WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7 - Page 8

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
  •         ---> 
  •         |           `--> Re: What's a hardware firewall? was W iFi security issues? Newbie
  •         ---> 
  •         |               `--> Re: What's a hardware firewall? was W iFi security issues? Newbie

Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

Quoted text here. Click to load it

   Well, there are real differences between the various iterations of
Windows (and they say that Linux has fragmentation). This is why there
was a lot of disappointment when they decided to castrate WHS.

--
    If some college kid can replicate your "invention" without seeing   |||
any of the details of your patent then you have been granted a patent  / | \
on the "idea" and not the actual implementation.

Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
version
prices.
difference
server
o/s
Quoted text here. Click to load it


of
there


Stick to  your slices of Linux and tell your idiot home user puppy
dog who keeps yapping and knows about an (ordinary) o/s to do the
same, and it doesn't know about the difference between a workstation
and server o/s produced by any vendor.  :)

You need to school it.

--
posted with a Droid

Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

Quoted text here. Click to load it

[a lot of nonsense deleted]

--
    If some college kid can replicate your "invention" without seeing   |||
any of the details of your patent then you have been granted a patent  / | \
on the "idea" and not the actual implementation.

Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

On 12/22/2010 1:56 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:

<snipped>

You got the same babble in COLA. Why would I want to see you babbling
anywhere else?

See ya I wouldn't want to be ya!

bye

Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

On 22/12/2010 03:45, Big Steel wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yes, I /do/ know the difference.  You are reading too much into a minor
sarcastic comment.

It is definitely the case that at least some non-server versions of
windows have specific arbitrary limits on file sharing (a limit of 10
simultaneously connected users, IIRC) which have no technical basis or
justification.  The only reason for having that limit is to encourage
people to buy server versions of windows rather than using the "smaller"
versions as file servers.


Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

On 12/22/2010 7:13 AM, David Brown wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

The justification is MS choice not your or anyone else justified choice.
It is what it is.

Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

On 22/12/2010 13:19, Big Steel wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

That's true enough.  And MS is a commercial company - they want to make
money.  If they want to do that by selling client access licenses, then
that's their choice.

However, don't try to make it look like some sort of /technical/ issue,
or that you have to use the server OS because it is "better optimised
for multiple connections" in some way.  I'm sure that the windows kernel
shipped with the server OS's /is/ better optimised for multiple
connections than the kernel shipped with the workstation versions, but I
am equally sure that it's a negligible effect in most real-world cases.

It's about making money for MS - nothing more, nothing less.  MS chose
to limit the connections to workstation windows so that you would have
to pay them more money if you want to connect more than ten clients to a
single file server.  But as you say, it is MS's choice.  And as long as
users have the choice of alternatives (such as Linux file servers),
that's fair enough.





Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

On 12/22/2010 7:57 AM, David Brown wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it


You have a lot of lip service now that I am not interested in at all. If
you are going to stand on the soapbox, I heard it all before. What's new?

Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

On 22/12/2010 14:06, Big Steel wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

This thread was originally posted to a variety of unrelated newsgroups,
thus mixing people who have had no previous Usenet contact.  That means
different styles, different levels of knowledge and experience, and
different interests and opinions.  And there are some people in these
groups that need to be spoon-fed repeatedly before they'll learn
anything.  So I have no idea what you have heard before, or what you are
interested in, except what I can guess from this thread.  It seems to me
that you know what you are talking about, and are interested in
spreading knowledge, but not interested in the sort of rambling
discussions that have been common on c.o.l.s. recently.  Fair enough -
I'll try not to ramble here any more (after this post).



Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Time for me to go back to Thailand--it's the dry season there and the
sap is rising.

One good thing about Thailand: you can get quality Windows software
for dirt cheap:  For example, Autocad, a several thousand dollar
program, for $5.  "I don't know how they do it" <--and that's my
defense with US Customs, should it come to that.

RL

*Ramble On, And now's the time, the time is now, to sing my song.
I'm goin' 'round the world, I got to find my girl, on my way.
I've been this way ten years to the day, Ramble On,
Gotta find the queen of all my dreams.

More lyrics: http://www.lyricsfreak.com/l/led+zeppelin/#share

Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

Big Steel wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

   Imagine that... you seem to think that it's ok for M$ to have a
choice but not me... hmmmm.

--
Norman
Registered Linux user #461062
AMD64X2 6400+ Ubuntu 8.04 64bit

Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

On 12/22/2010 8:18 AM, Norman Peelman wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Do you think I care about you? I don't care about you,  and no one
should care about you but you. A Linux user with an attitude what's new?

Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

On Dec 22, 3:23=A0pm, Steel <""Fake99XX1199999fake\"@(Big)
(Steel)theXfactor.com"> wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

That's true. And that's why Linux has 1% market share.  In any
population you will have 1% that's socially deviant (actually more
like 10%--that's why I'm amazed that Linux, after 15 years of trying,
still has much less than 10% market share).  That 1% is attracted to
Linux.

And "attitude" as well as "doing it yourself" is why Neanderthal man
went extinct and was absorbed by (latest evidence, though little
intermingling occurred) or largely killed off by the more socially
networking Cro-Magnum man--modern man.  MSFT is like Cro-Magnum man:
modern.  It allows users to agree to a de facto standard. It's not
perfect--nothing is--but it's close enough to perfect to allow 90% of
the computing public to move forward.  And it makes money for
developers, allowing them to feed their family on Christmas Day, like
Tiny Tim.

Merry Xmas,

RL

Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

RayLopez99 wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

de facto standard... hah ahha ahhahahahahah

Quoted text here. Click to load it


--
Norman
Registered Linux user #461062
AMD64X2 6400+ Ubuntu 8.04 64bit

Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

On 22/12/2010 02:07, RayLopez99 wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Misunderstanding by RayLopez99 noted.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

VPN's are neither necessary nor sufficient for secure use of public
networks.  They can be part of the solution, but they are not a "one
size fits all" answer.

And download times are not necessarily slower - the VPN I use compresses
traffic, which may result in faster transfers.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

True.


Actually, https /is/ secure if the site you are accessing implements it
properly (some get it wrong).  The most common error is that the user
first goes to a non-https site, and then selects a link to move to the
https server.  But while they are on the http side, cookies are still
transferred - as they are in plain text, these can be sniffed.  The
trick is to go directly to the https site without going via the http site.

Of course, if you access other sites with http and there are data leaks
or cookie leaks between the sites, then you can still be sniffed.  But
anything that is transferred over the SSL link can be considered
unbreakable.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

VPNs connect one computer (or network) to another computer (or network),
so that traffic can pass between these computers without being
interceptible.  But unless you know exactly where the other end of the
tunnel is, you are no better off.  I certainly wouldn't consider some
random ad-supported "VPN service" to be much more reliable than a public
wifi in a café.  While it is easier to sniff traffic at the public wifi,
it is low risk because it is not of interest to an attacker - who cares
what people are watching on youtube while having a cup of coffee?  The
"VPN service", on the other hand, /is/ an appealing target - because
people think it is secure, there might be all sorts of interesting
traffic such as online banking.  It may be harder to crack, but bribing
some low-paid employee is an easy strategy.

If you want to use a VPN, I recommend making sure you have an end-point
that you can trust, such as a service directly from your ISP (since you
trust them anyway).  Alternatively, if you have a computer on in your
home and connected by broadband, it is a simple matter to set up a VPN
server and use that.  Use openvpn - it is free, cross-platform,
reliable, and simple to use regardless of routers and things because it
uses a single port that is easily forwarded.


The other big issue with VPNs is making sure that all the relevant
traffic actually uses the VPN, rather than the other network ports
(e.g., wifi).  Don't consider your VPN secure or even useful until you
understand exactly where your traffic goes.


Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Nope.  Wrong again.  They pretty much are a one-size fits all
solution.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Weasel word noted "may".  If that was true, everybody would compress
traffic routinely--why not?



Quoted text here. Click to load it

Thanks, that is interesting, so you finally got one right.  Indeed if
a HTTP site uses cookies to forward information in the URL redirect to
an HTTPS site, I can see how this would be a security breach.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Nope.  But hard to break.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Off topic, and noted by the advert earlier. So?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

OK so your crack is to bribe an employee? Ha ha ha.  OK.  Noted. Move
along.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Or, doing exactly what the advert recommended:  trying a paid VPN
service like Hide My Ass.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

So you are recommending that one use their PC at home as a VPN
server?  Meaning it has to be turned on 24/7 (or whenever you are on
the road with your laptop, you would leave your PC at home turned on
for the entire road trip, which may last two or three weeks)?  And you
think that's 'simple'?  You are one complex guy if so.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Not clear what you mean by "all relevant traffic", unless you are
referring to the one good point you made in this entire thread, with
the HTTP vs HTTPS redirect and cookies.

Goodbye, and Merry Christmas,

RL

Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

On 25/12/10 10:23, RayLopez99 wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Are you sure you are not Rod Speed in disguise?  I get the feeling I've
seen this thoughtless "Nope.  Wrong again." style before.

