Hi,

Can someone highlight possible security implications for the following setup
/ conditions - and what perhaps needs to be tweaked to improve things,
should they need to be improved.

Background:- A friend moved to a new house and it has taken over two months,
(after a catalogue of errors by Orange (originally FreeServe then Wanadoo -
now Orange), to get his ISP service up and running. He has two teenage boys
with wifi notebooks who very quickly discovered that the neighbouring house
contained a wifi router that was unprotected / no WEP or WPA enabled in it.
Of course the boys were happy as could be that they have internet access -
while "Dad" was left blowing his top for two months because Orange took so
long to get him connected. Of interest, is that the neighbouring house
"unwittingly" supplying an internet feed to my friends' two boys, apparantly
is an "IT person," immemdiately alerting me to the possibility that this
free wifi feed could be a cunnning ploy to something more sinister !

Anyway, my friend has a Linksys WAG254G v2 (combined adsl
modem/router/wifi), connected to his Office PC with rj45/lan lead, I set a
strong WPA pre-shared key in it, and have restricted connection access to
the two MAC no's. matching his two sons laptops. So as far as my friends'
WAG354 v2 is concerned nobody else can connect to it.

What I'm unsure about, is the Windows services that are floating about in my
friends PC's - "Client for Microsoft Networks," etc. (which I think is not
enabled), and other Windows services where a PC can supply internet access
to a network etc.

In short, is there any way that the sons laptops, who can access two
wireless networks, (Dads' WPA protected wifi network and the neighbours'
unprotected wifi network), pose a security risk to "Dad's" office PC - via
Windows networking services - which - as you can tell - I'm not too
knowledgeable about ? !!! ?

BiiiiiiiG TIA :-)

regards, Richard

Hi
Technically these practices might pose a security Risk.
1. If a Network Bridge is set on one of the computers that are using few
networks, their would be a free flow of information between the two
Networks.
2. Depending on the IP scheme your friend's Network can be easily invaded
through File Sharing if a computer is connected to both Networks.
To minimize the risk each computer should have Software Firewall that blocks
local communication of IPs that are out of the range of the Local Network.
Otherwise their is a Moral and legal issue as well.
In many places, local laws might define "leeching" on some one else's
Wireless Network as illegal.
The boys can use these "Free" connections to get involved in Internet
connection that his very unhealthy to them.
Jack (MVP-Networking).

"RJK" wrote in message
news:%23DCpH04bHHA.588@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
>
> Can someone highlight possible security implications for the following
> setup / conditions - and what perhaps needs to be tweaked to improve
> things, should they need to be improved.
>
> Background:- A friend moved to a new house and it has taken over two
> months, (after a catalogue of errors by Orange (originally FreeServe then
> Wanadoo - now Orange), to get his ISP service up and running. He has two
> teenage boys with wifi notebooks who very quickly discovered that the
> neighbouring house contained a wifi router that was unprotected / no WEP
> or WPA enabled in it. Of course the boys were happy as could be that they
> have internet access - while "Dad" was left blowing his top for two
> months because Orange took so long to get him connected. Of interest, is
> that the neighbouring house "unwittingly" supplying an internet feed to my
> friends' two boys, apparantly is an "IT person," immemdiately alerting me
> to the possibility that this free wifi feed could be a cunnning ploy to
> something more sinister !
>
> Anyway, my friend has a Linksys WAG254G v2 (combined adsl
> modem/router/wifi), connected to his Office PC with rj45/lan lead, I set a
> strong WPA pre-shared key in it, and have restricted connection access to
> the two MAC no's. matching his two sons laptops. So as far as my
> friends' WAG354 v2 is concerned nobody else can connect to it.
>
> What I'm unsure about, is the Windows services that are floating about in
> my friends PC's - "Client for Microsoft Networks," etc. (which I think is
> not enabled), and other Windows services where a PC can supply internet
> access to a network etc.
>
> In short, is there any way that the sons laptops, who can access two
> wireless networks, (Dads' WPA protected wifi network and the neighbours'
> unprotected wifi network), pose a security risk to "Dad's" office PC - via
> Windows networking services - which - as you can tell - I'm not too
> knowledgeable about ? !!! ?
>
> BiiiiiiiG TIA :-)
>
> regards, Richard

Thanks Jack,
MUCH obliged, ...if I understand your deliberations correctly, the risk is
minimal ?
....I have emailed my friend, and instructed him to ensure that his sons'
cease to connect to the neighbours wireless netowrk.

