How did he do it?

Discussion in 'Wireless Networking' started by =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=, Oct 16, 2005.

  1. my neighbour informed me last night that he is able to view documents on my
    laptop and pc. he can see music lists for example.
    on a wireless network in the house and i presume this is how hes got in but
    how did he do it?
    can i see his files as well??
    help please!
     
    =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=, Oct 16, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=

    Frankster Guest

    > my neighbour informed me last night that he is able to view documents on
    > my
    > laptop and pc. he can see music lists for example.
    > on a wireless network in the house and i presume this is how hes got in
    > but
    > how did he do it?
    > can i see his files as well??
    > help please!


    Did you give him a username and password to access your system? You do have
    a username and password assigned, right?

    -Frank
     
    Frankster, Oct 16, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. no i didnt give him a username or password. i wouldnt know if there is one
    set up.didnt set the system up

    "Frankster" wrote:

    > > my neighbour informed me last night that he is able to view documents on
    > > my
    > > laptop and pc. he can see music lists for example.
    > > on a wireless network in the house and i presume this is how hes got in
    > > but
    > > how did he do it?
    > > can i see his files as well??
    > > help please!

    >
    > Did you give him a username and password to access your system? You do have
    > a username and password assigned, right?
    >
    > -Frank
    >
    >
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=, Oct 16, 2005
    #3
  4. =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=

    Frankster Guest


    > no i didnt give him a username or password. i wouldnt know
    > if there is one set up.didnt set the system up


    Well, there you have it. Why not set one up?

    -Frank
     
    Frankster, Oct 16, 2005
    #4
  5. =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=

    Malke Guest

    Frankster wrote:

    >
    >
    >> no i didnt give him a username or password. i wouldnt know
    >> if there is one set up.didnt set the system up

    >
    > Well, there you have it. Why not set one up?
    >
    > -Frank


    Here are some links to help the OP set up basic wireless security:

    Wireless - Basic Security - http://www.ezlan.net/Wireless_Security.html
    MVP Barb Bowman on wireless security - http://tinyurl.com/56fc5

    To the OP: If you are uncomfortable working with your computer and
    network, have a professional set you up properly (obviously not the
    person who did it the first time and left you unencrypted). However,
    you need to make an effort to understand what the pro has done so you
    know about your own security. It is not difficult.

    Malke
    --
    MS-MVP Windows User/Shell
    Elephant Boy Computers
    www.elephantboycomputers.com
    "Don't Panic"
     
    Malke, Oct 16, 2005
    #5
  6. On your wireless network you have to make sure that your network is setup as
    a "secured network", either using WEP/WAP password encryption. If your
    network isn't setup as a "secured network" then your network is "unsecured"
    which is scary, this will allow any and all unwanted users to use you network
    and even allow them to view your personal files on your workstation.
    --
    Sherman Wilkins


    "lynz" wrote:

    > my neighbour informed me last night that he is able to view documents on my
    > laptop and pc. he can see music lists for example.
    > on a wireless network in the house and i presume this is how hes got in but
    > how did he do it?
    > can i see his files as well??
    > help please!
     
    =?Utf-8?B?U2hlcm1hbiBXLg==?=, Oct 16, 2005
    #6
  7. =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=

    ComPCs Guest

    In article <>,
    says...

    > On your wireless network you have to make sure that your network is setup as
    > a "secured network", either using WEP/WAP password encryption. If your
    > network isn't setup as a "secured network" then your network is "unsecured"
    > which is scary, this will allow any and all unwanted users to use you network
    > and even allow them to view your personal files on your workstation.


    Is it not possible to have an unsecured network (in respect of WEP) but
    to 'secure' it by insisting that only certain MAC addresses can access
    it?
     
    ComPCs, Oct 16, 2005
    #7
  8. =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=

    McSpreader Guest

    ComPCs <> wrote in
    news::

    > In article <>,
    > says...
    >
    >> On your wireless network you have to make sure that your
    >> network is setup as a "secured network", either using WEP/WAP
    >> password encryption. If your network isn't setup as a "secured
    >> network" then your network is "unsecured" which is scary, this
    >> will allow any and all unwanted users to use you network and
    >> even allow them to view your personal files on your
    >> workstation.

    >
    > Is it not possible to have an unsecured network (in respect of
    > WEP) but to 'secure' it by insisting that only certain MAC
    > addresses can access it?
    >


    MAC filtering will deter casual intrusion but spoofing MAC addresses
    is not difficult.
     
    McSpreader, Oct 16, 2005
    #8
  9. =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=

    Jack Guest

    Hi
    How he did it is less relevant than configuring the system so that your
    wireless would not be compromised.
    Wireless Security - http://www.ezlan.net/Wireless_Security.html
    WEP, WPA, and WPA2 - http://www.ezlan.net/wpa_wep.html
    Jack (MVP-Networking).

    "lynz" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > my neighbour informed me last night that he is able to view documents on
    > my
    > laptop and pc. he can see music lists for example.
    > on a wireless network in the house and i presume this is how hes got in
    > but
    > how did he do it?
    > can i see his files as well??
    > help please!
     
    Jack, Oct 16, 2005
    #9
  10. "lynz" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > my neighbour informed me last night that he is able to view documents on
    > my
    > laptop and pc. he can see music lists for example.
    > on a wireless network in the house and i presume this is how hes got in
    > but
    > how did he do it?
    > can i see his files as well??
    > help please!


    You obviously have no encryption on your wi-fi and neighbour is viewing
    shared docs and music.

    Turn encryption on and keep him out.
     
    Diamontina Cocktail, Oct 17, 2005
    #10
  11. =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=

    ANONYMOUS Guest

    It looks like your system has File and Printer sharing on. If he can
    see your music files then this is it. These files are stored in
    SHAREDOCS folder. I don't think he can see the entire C drive unless
    the entire system is open to sharing!!!

    Also, you need to encrypt your wireless. First, make sure your SSID is
    not broadcast. Second change the SSID to non default. Third, assign a
    encryption key generated randomly by Microsoft Wizard.

    You only need basic precaution to safeguard your system.

    HTH


    lynz wrote:
    >
    > my neighbour informed me last night that he is able to view documents on my
    > laptop and pc. he can see music lists for example.
    > on a wireless network in the house and i presume this is how hes got in but
    > how did he do it?
    > can i see his files as well??
    > help please!
     
    ANONYMOUS, Oct 17, 2005
    #11
  12. =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=

    N. Miller Guest

    On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 22:34:15 +0100, ComPCs wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > says...


    >> On your wireless network you have to make sure that your network is setup as
    >> a "secured network", either using WEP/WAP password encryption. If your
    >> network isn't setup as a "secured network" then your network is "unsecured"
    >> which is scary, this will allow any and all unwanted users to use you network
    >> and even allow them to view your personal files on your workstation.


    > Is it not possible to have an unsecured network (in respect of WEP) but
    > to 'secure' it by insisting that only certain MAC addresses can access
    > it?


    About as secure as leaving the key to the house under the doormat and
    telling a few trusted friends where it is.

    --
    Norman
    ~Win dain a lotica, En vai tu ri, Si lo ta
    ~Fin dein a loluca, En dragu a sei lain
    ~Vi fa-ru les shutai am, En riga-lint
     
    N. Miller, Oct 17, 2005
    #12
  13. =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=

    N. Miller Guest

    On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 03:41:21 +0100, ANONYMOUS wrote:

    > ...you need to encrypt your wireless. First, make sure your SSID is
    > not broadcast. Second change the SSID to non default.


    This advice will do nothing to secure the network.

    > Third, assign a encryption key generated randomly by Microsoft Wizard.


    This is better. Use WPA with AES, or WPA2, if available. WPA with TKIP is
    acceptable. If you can only use WEP because of equipment compatibility, it
    is time to replace the WEP-only equipment.

    --
    Norman
    ~Win dain a lotica, En vai tu ri, Si lo ta
    ~Fin dein a loluca, En dragu a sei lain
    ~Vi fa-ru les shutai am, En riga-lint
     
    N. Miller, Oct 17, 2005
    #13
  14. =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=

    ComPCs Guest

    In article <>,
    says...

    > About as secure as leaving the key to the house under the doormat and
    > telling a few trusted friends where it is.


    So it can be done, albeit less 'secure', as I suggested.
     
    ComPCs, Oct 17, 2005
    #14
  15. =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=

    ComPCs Guest

    In article <Xns96F1E80947701McP@62.253.170.163>,
    says...

    > MAC filtering will deter casual intrusion but spoofing MAC addresses
    > is not difficult.


    I didn't say it was, but it will be enough to deter most, and
    subsequently, just because the wi-fi shows as insecure, doesn't mean it
    is /entirely/ so, as someone else has suggested.
     
    ComPCs, Oct 17, 2005
    #15
  16. =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=

    N. Miller Guest

    On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:13:43 +0100, ComPCs wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > says...
    >
    >> About as secure as leaving the key to the house under the doormat and
    >> telling a few trusted friends where it is.

    >
    > So it can be done, albeit less 'secure', as I suggested.


    There is no such thing as "less" secure. Either you are secure, or you are
    not secure. Leaving a key to the front door is not "less" secure, it is
    "not" secure.

    MAC address association is "not" secure; neither is disabling SSID
    broadcast. I do use MAC address association; I don't use it for security. I
    have a wired LAN, so my neighbors can't eavesdrop anyway. I have a MAC
    address reservation table for the DHCP server so it will hand out the same
    IP address to the same computer; reserving that IP address only for that
    computer MAC address. That makes it easier to set up port forwarding for
    the mail server.

    --
    Norman
    ~Win dain a lotica, En vai tu ri, Si lo ta
    ~Fin dein a loluca, En dragu a sei lain
    ~Vi fa-ru les shutai am, En riga-lint
     
    N. Miller, Oct 17, 2005
    #16
  17. =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=

    Frankster Guest

    > There is no such thing as "less" secure. Either you are secure, or you are
    > not secure.


