked me to setup their wi-fi's I don't think I'm in any risk of them sniffing out my MAC key and spoofing it, just to get a bit of freebie 'slow cos its too far' wifi, when they have their own faster ones sitting at home.
Get realistic all those comparing it to getting raped ?
Plus I know the only two neighbours that are close enough to reach and since they both asked me to setup their wi-fi's I don't think I'm in any risk of them sniffing out my MAC key and spoofing it, just to get a bit of freebie 'slow cos its too far' wifi, when they have their own faster ones sitting at home.
Get realistic all those comparing it to getting raped ?
Last edited:
The little &^%$ neighbour of mine ! he told me he just playing with his new toy... why the little tike !
Lucky for you, one of the moron's didn't come over and beat you to a pulp. I'm sure the nerdy computer geek who hasn't got anything better to do other than rename SSID's in the neighbourhood stands out !
Last edited:
your secure transactions performed over Ethernet can still be broadcast over WiFi if you have the right software running on one of the clients.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 8,436
- Location
- Kent
I don't think the chosen analogies (unlocked car, or rape - what the hell?) are any good. Fact is this is a relatively new concept. Never before has our personal information literally been hanging in the air for somebody to take, and the general view being taken by most governments who have considered the question is simply that the owner of the network is responsible for securing it and that any felonies committed by somebody using the network are considered to have been committed by the owner of the network itself.
I don't feel this is unfair. If you are unable or unwilling to learn the technical aspects of wireless networking (and the word "technical" here is used very loosely) then you should have to pay someone to do it for you.
After all, your house comes with a lock. Since most of us aren't locksmiths, we've paid somebody to sort it out for us, and now we can lock our home from potential intruders
I don't feel this is unfair. If you are unable or unwilling to learn the technical aspects of wireless networking (and the word "technical" here is used very loosely) then you should have to pay someone to do it for you.
After all, your house comes with a lock. Since most of us aren't locksmiths, we've paid somebody to sort it out for us, and now we can lock our home from potential intruders
What if you're not home? Or in the middle of the night?OK, next time I see a car on my drive with a nerd sitting in there armed with a laptop, I'll enable WPA2.
After going outside asking him WTF he's upto.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
The wireless network at my parents is unsecured but it's a) turned on only when they need it, b) it's less hassle that way as they're not the most technologically literate of people so getting them to reconnect when it eventually causes a problem would be an issue and c) most importantly there's only one set of neighbours within half a mile so I'm not too worried about anyone else using the connection.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 May 2004
- Posts
- 3,270
Why?
Isn't that akin to saying to a girl if she wears a short skirt on a night out she deserves to be raped?
The trouble is that for someone to use your network, their computer will ask your router for an IP address. If the router hands out an IP address, consent is arguably implied, as you should have configured your router in an appropriate way.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 8,436
- Location
- Kent
Out of curiosity, since it appears the owner of the network is responsible for what happens on it (which I agree with), what happens to places with purposely open networks?
I'm thinking places like Starbucks or the like who offer free WiFi for customers. Will this die out when the owners decide they don't want to take responsibility for what people do on their network? Or will they start taking down identification and details before they let you on the network?
I'm thinking places like Starbucks or the like who offer free WiFi for customers. Will this die out when the owners decide they don't want to take responsibility for what people do on their network? Or will they start taking down identification and details before they let you on the network?