|
windows
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Is a PC vulnerable if wireless is on but not connected to a networ"not" connected to any of the wireless networks it can find, is it vulnerable to hacking from other wireless PCs within range of it's wireless signal? BACKGROUND I'm brand new to both networking and wireless. Last week I set up our first home network--it's very simple at this point. I have three PCs on the network: 1) A desktop connected via ethernet cable. 2) A desktop connected via a wireless USB adapter. 3) A laptop with built in Wifi capability. All hardware is WPA-PSK capable, so I enabled WPA-PSK security on my gateway (a 2Wire 2700HG, that's a DSL modem/router/firewall/switch/access point combo). It's my understanding that any wireless communication taking place between my two wireless PCs and my network will be encrypted. But what happens if the connection to my network is disabled on either of the wireless PCs? If someone elses PC (i.e. A PC that has not been set up on my network) is in range of the wirelss signal from the PC that was disconnected from my network, will they automatically be able to monitor/access/hack/etc. the PC that was disconnected from my network? The reason I ask, is my wife and son sometimes disable their connection to the network but don't turn off the wireless adapter on the laptop or desktop. -- So much to learn... So little time. Like you said, the computers in question are disconnected from the network,
therefore disconnected from the internet. Thus, we can conclude that if a computer isn't connected to the internet then it isn't susceptible to internet based security problems (i.e. "monitor/access/hack/etc."). And since you have WPA enabled then people in range of your wireless network won't be able to compromise your connection while you are connected to the network. As with any network though, it is good practice to run a firewall also as this will increase security. Windows Firewall isn't recomended if that's what you are using. ZoneAlarm is good and fairly easy to set up: http://www.zonelabs.com/store/content/company/products/znalm/freeDownload.jsp (just in case you aren't using a firewall, or if you are using Windows Firewall). -Dan Show quoteHide quote "Roughneck" <Roughn***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:D13B1317-A0BA-433E-AA04-0945BC178E3B@microsoft.com... > If a PC with wireless capability has the wireless feature enabled but it's > "not" connected to any of the wireless networks it can find, is it > vulnerable > to hacking from other wireless PCs within range of it's wireless signal? > > BACKGROUND > I'm brand new to both networking and wireless. Last week I set up our > first > home network--it's very simple at this point. I have three PCs on the > network: > > 1) A desktop connected via ethernet cable. > 2) A desktop connected via a wireless USB adapter. > 3) A laptop with built in Wifi capability. > > All hardware is WPA-PSK capable, so I enabled WPA-PSK security on my > gateway > (a 2Wire 2700HG, that's a DSL modem/router/firewall/switch/access point > combo). It's my understanding that any wireless communication taking > place > between my two wireless PCs and my network will be encrypted. But what > happens if the connection to my network is disabled on either of the > wireless > PCs? If someone elses PC (i.e. A PC that has not been set up on my > network) > is in range of the wirelss signal from the PC that was disconnected from > my > network, will they automatically be able to monitor/access/hack/etc. the > PC > that was disconnected from my network? > > The reason I ask, is my wife and son sometimes disable their connection to > the network but don't turn off the wireless adapter on the laptop or > desktop. > -- > So much to learn... So little time. Hi
The Wireless communication is done through the Wireless source (Wireless Router, Access Point). In a system like yours the client computers are configured of infra structure mode and an other would not connect directly to another computer. I.e. No one should be able to connect directly to any of your computer, they need to go through the Wireless Router. In addition if the Wireless Network Stack is disabled it does not matter that the physical Radio is On Since the Radio can not connect to the Computer without the Network interface. Jack (MVP-Networking). Show quoteHide quote "Roughneck" <Roughn***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:D13B1317-A0BA-433E-AA04-0945BC178E3B@microsoft.com... > If a PC with wireless capability has the wireless feature enabled but it's > "not" connected to any of the wireless networks it can find, is it > vulnerable > to hacking from other wireless PCs within range of it's wireless signal? > > BACKGROUND > I'm brand new to both networking and wireless. Last week I set up our > first > home network--it's very simple at this point. I have three PCs on the > network: > > 1) A desktop connected via ethernet cable. > 2) A desktop connected via a wireless USB adapter. > 3) A laptop with built in Wifi capability. > > All hardware is WPA-PSK capable, so I enabled WPA-PSK security on my > gateway > (a 2Wire 2700HG, that's a DSL modem/router/firewall/switch/access point > combo). It's my understanding that any wireless communication taking > place > between my two wireless PCs and my network will be encrypted. But what > happens if the connection to my network is disabled on either of the > wireless > PCs? If someone elses PC (i.e. A PC that has not been set up on my > network) > is in range of the wirelss signal from the PC that was disconnected from > my > network, will they automatically be able to monitor/access/hack/etc. the > PC > that was disconnected from my network? > > The reason I ask, is my wife and son sometimes disable their connection to > the network but don't turn off the wireless adapter on the laptop or > desktop. > -- > So much to learn... So little time. Dan and Jack--thanks much for the quick replies--they're very helpful.
There's something I'm still wondering about though. While browsing the web yesterday, I ran across an illustration that showed three laptop PCs connecting to each other wirelessly without a router or an internet connection. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to relocate the web site, but it said two or three laptops with WiFi capability can communicate with each other directly--no need for an internet connection, router, or even a switch/access point. But it didn't detail how that's done. Can anyone explain how that's done (or point me to a web site that does), and tell me if there's a way to make sure my WiFi enabled laptop isn't available to another laptop that might be seeking it out? (Note: In this illustration they were using three laptops, but I would think it could apply equally to a WiFi enabled desktop.) Regarding a software based firewall, I currently have XP's firewall turned off and am using NAV's Internet Worm Protection on all three computers. As I understand it, NAV's IWP "is" in affect a firewall. Norton says you shouldn't use two firewalls and recommend turning XP's FW off and using NAV's IWP instead. -- Show quoteHide quoteSo much to learn... So little time. "Roughneck" wrote: > If a PC with wireless capability has the wireless feature enabled but it's > "not" connected to any of the wireless networks it can find, is it vulnerable > to hacking from other wireless PCs within range of it's wireless signal? > > BACKGROUND > I'm brand new to both networking and wireless. Last week I set up our first > home network--it's very simple at this point. I have three PCs on the > network: > > 1) A desktop connected via ethernet cable. > 2) A desktop connected via a wireless USB adapter. > 3) A laptop with built in Wifi capability. > > All hardware is WPA-PSK capable, so I enabled WPA-PSK security on my gateway > (a 2Wire 2700HG, that's a DSL modem/router/firewall/switch/access point > combo). It's my understanding that any wireless communication taking place > between my two wireless PCs and my network will be encrypted. But what > happens if the connection to my network is disabled on either of the wireless > PCs? If someone elses PC (i.e. A PC that has not been set up on my network) > is in range of the wirelss signal from the PC that was disconnected from my > network, will they automatically be able to monitor/access/hack/etc. the PC > that was disconnected from my network? > > The reason I ask, is my wife and son sometimes disable their connection to > the network but don't turn off the wireless adapter on the laptop or desktop. > -- > So much to learn... So little time. Hi
This type of connection is called Ad-Hoc, it is done when there is No Wireless source (like a Wireless Router). Computer configured to Ad-Hoc can not connect to regular Wireless system (infrastructure) and Vice Versa). If all the system is Ad-Hoc and the security set On (Like WEP/WPA), a stranger computer would not be able to connect. In addition if the Wireless (software) Network connection is disabled, but the Wireless Radio left On, no Wireless connection would be possible regardless of any configuration. Jack (MVP-Networking). Show quoteHide quote "Roughneck" <Roughn***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:C869A981-02DA-4CDC-9AA0-063F2F216B28@microsoft.com... > Dan and Jack--thanks much for the quick replies--they're very helpful. > There's something I'm still wondering about though. While browsing the > web > yesterday, I ran across an illustration that showed three laptop PCs > connecting to each other wirelessly without a router or an internet > connection. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to relocate the web site, > but > it said two or three laptops with WiFi capability can communicate with > each > other directly--no need for an internet connection, router, or even a > switch/access point. But it didn't detail how that's done. > > Can anyone explain how that's done (or point me to a web site that does), > and tell me if there's a way to make sure my WiFi enabled laptop isn't > available to another laptop that might be seeking it out? (Note: In this > illustration they were using three laptops, but I would think it could > apply > equally to a WiFi enabled desktop.) > > Regarding a software based firewall, I currently have XP's firewall turned > off and am using NAV's Internet Worm Protection on all three computers. > As I > understand it, NAV's IWP "is" in affect a firewall. Norton says you > shouldn't use two firewalls and recommend turning XP's FW off and using > NAV's > IWP instead. > -- > So much to learn... So little time. > > > "Roughneck" wrote: > >> If a PC with wireless capability has the wireless feature enabled but >> it's >> "not" connected to any of the wireless networks it can find, is it >> vulnerable >> to hacking from other wireless PCs within range of it's wireless signal? >> >> BACKGROUND >> I'm brand new to both networking and wireless. Last week