best regards, Richard


"Jack (MVP-Networking)." wrote in message
news:ehWPRG9bHHA.4176@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> Technically these practices might pose a security Risk.
> 1. If a Network Bridge is set on one of the computers that are using few
> networks, their would be a free flow of information between the two
> Networks.
> 2. Depending on the IP scheme your friend's Network can be easily invaded
> through File Sharing if a computer is connected to both Networks.
> To minimize the risk each computer should have Software Firewall that
> blocks local communication of IPs that are out of the range of the Local
> Network.
> Otherwise their is a Moral and legal issue as well.
> In many places, local laws might define "leeching" on some one else's
> Wireless Network as illegal.
> The boys can use these "Free" connections to get involved in Internet
> connection that his very unhealthy to them.
> Jack (MVP-Networking).
>
> "RJK" wrote in message
> news:%23DCpH04bHHA.588@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>>
>> Can someone highlight possible security implications for the following
>> setup / conditions - and what perhaps needs to be tweaked to improve
>> things, should they need to be improved.
>>
>> Background:- A friend moved to a new house and it has taken over two
>> months, (after a catalogue of errors by Orange (originally FreeServe then
>> Wanadoo - now Orange), to get his ISP service up and running. He has two
>> teenage boys with wifi notebooks who very quickly discovered that the
>> neighbouring house contained a wifi router that was unprotected / no WEP
>> or WPA enabled in it. Of course the boys were happy as could be that they
>> have internet access - while "Dad" was left blowing his top for two
>> months because Orange took so long to get him connected. Of interest, is
>> that the neighbouring house "unwittingly" supplying an internet feed to
>> my friends' two boys, apparantly is an "IT person," immemdiately alerting
>> me to the possibility that this free wifi feed could be a cunnning ploy
>> to something more sinister !
>>
>> Anyway, my friend has a Linksys WAG254G v2 (combined adsl
>> modem/router/wifi), connected to his Office PC with rj45/lan lead, I set
>> a strong WPA pre-shared key in it, and have restricted connection access
>> to the two MAC no's. matching his two sons laptops. So as far as my
>> friends' WAG354 v2 is concerned nobody else can connect to it.
>>
>> What I'm unsure about, is the Windows services that are floating about in
>> my friends PC's - "Client for Microsoft Networks," etc. (which I think is
>> not enabled), and other Windows services where a PC can supply internet
>> access to a network etc.
>>
>> In short, is there any way that the sons laptops, who can access two
>> wireless networks, (Dads' WPA protected wifi network and the neighbours'
>> unprotected wifi network), pose a security risk to "Dad's" office PC -
>> via Windows networking services - which - as you can tell - I'm not too
>> knowledgeable about ? !!! ?
>>
>> BiiiiiiiG TIA :-)
>>
>> regards, Richard
>
>

Hi
The risk is minimal if the settings take into consideration a secondary
Network active together with the primary Network.
Otherwise, it is Risky.
Jack (MVP-Networking).

"RJK" wrote in message
news:evXpvs$bHHA.4716@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Jack,
> MUCH obliged, ...if I understand your deliberations correctly, the risk is
> minimal ?
> ...I have emailed my friend, and instructed him to ensure that his sons'
> cease to connect to the neighbours wireless netowrk.
>
> best regards, Richard
>
>
> "Jack (MVP-Networking)." wrote in message
> news:ehWPRG9bHHA.4176@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Hi
>> Technically these practices might pose a security Risk.
>> 1. If a Network Bridge is set on one of the computers that are using few
>> networks, their would be a free flow of information between the two
>> Networks.
>> 2. Depending on the IP scheme your friend's Network can be easily invaded
>> through File Sharing if a computer is connected to both Networks.
>> To minimize the risk each computer should have Software Firewall that
>> blocks local communication of IPs that are out of the range of the Local
>> Network.
>> Otherwise their is a Moral and legal issue as well.
>> In many places, local laws might define "leeching" on some one else's
>> Wireless Network as illegal.
>> The boys can use these "Free" connections to get involved in Internet
>> connection that his very unhealthy to them.
>> Jack (MVP-Networking).
>>
>> "RJK" wrote in message
>> news:%23DCpH04bHHA.588@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Can someone highlight possible security implications for the following
>>> setup / conditions - and what perhaps needs to be tweaked to improve
>>> things, should they need to be improved.
>>>
>>> Background:- A friend moved to a new house and it has taken over two
>>> months, (after a catalogue of errors by Orange (originally FreeServe
>>> then Wanadoo - now Orange), to get his ISP service up and running. He
>>> has two teenage boys with wifi notebooks who very quickly discovered
>>> that the neighbouring house contained a wifi router that was unprotected
>>> / no WEP or WPA enabled in it. Of course the boys were happy as could be
>>> that they have internet access - while "Dad" was left blowing his top
>>> for two months because Orange took so long to get him connected. Of
>>> interest, is that the neighbouring house "unwittingly" supplying an
>>> internet feed to my friends' two boys, apparantly is an "IT person,"
>>> immemdiately alerting me to the possibility that this free wifi feed
>>> could be a cunnning ploy to something more sinister !
>>>
>>> Anyway, my friend has a Linksys WAG254G v2 (combined adsl
>>> modem/router/wifi), connected to his Office PC with rj45/lan lead, I set
>>> a strong WPA pre-shared key in it, and have restricted connection access
>>> to the two MAC no's. matching his two sons laptops. So as far as my
>>> friends' WAG354 v2 is concerned nobody else can connect to it.
>>>
>>> What I'm unsure about, is the Windows services that are floating about
>>> in my friends PC's - "Client for Microsoft Networks," etc. (which I
>>> think is not enabled), and other Windows services where a PC can supply
>>> internet access to a network etc.
>>>
>>> In short, is there any way that the sons laptops, who can access two
>>> wireless networks, (Dads' WPA protected wifi network and the neighbours'
>>> unprotected wifi network), pose a security risk to "Dad's" office PC -
>>> via Windows networking services - which - as you can tell - I'm not too
>>> knowledgeable about ? !!! ?
>>>
>>> BiiiiiiiG TIA :-)
>>>
>>> regards, Richard
>>
>>
>

