Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

"View Wireless Networks under SP2

Last response: in Wireless Networking
Share
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
September 29, 2004 12:56:48 AM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

Pre SP2 I could see a, changing, list of Wireless Networks within range of
this desktop. I could even, occasionally, connect to one.

SP2 has offered a different screen view of these networks. MY
network -between this computer and the router- is shown as Security Enabled
Wireless Network. It uses WEP with a big, long encryption key. The others
are Unsecured Wireless Networks.

Does that mean they are wide open? Does it mean someone within range has a
wireless link in a network that is not encrypted?

TIA

--
September 29, 2004 1:17:46 AM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

Neo Anderson thought carefully and wrote on 9/28/2004 8:56 PM:

> Pre SP2 I could see a, changing, list of Wireless Networks within range of
> this desktop. I could even, occasionally, connect to one.
>
> SP2 has offered a different screen view of these networks. MY
> network -between this computer and the router- is shown as Security Enabled
> Wireless Network. It uses WEP with a big, long encryption key. The others
> are Unsecured Wireless Networks.
>
> Does that mean they are wide open? Does it mean someone within range has a
> wireless link in a network that is not encrypted?

Yes, they're wide open. I've accidently used someone else's wireless
network to surf the 'net instead of my own.

Lance
*****
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
September 29, 2004 1:33:49 AM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

I did the same the other evening. Luckily for the neighbor (about 400' down
the street) he'd named his network with his last name. I walked down,
invited him here for a little show-n-tell.

--

"Lance" <lltbhill@link_earth.net> wrote in message
news:uyAmGtdpEHA.3728@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Neo Anderson thought carefully and wrote on 9/28/2004 8:56 PM:
>
>> Pre SP2 I could see a, changing, list of Wireless Networks within range
>> of this desktop. I could even, occasionally, connect to one.
>>
>> SP2 has offered a different screen view of these networks. MY
>> network -between this computer and the router- is shown as Security
>> Enabled Wireless Network. It uses WEP with a big, long encryption key.
>> The others are Unsecured Wireless Networks.
>>
>> Does that mean they are wide open? Does it mean someone within range has
>> a wireless link in a network that is not encrypted?
>
> Yes, they're wide open. I've accidently used someone else's wireless
> network to surf the 'net instead of my own.
>
> Lance
> *****
Related resources
September 29, 2004 1:58:28 AM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

400 ft! What are you (or your neighbor) using? I have problems getting a
signal to my son's room 50 ft away.

Lance
*****

Neo Anderson thought carefully and wrote on 9/28/2004 9:33 PM:

> I did the same the other evening. Luckily for the neighbor (about 400' down
> the street) he'd named his network with his last name. I walked down,
> invited him here for a little show-n-tell.
>
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
September 29, 2004 2:19:07 AM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

D-Link DWL-G120

He has a Linksys router wireless to an internal wireless adapter in a
laptop.

We have a near line-of-sight with only window glass in between.

--

"Lance" <lltbhill@link_earth.net> wrote in message
news:o bay1DepEHA.2340@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> 400 ft! What are you (or your neighbor) using? I have problems getting a
> signal to my son's room 50 ft away.
>
> Lance
> *****
>
> Neo Anderson thought carefully and wrote on 9/28/2004 9:33 PM:
>
>> I did the same the other evening. Luckily for the neighbor (about 400'
>> down the street) he'd named his network with his last name. I walked
>> down, invited him here for a little show-n-tell.
>>
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
September 29, 2004 1:50:35 PM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

In news:o bay1DepEHA.2340@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl,
Lance <lltbhill@link_earth.net> fumbled, fiddled and fingered:
> 400 ft! What are you (or your neighbor) using? I have problems
> getting a signal to my son's room 50 ft away.
>

Neos neighbour

http://tinyurl.com/4hozd

hope that helps ;o)


--
Steve Parry BA (Hons) MCP MVP

http://www.gwynfryn.co.uk
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
September 29, 2004 1:50:36 PM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

Well, heck, Steve - Everyone in the neighborhood had one of those. Doesn't
every wi-fi user? ; )


--

"Steve Parry [MVP]" <k100rs_1990@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uLqkyFgpEHA.3988@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> In news:o bay1DepEHA.2340@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl,
> Lance <lltbhill@link_earth.net> fumbled, fiddled and fingered:
>> 400 ft! What are you (or your neighbor) using? I have problems
>> getting a signal to my son's room 50 ft away.
>>
>
> Neos neighbour
>
> http://tinyurl.com/4hozd
>
> hope that helps ;o)
>
>
> --
> Steve Parry BA (Hons) MCP MVP
>
> http://www.gwynfryn.co.uk
>
>
September 29, 2004 11:40:51 PM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

Does it do WEP?