I set up our >> first >> home network--it's very simple at this point. I have three PCs on the >> network: >> >> 1) A desktop connected via ethernet cable. >> 2) A desktop connected via a wireless USB adapter. >> 3) A laptop with built in Wifi capability. >> >> All hardware is WPA-PSK capable, so I enabled WPA-PSK security on my >> gateway >> (a 2Wire 2700HG, that's a DSL modem/router/firewall/switch/access point >> combo). It's my understanding that any wireless communication taking >> place >> between my two wireless PCs and my network will be encrypted. But what >> happens if the connection to my network is disabled on either of the >> wireless >> PCs? If someone elses PC (i.e. A PC that has not been set up on my >> network) >> is in range of the wirelss signal from the PC that was disconnected from >> my >> network, will they automatically be able to monitor/access/hack/etc. the >> PC >> that was disconnected from my network? >> >> The reason I ask, is my wife and son sometimes disable their connection >> to >> the network but don't turn off the wireless adapter on the laptop or >> desktop. >> -- >> So much to learn... So little time. For the connection to occur like that there had to be some other hardware
installed on the laptops, or it's possible that the diagram you saw was just illustrating how wifi enabled computers can "talk" to each other - but just didn't include the router in the picture. For example I have an HP laptop that utilizes wireless networking and there is no other way for me to directly connect to another compter that also has a wireless card. I can only connect to routers. As for NAV Internet Worm Protection: http://review.zdnet.com/Norton_AntiVirus_2005/4505-3681_16-30998882-4.html From this site it says that it's not a full-fledged firewall. If I were you I would get ZoneAlarm - that way you'll be sure to have FULL protection. Also stated in the article, it doesn't give outbound protection like a full-fledged firewall does - which you'll want. -Dan Show quoteHide quote "Roughneck" <Roughn***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:C869A981-02DA-4CDC-9AA0-063F2F216B28@microsoft.com... > Dan and Jack--thanks much for the quick replies--they're very helpful. > There's something I'm still wondering about though. While browsing the > web > yesterday, I ran across an illustration that showed three laptop PCs > connecting to each other wirelessly without a router or an internet > connection. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to relocate the web site, > but > it said two or three laptops with WiFi capability can communicate with > each > other directly--no need for an internet connection, router, or even a > switch/access point. But it didn't detail how that's done. > > Can anyone explain how that's done (or point me to a web site that does), > and tell me if there's a way to make sure my WiFi enabled laptop isn't > available to another laptop that might be seeking it out? (Note: In this > illustration they were using three laptops, but I would think it could > apply > equally to a WiFi enabled desktop.) > > Regarding a software based firewall, I currently have XP's firewall turned > off and am using NAV's Internet Worm Protection on all three computers. > As I > understand it, NAV's IWP "is" in affect a firewall. Norton says you > shouldn't use two firewalls and recommend turning XP's FW off and using > NAV's > IWP instead. > -- > So much to learn... So little time. > > > "Roughneck" wrote: > >> If a PC with wireless capability has the wireless feature enabled but >> it's >> "not" connected to any of the wireless networks it can find, is it >> vulnerable >> to hacking from other wireless PCs within range of it's wireless signal? >> >> BACKGROUND >> I'm brand new to both networking and wireless. Last week I set up our >> first >> home network--it's very simple at this point. I have three PCs on the >> network: >> >> 1) A desktop connected via ethernet cable. >> 2) A desktop connected via a wireless USB adapter. >> 3) A laptop with built in Wifi capability. >> >> All hardware is WPA-PSK capable, so I enabled WPA-PSK security on my >> gateway >> (a 2Wire 2700HG, that's a DSL modem/router/firewall/switch/access point >> combo). It's my understanding that any wireless communication taking >> place >> between my two wireless PCs and my network will be encrypted. But what >> happens if the connection to my network is disabled on either of the >> wireless >> PCs? If someone elses PC (i.e. A PC that has not been set up on my >> network) >> is in range of the wirelss signal from the PC that was disconnected from >> my >> network, will they automatically be able to monitor/access/hack/etc. the >> PC >> that was disconnected from my network? >> >> The reason I ask, is my wife and son sometimes disable their connection >> to >> the network but don't turn off the wireless adapter on the laptop or >> desktop. >> -- >> So much to learn... So little time. Thanks again guys!
