full-disclosure - WiFi question

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: Colin.Scott at csplc.com (Colin.Scott@...lc.com)
Subject: WiFi question

Well after running around for 2 days attempting to find the source of the
wireless points, it stopped.

We think that someone was running FakeAP, perhaps by accident (playing
around at home then forgetting to switch off), all the peer-to-peer Access
Points were of the same name and all the MACs were not corrupted. We
narrowed the signal down to a specific desk, but there were no devices in
the area (and no power leads going into drawers anywhere)... can only
assume it was a PDA or something.

One of lifes mysteries.

Thanks for all the on and off-line responses very informative.

Colin.

             Ron DuFresne                                                  
             <dufresne@...tern                                             
             et.com>                                                    To 
             Sent by:                  Paul Schmehl <pauls@...allas.edu>   
             full-disclosure-a                                          cc 
             dmin@...ts.netsys         Ake Nordin <rootmoose@...ia.com>,   
             .com                      "Lachniet, Mark"                    
                                       <mlachniet@...uoianet.com>,         
                                       <full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com>  
             22/11/2004 22:51                                      Subject 
                                       RE: [Full-Disclosure] WiFi question 

>
> I'm still not convinced that, more than a few feet from a device, the
> interference would even be detectable.

Though two devices within 10 feet <both setup in the same room> of another
might well conflict with one  another, and might be what the original
poster on device contention was running into.

Thanks,

Ron DuFresne
--
"Sometimes you get the blues because your baby leaves you. Sometimes you
get'em
'cause she comes back." --B.B. King
        ***testing, only testing, and damn good at it too!***

OK, so you're a Ph.D.  Just don't touch anything.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

***********************************************************************************

This e-mail is confidential and may contain privileged information.  If you 
are not the addressee or if you have received the e-mail in error, it may
be unlawful for you to read, copy, distribute, disclose or otherwise use the information which it contains.  Under these circumstances, please notify us immediately by returning this mail to 'mailerror@...lc.com' and deleting this e-mail from your system.

Any views expressed by an individual within this e-mail do not necessarily reflect the views of Cadbury Schweppes Plc or its subsidiaries.  Cadbury Schweppes Plc will not be bound by any agreement entered into as a result of this email, unless its intention is clearly evidenced in the body of the email.  Whilst we have taken reasonable steps to ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from viruses, recipients are advised to subject this mail to their own virus checking, in keeping with good computing practice. Please
note that email received by Cadbury Schweppes Plc or its subsidiaries may be monitored in accordance with the prevailing law in the United Kingdom.

***********************************************************************************