    You are 100 percent wrong on this. There are varying degrees of security
    dependant upon your requirements (such as value of data, monetary risk if
    compromised, public sentiment risk if compromised, time to
    reconstruct/rebuild if compromised, etc) and cost. Period. Secuity cannot
    be simplified into a yes it is or not it's not scenario.

    -Frank
     
    Frankster, Oct 17, 2005
    #17
  18. =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=

    ComPCs Guest

    In article <1oot041lkykp0$>,
    says...
    > On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:13:43 +0100, ComPCs wrote:



    > There is no such thing as "less" secure. Either you are secure, or you are
    > not secure. Leaving a key to the front door is not "less" secure, it is
    > "not" secure.


    So WEP isn't secure, whereas WPA is, based on what you are saying?

    MAC addressing prevents access, unless spoofed. Thus it is a layer of
    security, albeit a very, very minor one IMO. It is the equivalent to
    leaving your key with a few trusted people. It's only when one of them
    decides to use it that it becomes less secure - that is unless you have
    also installed an intruder alarm for which they do not know the access
    code (WEP/WPA)

    Based on what you have said, even if I don't leave my key out, and take
    it with me, if someone smashes my window to get in, I'm less secure
    because I have Windows (erm, no pun intended)
     
    ComPCs, Oct 17, 2005
    #18
  19. "ComPCs" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <1oot041lkykp0$>,
    > says...
    >> On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:13:43 +0100, ComPCs wrote:

    >
    >
    >> There is no such thing as "less" secure. Either you are secure, or you
    >> are
    >> not secure. Leaving a key to the front door is not "less" secure, it is
    >> "not" secure.

    >
    > So WEP isn't secure, whereas WPA is, based on what you are saying?
    >


    I didnt read him saying that. You can see a totally unsecured network and
    then go put WEP on it and say it being open is less secure than WEP but then
    you can put WPA on it and say WEP is less secure. It's semantics (as opposed
    to Nortons) but it is true anyway.

    > MAC addressing prevents access, unless spoofed. Thus it is a layer of
    > security, albeit a very, very minor one IMO. It is the equivalent to
    > leaving your key with a few trusted people. It's only when one of them
    > decides to use it that it becomes less secure - that is unless you have
    > also installed an intruder alarm for which they do not know the access
    > code (WEP/WPA)
    >
    > Based on what you have said, even if I don't leave my key out, and take
    > it with me, if someone smashes my window to get in, I'm less secure
    > because I have Windows (erm, no pun intended)


    That is also possible. I have windows on the house but roll down lockable
    metal shutters (same colour as the house) which protect me from intruders so
    I am more secure than my neighbours who don't have anything on their
    windows. I used to live in the worst burglary area in Australia, once. I put
    bars and shutters on the house and protected it. The next door neighbour had
    all sorts of things on the doors and nothing but a window lock on the
    windows. When robbed, she claimed and got nothing as it "was less secure
    than it should be". In a similar vein, if you use WEP, it may be OK if you
    live in a rural area as I now do and doesn't have hackers who know a thing
    but know how to access an open wi-fi. You may use only WEP just to keep
    unwanted people from easily getting access. It isn't an entire answer but it
    also occurred to me that if you have the best security ON in an area that
    doesn't really have much going on, you are also telling REAL hackers "Hey
    come look at me! I have something to hide!".

    Disagree if you like but my idea with wi-fi security and how I implement it
    depends entirely on the company or the person and where they are situated.
    Air Force based stuff I put the best in for but let's face it - if you
    frighten a customer enough in an area that doesn't really have any hackers,
    you are more likely to miss the sale. Just do what is required because the
    upshot is that if the area starts to rise for hackers, you can get another
    appointment in order to beef up security because it is THEN needed and the
    customer knows it. That raises the question from them "Why didn't you do
    this before?" to a lot of people and my answer is that it wasn't needed
    before and DOES slow networking down. When not needed why slow things down?
     
    Diamontina Cocktail, Oct 17, 2005
    #19
  20. =?Utf-8?B?bHlueg==?=

    ComPCs Guest

    In article <>,
    says...

    [...]

    > I didnt read him saying that.


    I did ...

    "Either you are secure, or you are not secure"

    I think he is wrong as you can have varying levels of security.

    You have shutters, I have glass. I am less secure than you, but I do
    have a level of security. If I had no glass (taking it to the ridiculous
    extreme) but an intruder alarm, I would be even less secure, but would
    still have a layer of security.
     
    ComPCs, Oct 18, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    693
    Silverstrand
    Oct 12, 2005
  2. The Celtic Warrior

    Did today's Windows updates break wireless??

    The Celtic Warrior, Jul 14, 2004, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,238
    Guest
    Jul 15, 2004
  3. =?Utf-8?B?TGlzYSBG?=

    Did my network disturb my wireless internet?

    =?Utf-8?B?TGlzYSBG?=, Aug 31, 2004, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    543
    =?Utf-8?B?TGlzYSBG?=
    Aug 31, 2004
  4. optimus
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    725
    Phillip Remaker
    Dec 31, 2003
  5. The Maitch
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    692
    The Maitch
    Apr 26, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page