Dan, I wish I could relocate the web site so I could provide the URL of the site that was giving the example of the direct PC to PC communication. The point they were making was that there is a way to do that without a network. I'll keep looking, but for whatever reason, I can't find it in my IE history and I haven't been able to relocate it with any searches. Jack, I'm guessing the web site was probably demonstrating the Ad-Hoc approach that you mentioned. I'll do a search on that. Again--thanks to both of you for your help!!! -- Show quoteHide quoteSo much to learn... So little time. "Roughneck" wrote: > Dan and Jack--thanks much for the quick replies--they're very helpful. > There's something I'm still wondering about though. While browsing the web > yesterday, I ran across an illustration that showed three laptop PCs > connecting to each other wirelessly without a router or an internet > connection. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to relocate the web site, but > it said two or three laptops with WiFi capability can communicate with each > other directly--no need for an internet connection, router, or even a > switch/access point. But it didn't detail how that's done. > > Can anyone explain how that's done (or point me to a web site that does), > and tell me if there's a way to make sure my WiFi enabled laptop isn't > available to another laptop that might be seeking it out? (Note: In this > illustration they were using three laptops, but I would think it could apply > equally to a WiFi enabled desktop.) > > Regarding a software based firewall, I currently have XP's firewall turned > off and am using NAV's Internet Worm Protection on all three computers. As I > understand it, NAV's IWP "is" in affect a firewall. Norton says you > shouldn't use two firewalls and recommend turning XP's FW off and using NAV's > IWP instead. > -- > So much to learn... So little time. > > > "Roughneck" wrote: > > > If a PC with wireless capability has the wireless feature enabled but it's > > "not" connected to any of the wireless networks it can find, is it vulnerable > > to hacking from other wireless PCs within range of it's wireless signal? > > > > BACKGROUND > > I'm brand new to both networking and wireless. Last week I set up our first > > home network--it's very simple at this point. I have three PCs on the > > network: > > > > 1) A desktop connected via ethernet cable. > > 2) A desktop connected via a wireless USB adapter. > > 3) A laptop with built in Wifi capability. > > > > All hardware is WPA-PSK capable, so I enabled WPA-PSK security on my gateway > > (a 2Wire 2700HG, that's a DSL modem/router/firewall/switch/access point > > combo). It's my understanding that any wireless communication taking place > > between my two wireless PCs and my network will be encrypted. But what > > happens if the connection to my network is disabled on either of the wireless > > PCs? If someone elses PC (i.e. A PC that has not been set up on my network) > > is in range of the wirelss signal from the PC that was disconnected from my > > network, will they automatically be able to monitor/access/hack/etc. the PC > > that was disconnected from my network? > > > > The reason I ask, is my wife and son sometimes disable their connection to > > the network but don't turn off the wireless adapter on the laptop or desktop. > > -- > > So much to learn... So little time. I've never dealt with an Ad-Hoc network before, so that is new to me also.
