6 replies to this topic

[mjwdr]

Hello all,
There is a workgroup with 20 PC and all are connected by a wireless router.I want to upgrade to a Domain. do you think I should use a switch instead of wireless router for connection between client and server because I am a little concern about network traffics and speed such as login traffic and ... ?????? can I use a wireless router as switch for such network???

can I limit internet connectivity with a ISA server. i want just a few user have access to internet during the working hours and after working hours I want internet be free to all user.
thanks

[kamtec1]

Hello all,
There is a workgroup with 20 PC and all are connected by a wireless router.I want to upgrade to a Domain. do you think I should use a switch instead of wireless router for connection between client and server because I am a little concern about network traffics and speed such as login traffic and ... ?????? can I use a wireless router as switch for such network???

can I limit internet connectivity with a ISA server. i want just a few user have access to internet during the working hours and after working hours I want internet be free to all user.
thanks

Hi ,

OK .

Lets see . If you use the wireless technology the risks are :

1) The data is not protected well.
2) Can be sniffed away .
3) Can be hacked away .
4) Traffic speed is not so speedy ( depends on a wifi and router and signal ) .
and etc i can write more things but its the red ones .

The way your PCs connected is very risky .

For the best choose is the switch .... less problems from security arena . Need to limit wifi .

Yes , You can limit the Internet with ISA server .

You can configure the Internet access in the GPO and ISA too . Depends how you wont to limit ,,, you can limit it too with GPO but less options to configure there

P.S. Its all depends witch firm is running and the priority of the security of the files and data. .


Good luck

[sirkozz]

• The data is not protected well.

??? WPA with a non-dictionary pass-phrase is realistically un-hackable

2) Can be sniffed away .
??? see above

3) Can be hacked away .
??? see above

4) Traffic speed is not so speedy ( depends on a wifi and router and signal ) .
and etc file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CSK%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_image002.pngi can write more things but its the red ones file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CSK%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_image003.png.

Any enterprise AP a/b/g can easily handle 20 STA’s; put a dual band n AP and what’s the issue???

[kamtec1]

• The data is not protected well.

??? WPA with a non-dictionary pass-phrase is realistically un-hackable

2) Can be sniffed away .
??? see above

3) Can be hacked away .
??? see above

4) Traffic speed is not so speedy ( depends on a wifi and router and signal ) .
and etc file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CSK%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_image002.pngi can write more things but its the red ones file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CSK%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_image003.png.

Any enterprise AP a/b/g can easily handle 20 STA’s; put a dual band n AP and what’s the issue???

1/2/3 ) ;D WPA can be hacked with good tools and not dict. words too . like i wrote depends what org . !!!!!!! depend what data !!!
Depends everything Never wifi in my Army . No wifi bands only other thing

4) not get it .

Like sirkozz say you can use :

Any enterprise AP a/b/g can easily handle 20 STA’s; put a dual band n AP and what’s the issue???

The N model more speedy .

But i with my word ;DDD depends what a org and data =)

[sirkozz]

The use of a 63 character non-dictionary pass-phrase for WPA is affectively un-hackable. I’m not saying that governments don’t have the horse-power to do it but your local basement dweller certainly doesn’t. It would take years to brute force the password which makes it effectively un-hackable; which is why those of us in the WLAN industry still see WPA as a “secure solution” but typically deploy WPA2 which at this date at least 100% secure. No wifi in the idf, sorry to hear that; army’s loss then; as like I’ve said wifi can be secure even with WPA; use of WPA2 with let’s say client/server certs and a user fob is you guessed it un-hackable and is typical of enterprise WLAN deployments.

[kamtec1]

The use of a 63 character non-dictionary pass-phrase for WPA is affectively un-hackable. I’m not saying that governments don’t have the horse-power to do it but your local basement dweller certainly doesn’t. It would take years to brute force the password which makes it effectively un-hackable; which is why those of us in the WLAN industry still see WPA as a “secure solution” but typically deploy WPA2 which at this date at least 100% secure. No wifi in the idf, sorry to hear that; army’s loss then; as like I’ve said wifi can be secure even with WPA; use of WPA2 with let’s say client/server certs and a user fob is you guessed it un-hackable and is typical of enterprise WLAN deployments.

63 characters would deficiently take years to crack to local basement .. and because of that i always say that it depends on every thing on specific data and organizations

WPA2 is the best now in the wifi area but i hear some rumors for changes come up next couple of years ...

We have some other things not wifi . sorry cant write it but it is not wifi and use them not soldiers but only a command line or operators and tech staff

With the certs and smart card its the best thing but no wifi signals ;D only some other frequency

[talent pk]

Packet Sniffing is much easier on Cabled LANS instead of WiFi. However you do compromise on Speed and Packet Collision is more likely to happen. But for now keep the necessary hardware that you have at your dispose.

Edited by talent pk, 18 June 2012 - 06:36 PM.