There is no point in trying to correct you - you have clearly already
decided on your view of things.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Actually, a lot of traffic is already compressed - many html servers
transparently compress html pages, and things like jpg files are already
compressed.  But there is plenty of scope for compressing other traffic
such as email, html headers, and even the ip packet envelopes.  When
traffic is coming from or going to a particular program, it is often
inappropriate to compress it - that would mean adding compression as a
feature of every program.  And for lots of network types, especially
trunks, it doesn't make sense to compress traffic - it would take too
much processor resources.  But for some types of network, such as
dail-up modem links and vpns, compression has little cost and therefore
makes sense.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

SSL is so hard to break that it can be considered unbreakable.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Try not to show your ignorance.

A very large proportion of crimes are committed with "inside" help -
either willing help, unwilling help, or unwitting help (people who are
simply fooled).  If I wanted to crack people's access to bank sites,
then I would do it by some sort of social engineering - not brute force
encryption cracking of a public wifi spot.  I can't say what would be
most cost-effective -  bribing an ISP's employee, using blackmail,
writing a trojan, or sending phishing emails.  Setting up a VPN service
would certainly be a good method - it is extremely easy to do, and there
are plenty of gullible people willing to try it.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Ah, a /paid/ service.  That makes it /so/ much less likely that there
are con-artists behind the service, or corrupt employees, or accidental
security holes.  Since they charge money, they /must/ be good!

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Do I think it is hard to leave a computer on all the time?  No, I don't
think it's hard - my Linux server in the cellar is only ever turned off
by power cuts.  And I'm far from alone in that.  My desktop is on almost
as much the time - even my windows desktop at work has an average of a
month or so between reboots.  To be fair, I live in a relatively cold
country where we use electric heating - thus there is no electricity
charge in keeping them on.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I mean all traffic except the VPN tunnel itself.  For a VPN to be
effective at hiding or securing your connection, every network packet
(and there are /lots/ of them) needs to pass through the tunnel.

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

No but Rod Speed is a "friend" of mine. He's been tamed though by his
ISP...or he retired from Usenet as I've not seen his posts in the last
year or so.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Nope.  Wrong again.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

OK, sounds plausible.  Does not negate my points at all, as this was a
side issue.




Quoted text here. Click to load it


OK, conspiracy theory noted.  Moving right along, as this paranoia is
counterproductive...

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Exactly.  Now you're starting to get it.  By paying money you attract
smart people--even smarter than you--to build a robust VPN system.
Try doing that with "hobbyists" like Linux enthusiasts.  Not as easy.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

OK, just as I thought.  My point exactly.  Let's move on please, as
this was a minor point.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

What are these "lots" of data packets?  I don't have a clue.  In my
scenario (perhaps you have something else in mind):  a user has her
laptop at a public Wi-Fi spot like Starbucks in the USA or an
airport.  She then clicks on an icon by a commercial VPN service like
"Hide My Ass".  Her data is then https tunneled to HMA's VPN servers,
and from there the data go to an online bank site.  How can you have
"lots" of network packets that are outside this https tunnel?  You
cannot.

RL

What's a hardware firewall? was WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

17:25:55 +0100 typed in microsoft.public.windows.vista.general  the
following:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

    I've been on dialup since the dark ages, just now going to DSL.  I
haven't worried to much about firewalls - I could unplug the phone
line. I have used AVG (and others) to augment the windows firewall
software.  (I've too many friends in Redmond to feel really secure
trusting MS products - but that's another story.)

    So what is the deal with a "hardware firewall"?  What is it, how
does it work, is it difficult to setup?  ("How high is up?")  I'd
google all that, but I'm at home, away from the WiFi hotspot...

thanks in advance.

pyotr

--
pyotr filipivich
If you get hit by a train, it isn't the caboose what kills you.

Re: What's a hardware firewall? was WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

pyotr filipivich wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
I have a Speedtouch ISP modem/router, with 4 outputs(no wireless).
If you ask your ISP for a router type, most come with a firewall.
Some call that a hardware firewall, but it is just software/linux
running in flash memory.
This device acts as a hardware firewall, without need to install
anything.

On occasion I have had up to 3 computers connected to the net.

In the browser I enter a site like 10.0.0.xxx, to comunicate with
the router, set options, and test the adsl connection.

The router only allows things to your computer which your computer
has requested.

That pretty much stops most attacks, but cannot stop malware which you
yourself install from sleazy websites.

That is where your AVG or others have to help you.

Site Timeline