Live and learn. -Dan Show quoteHide quote "Roughneck" <Roughn***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:749259A4-B736-4597-93DF-55231D32AC73@microsoft.com... > Thanks again guys! > > Dan, I wish I could relocate the web site so I could provide the URL of > the > site that was giving the example of the direct PC to PC communication. > The > point they were making was that there is a way to do that without a > network. > I'll keep looking, but for whatever reason, I can't find it in my IE > history > and I haven't been able to relocate it with any searches. > > Jack, I'm guessing the web site was probably demonstrating the Ad-Hoc > approach that you mentioned. I'll do a search on that. > > Again--thanks to both of you for your help!!! > -- > So much to learn... So little time. > > > "Roughneck" wrote: > >> Dan and Jack--thanks much for the quick replies--they're very helpful. >> There's something I'm still wondering about though. While browsing the >> web >> yesterday, I ran across an illustration that showed three laptop PCs >> connecting to each other wirelessly without a router or an internet >> connection. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to relocate the web site, >> but >> it said two or three laptops with WiFi capability can communicate with >> each >> other directly--no need for an internet connection, router, or even a >> switch/access point. But it didn't detail how that's done. >> >> Can anyone explain how that's done (or point me to a web site that does), >> and tell me if there's a way to make sure my WiFi enabled laptop isn't >> available to another laptop that might be seeking it out? (Note: In this >> illustration they were using three laptops, but I would think it could >> apply >> equally to a WiFi enabled desktop.) >> >> Regarding a software based firewall, I currently have XP's firewall >> turned >> off and am using NAV's Internet Worm Protection on all three computers. >> As I >> understand it, NAV's IWP "is" in affect a firewall. Norton says you >> shouldn't use two firewalls and recommend turning XP's FW off and using >> NAV's >> IWP instead. >> -- >> So much to learn... So little time. >> >> >> "Roughneck" wrote: >> >> > If a PC with wireless capability has the wireless feature enabled but >> > it's >> > "not" connected to any of the wireless networks it can find, is it >> > vulnerable >> > to hacking from other wireless PCs within range of it's wireless >> > signal? >> > >> > BACKGROUND >> > I'm brand new to both networking and wireless. Last week I set up our >> > first >> > home network--it's very simple at this point. I have three PCs on the >> > network: >> > >> > 1) A desktop connected via ethernet cable. >> > 2) A desktop connected via a wireless USB adapter. >> > 3) A laptop with built in Wifi capability. >> > >> > All hardware is WPA-PSK capable, so I enabled WPA-PSK security on my >> > gateway >> > (a 2Wire 2700HG, that's a DSL modem/router/firewall/switch/access point >> > combo). It's my understanding that any wireless communication taking >> > place >> > between my two wireless PCs and my network will be encrypted. But what >> > happens if the connection to my network is disabled on either of the >> > wireless >> > PCs? If someone elses PC (i.e. A PC that has not been set up on my >> > network) >> > is in range of the wirelss signal from the PC that was disconnected >> > from my >> > network, will they automatically be able to monitor/access/hack/etc. >> > the PC >> > that was disconnected from my network? >> > >> > The reason I ask, is my wife and son sometimes disable their connection >> > to >> > the network but don't turn off the wireless adapter on the laptop or >> > desktop. >> > -- >> > So much to learn... So little time. Roughneck wrote:
> Thanks again guys! This > > Dan, I wish I could relocate the web site so I could provide the URL of the > site that was giving the example of the direct PC to PC communication. The > point they were making was that there is a way to do that without a network. > I'll keep looking, but for whatever reason, I can't find it in my IE history > and I haven't been able to relocate it with any searches. > > Jack, I'm guessing the web site was probably demonstrating the Ad-Hoc > approach that you mentioned. I'll do a search on that. > > Again--thanks to both of you for your help!!! (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/expert/bowman_02april08.mspx) is a good article on how to set up ad-hoc wifi in Win-XP. It's from April 2002, so it's a bit out of date (talks about 802.11(b) and is pre SP2), but the basic principles are the same. This (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/setup/adhoc.mspx) describes how to share a single Internet connection among several wireless-enabled computers using ad-hoc connections, but I strongly suggest that you buy a router instead of using Internet Connection Sharing. Most home routers available today include both NAT and a hardware firewall. Also, IIRC, WinXP sp2 does not permit any encryption other than WEP for ad-hoc connections. That's another reason to get a router -- these days, WEP can rather easily be defeated. -- Lem -- To the moon and back with 64 Kbits of RAM and 512 Kbits of ROM. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer MS-MVP Thanks Lem.
