Hams Report 85-mile 802.11b File Transfers @ Oregon

[f***@pacbell.net]

Those of you inclined towards worrying about eavesdroppers will find the
following interesting ... QST Magazine (or was it NASA Tech Briefs?)
recently reported that two people successfully achieved connectivity and
exchanged files across a span of 85 miles, using COTS technology and
antennas optimized for operation in the 2.4 gHz frequency.

People operating 802.11b networks in corporate environments, take note -
your networks can probably be monitored from anywhere within a few
[dozen?] miles of the antenna, depending upon obstructions, and perhaps
from over the horizon, as well.

Regards,

-- richard

[v***@michvhf.com]

Post by f***@pacbell.net
Those of you inclined towards worrying about eavesdroppers will find the
following interesting ... QST Magazine (or was it NASA Tech Briefs?)
recently reported that two people successfully achieved connectivity and
exchanged files across a span of 85 miles, using COTS technology and
antennas optimized for operation in the 2.4 gHz frequency.
People operating 802.11b networks in corporate environments, take note -
your networks can probably be monitored from anywhere within a few
[dozen?] miles of the antenna, depending upon obstructions, and perhaps
from over the horizon, as well.

There are guys on the wireless equipment list that are getting 60+ miles
with off the shelf components. Not just swapping a few files, these are
24/7/365 links. The timing problems are overcome with the software
they're using (StarOS, also off the shelf).

Vince.

[s***@igc.org]

I would assume the hams used directional antennas on both ends, and
carefully pointed the antennas at each other.

So, this may have little relevance to monitoring people's
mostly-omnidirectional wireless LANs. Well, maybe you could so some
math to make the ham's numbers scale, but I would guess there are
more direct methods to measure/compute risk.

-scott

Post by f***@pacbell.net
Those of you inclined towards worrying about eavesdroppers will find the
following interesting ... QST Magazine (or was it NASA Tech Briefs?)
recently reported that two people successfully achieved connectivity and
exchanged files across a span of 85 miles, using COTS technology and
antennas optimized for operation in the 2.4 gHz frequency.
People operating 802.11b networks in corporate environments, take note -
your networks can probably be monitored from anywhere within a few
[dozen?] miles of the antenna, depending upon obstructions, and perhaps
from over the horizon, as well.
Regards,
-- richard

[w***@freebie.xs4all.nl]

On Wed, Apr 14, 2004 at 01:05:04PM -0700, Scott Weikart wrote:


Well, I recently tried an old 25" satellite dish and a biquad feeder
and we easily 'saw' APs at 3-4 miles away. Without trying anything fancy.
You need line of sight to the AP in most cases. Hills help.

What counts that Mr Evil Eavesdropper can get listening access to your
AP well away from your location.

W/

Post by s***@igc.org
I would assume the hams used directional antennas on both ends, and
carefully pointed the antennas at each other.
So, this may have little relevance to monitoring people's
mostly-omnidirectional wireless LANs. Well, maybe you could so some
math to make the ham's numbers scale, but I would guess there are
more direct methods to measure/compute risk.
-scott

Post by f***@pacbell.net
Those of you inclined towards worrying about eavesdroppers will find the
following interesting ... QST Magazine (or was it NASA Tech Briefs?)
recently reported that two people successfully achieved connectivity and
exchanged files across a span of 85 miles, using COTS technology and
antennas optimized for operation in the 2.4 gHz frequency.
People operating 802.11b networks in corporate environments, take note -
your networks can probably be monitored from anywhere within a few
[dozen?] miles of the antenna, depending upon obstructions, and perhaps
from over the horizon, as well.
Regards,
-- richard

_______________________________________________
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-mobile

---end of quoted text---

[r***@psg.com]

wep insecurity has been widely known for years and the ieee
did squat. toolkits for cracking have been out for years.
anyone who uses a broadcast medium without
o searching for discussion of vulnerabilities and
o taking measures (real crypto) to protect against them
is pretty <omitted>.

randy

[i***@bsdimp.com]

In message: <***@sandino.dnsalias.org>
Scott Weikart <***@igc.org> writes:
: I would assume the hams used directional antennas on both ends, and
: carefully pointed the antennas at each other.
:
: So, this may have little relevance to monitoring people's
: mostly-omnidirectional wireless LANs. Well, maybe you could so some
: math to make the ham's numbers scale, but I would guess there are
: more direct methods to measure/compute risk.

Well, if I put a 30dBm dish on my end, then you still have a problem.

I had a 24dBm dish that I played around with from the water tower near
my house. I saw like 300 different networks... Not all of them well,
but if I really wanted to eaves drop on any of them, I could do so...
Some of them were confirmed to be a few couple miles away.

Warner

[s***@igc.org]

Put another way, the area equals pi times the radius, squared ... so the
number of people who have the theoretical opportunity to passively crack
your wireless network increases, dramatically, with each increment of
distance from the center.

True.

You can pack an awful lot of people into a circle with a radius of 85 miles
... that's 170 miles, diametrically.

Probably irrelevant.

We're still presuming that 85 miles only worked because two
directional antennas were aimed at each other.

When you're trying to snoop a mostly-omnidirectional antenna, your
relevant radius is much smaller.

[NOTE: I still wouldn't advocate that anyone rely on WEP, and I'm
not sure LEAP can be relied on either; and WPA needs good keys.]

-scott

Post by w***@freebie.xs4all.nl
Well, I recently tried an old 25" satellite dish and a biquad feeder
and we easily 'saw' APs at 3-4 miles away. Without trying anything fancy.
You need line of sight to the AP in most cases. Hills help.

Post by s***@igc.org
I would assume the hams used directional antennas on both ends, and
carefully pointed the antennas at each other.
So, this may have little relevance to monitoring people's
mostly-omnidirectional wireless LANs. Well, maybe you could so some
math to make the ham's numbers scale, but I would guess there are
more direct methods to measure/compute risk.
-scott

[r***@speakeasy.net]

The design I used to implement an 802.11g network at my company is that =
it
the access points connect to a DMZ zone. The users who want to use it
access the DMZ and then using a VPN client may gain access to the =
corporate
network. The VPN access is RAS based off the AD. Using AD policies, I =
can
limit (or not) users to the areas they need to access. This is a pain to =
the
casual consultant but the standard installation of our laptops include =
the
VPN client.

-Ron

-----Original Message-----
childers / kg6hac
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:22 AM

s optimized for operation in the 2.4 gHz frequency.

=20
People operating 802.11b networks in corporate environments,=20
take note -=20
your networks can probably be monitored from anywhere within a few=20
[dozen?] miles of the antenna, depending upon obstructions,=20
and perhaps=20
from over the horizon, as well.
=20
Regards,
=20
-- richard
=20

--=20
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 7.0.230 / Virus Database: 262.8.0 - Release Date: 4/9/2004
=20