Lance
*****

Steve Parry [MVP] thought carefully and wrote on 9/29/2004 1:50 AM:
> In news:o bay1DepEHA.2340@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl,
> Lance <lltbhill@link_earth.net> fumbled, fiddled and fingered:
>
>>400 ft! What are you (or your neighbor) using? I have problems
>>getting a signal to my son's room 50 ft away.
>>
>
>
> Neos neighbour
>
> http://tinyurl.com/4hozd
>
> hope that helps ;o)
>
>
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
September 30, 2004 2:09:07 AM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

At the initial time he was not. We have him all locked down now.

--

"Lance" <lltbhill@link_earth.net> wrote in message
news:uLa2lbppEHA.692@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Does it do WEP?
>
> Lance
> *****
>
> Steve Parry [MVP] thought carefully and wrote on 9/29/2004 1:50 AM:
>> In news:o bay1DepEHA.2340@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl,
>> Lance <lltbhill@link_earth.net> fumbled, fiddled and fingered:
>>
>>>400 ft! What are you (or your neighbor) using? I have problems
>>>getting a signal to my son's room 50 ft away.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Neos neighbour
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/4hozd
>>
>> hope that helps ;o)
>>
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
September 30, 2004 11:09:03 PM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

Actually, certain Linksys systems have MAC address filters so WEP is
unnecessary for keeping unauthorized users out. However, the data can still
be watched and recorded, so WEP is a good idea.



"Neo Anderson" wrote:

> At the initial time he was not. We have him all locked down now.
>
> --
>
> "Lance" <lltbhill@link_earth.net> wrote in message
> news:uLa2lbppEHA.692@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > Does it do WEP?
> >
> > Lance
> > *****
> >
> > Steve Parry [MVP] thought carefully and wrote on 9/29/2004 1:50 AM:
> >> In news:o bay1DepEHA.2340@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl,
> >> Lance <lltbhill@link_earth.net> fumbled, fiddled and fingered:
> >>
> >>>400 ft! What are you (or your neighbor) using? I have problems
> >>>getting a signal to my son's room 50 ft away.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Neos neighbour
> >>
> >> http://tinyurl.com/4hozd
> >>
> >> hope that helps ;o)
> >>
>
>
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
October 4, 2004 7:29:10 PM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

"Obi-Wan Kenobi" <ObiWanKenobi@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6B758318-6FD6-418C-AD27-B2CF3C75439F@microsoft.com...
> Actually, certain Linksys systems have MAC address filters so WEP is
> unnecessary for keeping unauthorized users out. However, the data can
still
> be watched and recorded, so WEP is a good idea.
>
>
>
Not to mention that MAC address filtering can be tricked by spoofing the MAC
address if somebody knows how. WEP adds another layer of hassle for the
undesirable data stealer to get over. WPA would be even better. None of it
foolproff sadly yet but both or either (though I'd go with both but I use
WPA instead of WEP) will deter the casual unauthorised accesser.

Braces and a belt is sometimes a good thing. :-)


Rachael
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
October 4, 2004 9:15:27 PM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

Is WPA any more reliable? I've had real problems with my SP2 system dropping
the connection, and then re-connecting...

Obi-Wan Kenobi

"Rachael the Wiccan Rat" wrote:

>
> "Obi-Wan Kenobi" <ObiWanKenobi@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:6B758318-6FD6-418C-AD27-B2CF3C75439F@microsoft.com...
> > Actually, certain Linksys systems have MAC address filters so WEP is
> > unnecessary for keeping unauthorized users out. However, the data can
> still
> > be watched and recorded, so WEP is a good idea.
> >
> >
> >
> Not to mention that MAC address filtering can be tricked by spoofing the MAC
> address if somebody knows how. WEP adds another layer of hassle for the
> undesirable data stealer to get over. WPA would be even better. None of it
> foolproff sadly yet but both or either (though I'd go with both but I use
> WPA instead of WEP) will deter the casual unauthorised accesser.
>
> Braces and a belt is sometimes a good thing. :-)
>
>
> Rachael
>
>
>
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
October 5, 2004 7:33:34 AM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

"Obi-Wan Kenobi" <ObiWanKenobi@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:06C92F3C-5BED-408D-BF62-D3B41078B410@microsoft.com...
> Is WPA any more reliable? I've had real problems with my SP2 system
dropping
> the connection, and then re-connecting...
>

I've heard fiddling with the RTS threshold and the fragment threshold can
help in unstable connections with WPA and WEP (though particular with WPA so
I understand it) but I've never had the problem myself so I couldn't vouch
one way or another. Of course this does assume that you can get to your
wireless hardware's configs for those values.
A quick google with rts and threshold and wireless as your keywords would
turn up more about it I imagine. I did read a good page on it not so long
back but I'm beggared if I can find it in my history, sorry.


Rachael
!