ET
Jun 29, 2003, 1:31 PM
Post #11 of 13
(1204 views)
Shortcut
|
Re: [Esteban] Broadband Access in Lakeside - Any Success?
|
Can't Post | Private Reply
|
Esteban writes:
....I know that with the broadband here in Mazatlan, if you use a wireless network, the ISP cannot detect another connection and therefore you don't have to pay for the extra computers.
This is not a function of the network being wireless. This is the function of a network device, most commonly a router, which is performing Network Address Translation (NAT), sometimes referred to as "masquerading". When performing NAT, the router presents itself to the ISP as the one authorized device on the connection. All devices on the local area network (LAN) which need internet connectivity send their outgoing packets to this router, which rewrites the packet headers with the router's (authorized) address (IP #) as the sender, and then forwards them upstream. This router also receives all incoming packets from the internet connection, rewrites the packet headers with the actual recipients address, and forwards the packets onto the local network for use by the appropriate device. The NAT activities are transparent to the end users on the LAN, and in consumer-channel devices easily configurable, typically in less than 10 minutes. Many wireless "base" stations have a NAT router built into them as do some DSL modems; the "connection sharing" routers I described in my initial post to this message thread almost always have the capability, whether they be for wireless or twisted-pair networks, combinations, or something involving #4 baling wire.
....I was wondering why no one on your system can use a wireless network? Are you trying to keep control over how many computers have access?
The concerns about the security of current consumer wireless networking standards, particularly 802.11b/WiFi was the subject of a discussion in this forum that you participated in about a week ago.
In the case of our neighborhood network:
1. We're paying for the network and connectivity and don't feel it's anybody else's right to use it for free.
2. Far more importantly, it opens up security holes in the network. Because the network is segmented so that each participating household is isolated from the others the impact of somebody entering into the network would be generally localized to the segment containing the wireless link, where it would be the household's own fault and problem. Nonetheless, unless more effort is invested in a wireless network than we want to bother with, with the current WEP encryption used in consumer-channel equipment it means that somebody's data, including small amounts of network information, is vulnerable for interception and deciphering. To prove that vulnerability is more than a theoretical concern, the person handling our network security set up a demonstration in which using purely passive techniques (i.e. not "hacking" as you were going on about in the other thread) and without any type of trespass, within a bit more than a week collected enough data off of somebody on the block's wireless network to allow the encryption to be broken and both collected data and further transmissions to be monitored (somebody's got a taste for asian pornography). For temporary and casual use, such in a school classroom, trade show lounge, or coffee shop this isn't a real issue; for long term use either as part of a network or for internet connectivity it is.
|
Forums Index
Search Posts
Who's Online
Log In or Sign Up
