Router Question

[uka100]

When I get my new computer I will need a router and it will need to be wireless will this work?

http://www.ebuyer.com/customer/products/index.html?action=c2hvd19wcm9kdWN0X292ZXJ2aWV3...duct_uid=51436

I have a 600kps cable connection, I have a couple of questions, how does it work? and how much more vulnerable to hackers am I?

[sitlet]

im assuming you already have a computer and its connected to your cable connection? if thats the case, just take the cable thats going from the modem to your computer, and plug it in your new computer. you only need a router if you are going to have more than one computer hooked up to the internet. and unless you are going to have two computers far away from each other, you dont need wireless. if they are going to be far apart, and you dont want to run wires through the house, then you could get wireless. as for hackers, i currently have a wireless router hooked up to my dsl connection, and it has a firewall built in. i havent had any problems with hackers. i beleive most if not all routers have firewalls built in anyway

[edsmith77]

uka100,
sitlet has good advice. However, if your ISP does static IP assignments then there is a vulnerability. Your router does (or it should) act as a DHCP and will assign dynamic IPs to your home computers but based on a predefined base set of IPs. This will help for access control and your OS (if w2k or xp) will provide more if needed.
If your ISP assigns dynamic IPs as mine does then there is still a chance but very slim. You will more likely be attacked from within via email and the like versus a direct attack from the outside.
Linksys provides good stuff, I happen to prefer NetGear (which by the way I obtained while I was stationed in the UK, Woking).

I would not lose a lot of sleep worring about it. Just exercise good daily IT security practice.

[bottle-necked]

I seen something about wireless Lan on TechTV a while back and they were talking about how easy it was to break in and gain internet access. They run a scanner while driving around to locate a wireless lan then break the code in a few minutes and their in. Here's an article that explains some of what I just said. Look under the heading Wireless Networking.

Here is another page you might find interesting also.

Good luck

[stiltman]

I seen something about wireless Lan on TechTV a while back and they were talking about how easy it was to break in and gain internet access. They run a scanner while driving around to locate a wireless lan then break the code in a few minutes and their in. Here's an article that explains some of what I just said. Look under the heading Wireless Networking.

Here is another page you might find interesting also.

Good luck

Yeah....I post all my warez through my neighbor's wireless LAN
j/k

[Roundabout]

The best idea is not to use the wireless unless you absolutely have to have it. It isn't very secure, even using WEP (wired equivalent privacy) as this can be broken easily by any determined hacker (or your neighbors kid, bored with nothing better to do). No matter what is done for improvement in the encryption, the bottom line is that it will never be as secure as wired LAN's.

Think about it this way, you probably realize that cordless phones are not as secure as a corded one... if you have anything of a personal nature that you don't want heard, don't use a cordless phone. Although some use a form of encryption to help keep your conversation private, many do not even have the slightest form of encryption. The DSS (digital spread spectrum) phones are best of what's out there now, but even they can be compromised. Once you broadcast that signal into the air, no way of knowing who might be receiving it and for what purposes. If it stays on a wire, while not 100% secure, it's miles ahead of anything that is broadcast out to the world.

[bottle-necked]

Yeah....I post all my warez through my neighbor's wireless LAN
j/k

whats the address???? :P

[Hardcoreruss]

Linksys bite. Go with this combo

Netgear DG834G and a WG311. Sodd WEP its crap and slows the connection down. You can restrict access by MAC address.

[rallynavvie]

I picked up a D-Link 624 several months ago and the firmware upgrades have made it a formidable device. Not only can it transfer at 108 Mbps (which I have tested), it also has the latest in wireless security: WPA, or Wi-Fi Protected Access. Initially it was supposed to be implemented in 11i wireless protocol but many 11g devices are carrying it now. WPA has several advantages over WEP such as dynamic key allocation and it can filter tampered or piggy-back signals out of your network. Another thing to do is disable SSID broadcasting. You'll have to manually enter this data but at least you will discourage the WLAN sniffers. Also familiarize yourself with your router's built-in firewall and features, there are usually a lot of great utilities built in. If you're really paranoid get yourself a cheap P2/P3 box and load your favorite Linux kernel on it and use that as part of your security set-up. I have one connected to a little 13" monitor that I use to monitor network traffic when I'm feeling bored.

As for which one to get I initially had wanted a LinkSys, but the price on my D-Link was too good to pass up. After having used it for several months I'd recommend it to anyone wanting to set up a home WLAN. It has worked with the Airport card in an iBook, the D-Link PCI antenna in my remote PC, and a LinkSys card in a laptop. I've tested the 108 Mbps mode between desktops and I can game on it just like I was on a LAN. I also get pretty great signal reception from my router, or at least much better than I thought I'd get.

[Roundabout]

There are some weaknesses to WPA also, especially since the rely on human input to enter a passphrase, and many may be vulnerable to dictionary attacks. There is a solution to this, using longer passphrases and random characters. Read some more about this here:
http://wifinetnews.com/archives/002453.html

WPA is a step up from WEP, no doubt. WEP is very weak for encryption, at least WPA is more secure. If the mfgrs improve it a little by making it idiot-proof (denying use of short passphrase, etc.) and auto-generation of random keys, then it will be pretty secure. But no wireless network can ever be as secure as a wired net, that's the nature of the beast.

[rallynavvie]

Short passwords are always bad whether it's for your wireless network or your email account. Even more so if it's just a word. The problem with WEP was its keys were hex, meaning 16 characters to use. That would greatly cut down on the crack string used.

Another thing to consider. Some wireless networking hardware has a feature where you can tell it how many times a MAC device number can attempt to log into the network before that device is blocked. You can also set it to cut out new connections for the day after several MAC devices have made failed attempts to connect. This would pretty much shut down the keygen hacks unless they happened to get the right string on the first few tries.

I was told the best method is a layered approach of many of the methods talked about in this thread. By using several different methods of encryption and altering your network password ever so often you shouldn't have to worry. Also one of the simplest ways to keep people off your network is to locate your router in the center of your home so one would need to get fairly close to access it. I mean if you saw some kids parked in your driveway with a laptop you'd kind of have an idea what was going on.