"RJK" wrote in message
news:%23DCpH04bHHA.588@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
>
> Can someone highlight possible security implications for the following
> setup / conditions - and what perhaps needs to be tweaked to improve
> things, should they need to be improved.
>
> Background:- A friend moved to a new house and it has taken over two
> months, (after a catalogue of errors by Orange (originally FreeServe then
> Wanadoo - now Orange), to get his ISP service up and running. He has two
> teenage boys with wifi notebooks who very quickly discovered that the
> neighbouring house contained a wifi router that was unprotected / no WEP
> or WPA enabled in it. Of course the boys were happy as could be that they
> have internet access - while "Dad" was left blowing his top for two
> months because Orange took so long to get him connected. Of interest, is
> that the neighbouring house "unwittingly" supplying an internet feed to my
> friends' two boys, apparantly is an "IT person," immemdiately alerting me
> to the possibility that this free wifi feed could be a cunnning ploy to
> something more sinister !

It's possible, but let's be clear:
At the moment the only 'sinister' thing I can see is two people stealing
connectivity from a 3rd party. Now that 3rd party might be extremely stupid
(leaving their wifi open) or they might be up to no good somehow but at this
precise moment in time the only people we know are acting "sinister" are
your friends children. Believe it or not, 'stealing' a wifi connection is an
offence in the UK.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/h...cs/6565079.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4721723.stm

--
Robert Moir
http://www.rhymeswithgeek.com

Interesting, and ..thanks Robert.

Fortunately "Dad" has now got his Broadband back (couple of weeks ago at
least), and has forbidden his kids to connect to next doors wireless router.
Interesting that it's illegal in the UK, this is obviously "big business /
ISP's" simply not liking the idea that people could get together and share
one connection and split the cost -i.e. rip-off UK !!

regards, Richard


"Robert Moir" wrote in message
news:OAr3CSegHHA.4552@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> "RJK" wrote in message
> news:%23DCpH04bHHA.588@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>>
>> Can someone highlight possible security implications for the following
>> setup / conditions - and what perhaps needs to be tweaked to improve
>> things, should they need to be improved.
>>
>> Background:- A friend moved to a new house and it has taken over two
>> months, (after a catalogue of errors by Orange (originally FreeServe then
>> Wanadoo - now Orange), to get his ISP service up and running. He has two
>> teenage boys with wifi notebooks who very quickly discovered that the
>> neighbouring house contained a wifi router that was unprotected / no WEP
>> or WPA enabled in it. Of course the boys were happy as could be that they
>> have internet access - while "Dad" was left blowing his top for two
>> months because Orange took so long to get him connected. Of interest, is
>> that the neighbouring house "unwittingly" supplying an internet feed to
>> my friends' two boys, apparantly is an "IT person," immemdiately alerting
>> me to the possibility that this free wifi feed could be a cunnning ploy
>> to something more sinister !
>
> It's possible, but let's be clear:
> At the moment the only 'sinister' thing I can see is two people stealing
> connectivity from a 3rd party. Now that 3rd party might be extremely
> stupid (leaving their wifi open) or they might be up to no good somehow
> but at this precise moment in time the only people we know are acting
> "sinister" are your friends children. Believe it or not, 'stealing' a wifi
> connection is an offence in the UK.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/h...cs/6565079.stm
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4721723.stm
>
> --
> Robert Moir
> http://www.rhymeswithgeek.com
>