This will be useful if I'm ever in a pinch when my internet connection goes down. -Dan Show quoteHide quote "Lem" <lem***@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23ILBpLY6GHA.3288@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > Roughneck wrote: >> Thanks again guys! >> >> Dan, I wish I could relocate the web site so I could provide the URL of >> the site that was giving the example of the direct PC to PC >> communication. The point they were making was that there is a way to do >> that without a network. I'll keep looking, but for whatever reason, I >> can't find it in my IE history and I haven't been able to relocate it >> with any searches. >> >> Jack, I'm guessing the web site was probably demonstrating the Ad-Hoc >> approach that you mentioned. I'll do a search on that. >> >> Again--thanks to both of you for your help!!! > > This > (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/expert/bowman_02april08.mspx) > is a good article on how to set up ad-hoc wifi in Win-XP. It's from April > 2002, so it's a bit out of date (talks about 802.11(b) and is pre SP2), > but the basic principles are the same. > > This > (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/setup/adhoc.mspx) > describes how to share a single Internet connection among several > wireless-enabled computers using ad-hoc connections, but I strongly > suggest that you buy a router instead of using Internet Connection > Sharing. Most home routers available today include both NAT and a > hardware firewall. > > Also, IIRC, WinXP sp2 does not permit any encryption other than WEP for > ad-hoc connections. That's another reason to get a router -- these days, > WEP can rather easily be defeated. > > -- > Lem -- To the moon and back with 64 Kbits of RAM and 512 Kbits of ROM. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer > MS-MVP Thanks for the links, Lem. I'll check them out. But as you suggested, we
are using a router, firewall, and WPA-PSK, which is the best encryption available with our hardware. I guess it's not as good as WPA2, but hopefully none of our otherwise friendly names will turn out to be hackers cracking our WPA encryption. -- Show quoteHide quoteSo much to learn... So little time. "Lem" wrote: > Roughneck wrote: > > Thanks again guys! > > > > Dan, I wish I could relocate the web site so I could provide the URL of the > > site that was giving the example of the direct PC to PC communication. The > > point they were making was that there is a way to do that without a network. > > I'll keep looking, but for whatever reason, I can't find it in my IE history > > and I haven't been able to relocate it with any searches. > > > > Jack, I'm guessing the web site was probably demonstrating the Ad-Hoc > > approach that you mentioned. I'll do a search on that. > > > > Again--thanks to both of you for your help!!! > > This > (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/expert/bowman_02april08.mspx) > is a good article on how to set up ad-hoc wifi in Win-XP. It's from > April 2002, so it's a bit out of date (talks about 802.11(b) and is pre > SP2), but the basic principles are the same. > > This > (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/setup/adhoc.mspx) > describes how to share a single Internet connection among several > wireless-enabled computers using ad-hoc connections, but I strongly > suggest that you buy a router instead of using Internet Connection > Sharing. Most home routers available today include both NAT and a > hardware firewall. > > Also, IIRC, WinXP sp2 does not permit any encryption other than WEP for > ad-hoc connections. That's another reason to get a router -- these > days, WEP can rather easily be defeated. > > -- > Lem -- To the moon and back with 64 Kbits of RAM and 512 Kbits of ROM. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer > MS-MVP > Ooops! Not sure how to edit a post. In my last one, I meant to say...
"hopefully none of our otherwise friendly NEIGHBORS will turn out to be hackers cracking our WPA encryption". -- Show quoteHide quoteSo much to learn... So little time. "Roughneck" wrote: > Thanks for the links, Lem. I'll check them out. But as you suggested, we > are using a router, firewall, and WPA-PSK, which is the best encryption > available with our hardware. I guess it's not as good as WPA2, but hopefully > none of our otherwise friendly names will turn out to be hackers cracking our > WPA encryption. > -- > So much to learn... So little time. > > > "Lem" wrote: > > > Roughneck wrote: > > > Thanks again guys! > > > > > > Dan, I wish I could relocate the web site so I could provide the URL of the > > > site that was giving the example of the direct PC to PC communication. The > > > point they were making was that there is a way to do that without a network. > > > I'll keep looking, but for whatever reason, I can't find it in my IE history > > > and I haven't been able to relocate it with any searches. > > > > > > Jack, I'm guessing the web site was probably demonstrating the Ad-Hoc > > > approach that you mentioned. I'll do a search on that. > > > > > > Again--thanks to both of you for your help!!! > > > > This > > (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/expert/bowman_02april08.mspx) > > is a good article on how to set up ad-hoc wifi in Win-XP. It's from > > April 2002, so it's a bit out of date (talks about 802.11(b) and is pre > > SP2), but the basic principles are the same. > > > > This > > (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/setup/adhoc.mspx) > > describes how to share a single Internet connection among several > > wireless-enabled computers using ad-hoc connections, but I strongly > > suggest that you buy a router instead of using Internet Connection > > Sharing. Most home routers available today include both NAT and a > > hardware firewall. > > > > Also, IIRC, WinXP sp2 does not permit any encryption other than WEP for > > ad-hoc connections. That's another reason to get a router -- these > > days, WEP can rather easily be defeated. > > > > -- > > Lem -- To the moon and back with 64 Kbits of RAM and 512 Kbits of ROM. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer > > MS-MVP > > Ooops! Not sure how to edit a post. In my last one, I meant to say...
"hopefully none of our otherwise friendly NEIGHBORS will turn out to be hackers cracking our WPA encryption". -- Show quoteHide quoteSo much to learn... So little time. "Roughneck" wrote: > Thanks for the links, Lem. I'll check them out. But as you suggested, we > are using a router, firewall, and WPA-PSK, which is the best encryption > available with our hardware. I guess it's not as good as WPA2, but hopefully > none of our otherwise friendly names will turn out to be hackers cracking our > WPA encryption. > -- > So much to learn... So little time. > > > "Lem" wrote: > > > Roughneck wrote: > > > Thanks again guys! > > > > > > Dan, I wish I could relocate the web site so I could provide the URL of the > > > site that was giving the example of the direct PC to PC communication. The > > > point they were making was that there is a way to do that without a network. > > > I'll keep looking, but for whatever reason, I can't find it in my IE history > > > and I haven't been able to relocate it with any searches. > > > > > > Jack, I'm guessing the web site was probably demonstrating the Ad-Hoc > > > approach that you mentioned. I'll do a search on that. > > > > > > Again--thanks to both of you for your help!!! > > > > This > > (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/expert/bowman_02april08.mspx) > > is a good article on how to set up ad-hoc wifi in Win-XP. It's from > > April 2002, so it's a bit out of date (talks about 802.11(b) and is pre > > SP2), but the basic principles are the same. > > > > This > > (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/setup/adhoc.mspx) > > describes how to share a single Internet connection among several > > wireless-enabled computers using ad-hoc connections, but I strongly > > suggest that you buy a router instead of using Internet Connection > > Sharing. Most home routers available today include both NAT and a > > hardware firewall. > > > > Also, IIRC, WinXP sp2 does not permit any encryption other than WEP for > > ad-hoc connections. That's another reason to get a router -- these > > days, WEP can rather easily be defeated. > > > > -- > > Lem -- To the moon and back with 64 Kbits of RAM and 512 Kbits of ROM. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer > > MS-MVP > > Ooops! Not sure how to edit a post. In my last one, I meant to say...
"hopefully none of our otherwise friendly NEIGHBORS will turn out to be hackers cracking our WPA encryption". -- Show quoteHide quoteSo much to learn... So little time. "Roughneck" wrote: > Thanks for the links, Lem. I'll check them out. But as you suggested, we > are using a router, firewall, and WPA-PSK, which is the best encryption > available with our hardware. I guess it's not as good as WPA2, but hopefully > none of our otherwise friendly names will turn out to be hackers cracking our > WPA encryption. > -- > So much to learn... So little time. > > > "Lem" wrote: > > > Roughneck wrote: > > > Thanks again guys! > > > > > > Dan, I wish I could relocate the web site so I could provide the URL of the > > > site that was giving the example of the direct PC to PC communication. The > > > point they were making was that there is a way to do that without a network. > > > I'll keep looking, but for whatever reason, I can't find it in my IE history > > > and I haven't been able to relocate it with any searches. > > > > > > Jack, I'm guessing the web site was probably demonstrating the Ad-Hoc > > > approach that you mentioned. I'll do a search on that. > > > > > > Again--thanks to both of you for your help!!! > > > > This > > (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/expert/bowman_02april08.mspx) > > is a good article on how to set up ad-hoc wifi in Win-XP. It's from > > April 2002, so it's a bit out of date (talks about 802.11(b) and is pre > > SP2), but the basic principles are the same. > > > > This > > (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/setup/adhoc.mspx) > > describes how to share a single Internet connection among several > > wireless-enabled computers using ad-hoc connections, but I strongly > > suggest that you buy a router instead of using Internet Connection > > Sharing. Most home routers available today include both NAT and a > > hardware firewall. > > > > Also, IIRC, WinXP sp2 does not permit any encryption other than WEP for > > ad-hoc connections. That's another reason to get a router -- these > > days, WEP can rather easily be defeated. > > > > -- > > Lem -- To the moon and back with 64 Kbits of RAM and 512 Kbits of ROM. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer > > MS-MVP > > 
Other interesting topics
Frequent hangs
securing mobile users at hotspots suspect someone stealing access Wireless connection problem "handshake/looking" take 10min, Rt61 (with Xp drivers) and Zyxel 6 Networking doesnt seem to load on xp Can not find a network not establiging network connection turn wireless on neighbor using wireless connection |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
