[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OT: Wireless questions



Thanks for you answers Alvin and Others.

Some more comments below.

On Sun, Aug 07, 2005 at 06:13:23PM -0700, Alvin Oga wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sat, 6 Aug 2005, David Purton wrote:
> 

[SNIP]

> > At present it looks like this:
> > 
> >       +--------+
> >       | switch |-- wired private network
> >       +--------+
> >            |
> >          eth0
> >            |
> >   +-----------------+
> >   | debian linux    |          +------------+
> >   | server/firewall |-- eth1 --| adsl modem |-- internet
> >   | gateway/router  |          +------------+
> >   +-----------------+
>

[SNIP]

> it'd be better to add a hub/switch between the dsl router and
> your debian box and plug your wifi card into a 2nd 386-based PC
> or buy a linksys wt54g with a modified firmware

Except that it isn't a dsl router - just a modem. The debian box does
all the firewalling and routing.

> 
> > Then I could only allow
> > traffic through to/from the wired network through a VPN (probably using
> > openVPN, since I have used this before and it's easy enough to
> > configure).
> 
> wireless traffic over vpn is good and bad
> 
> good.. that they cannot see its content in clear text, but 
> since its vpn, they have access anyway unless you close off the 
> vpn to allow just one mac address
> 	- good, always run wifi devices over ssh or vpn .. BUT ..
> 
> anything you can do .. they can do tooo ..  even more so if you don't
> use any passwd or pass phrase, so it'd be pointless
> 	- passwdless login is a free use-any-time key to the cracker
> 

Huh? Why do they have access anyway? I thought the point of using a VPN
was so that you need a key + passphrase to log onto the VPN... And how
is that different to going through a sniffed wired network?

Without going through the VPN you can't get through the firewall either
way.

[SNIP]
> 
> they are the van outside the house or around the corner or behind the
> house or at starbucks or the high powered wifi antenna on the mountain top
> 
> > What are the disadvantages of doing it this way?
> 
> what is important to you would decide which is better ...
> 	- time
> 	- ease to setup
> 	- data security
> 	- getting fired from the company because a cracker got
> 	into the corp lan from your wifi home network
> 
> endless tons of disadvantages no matter which way you do it
> 
> i opt for data and login security first ... time and costs is secondary
> or non-issue ... data cannot be replaced/bought unless your backup
> scheme is self checking and self correcting and secure
> 
> > And what hardware would you recommend to get this setup to play nicely
> > with linux?
> 
> see above
> 
> any pci card will work
> 
> -- if you want your own AP .. you will have to pick a pci card that
>    is supported by a wifi driver
> 
> 	linux-wireless.org/Drivers
> 
> -- if you want your own AP with WPA... you will have to pick
>    a pci card that is supported by hostap or madwifi
> 
> -- if you buy off-the-shelf...
> 	- some netgear switches will not talk to linksys clients
> 	and vice versa ( s/netgear/any-commercial-product/g )

mmm ok, So I don't need a hardware AP connected to an ethernet Card?
Just so long as the PCI card is supported bu the linux wireless drivers?

> 
> > I guess the other option is getting a wireless router which I could
> > attach to my switch.
>  
> always put insecure wifi OUTSIDE the firewall
> 

Fair enough.

> bad idea to put wifi inside ( your switch )
> 
> > How does this compare to using just an access point? Is it better?
> 
> linux based AP is better ...
> 
> - you can control what it does
> - there is no default passwds that you didnt change
> - you can use wpa, wep is broken and worthless for preventing prying eyes

This was my initial thought.

> 
> c ya
> alvin
> 

-- 
David Purton
dcpurton@chariot.net.au
 
For the eyes of the LORD range throughout the earth to
strengthen those whose hearts are fully committed to him.
                                 2 Chronicles 16:9a

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: