Searching \ for '[OT:] WIFI Warning' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=wifi+warning
Search entire site for: 'WIFI Warning'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT:] WIFI Warning'
2004\08\05@092954 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
With all this talk of (and activity about) WIFI: have you noticed a
conspicuous silence from the Feds about it? No complaints about
encryption, or interference with airplane radios, etc, or any other
smoke and fog one normally expects to hear from Big Brother?

It's because they welcome WIFI with open arms; they've cracked its
encryption big time, and its as secure as a trainwreck. A Fed's dream:
all that data, readable w/o a court order, all ya gotta do is just pluck
it out of the air.

Watch out guys. Assume that everything you design is readable. Just a
friendly warning.

--Bob

Robert B. wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> {Original Message removed}

2004\08\05@115005 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
Bob Axtell wrote:

> With all this talk of (and activity about) WIFI: have you noticed a
> conspicuous silence from the Feds about it? No complaints about
> encryption, or interference with airplane radios, etc, or any other
> smoke and fog one normally expects to hear from Big Brother?
>
> It's because they welcome WIFI with open arms; they've cracked its
> encryption big time, and its as secure as a trainwreck. A Fed's dream:
> all that data, readable w/o a court order, all ya gotta do is just pluck
> it out of the air.
>
> Watch out guys. Assume that everything you design is readable. Just a
> friendly warning.

There are a number of open-source packages that will unencrypt standard
WEP on a standard laptop.  Nothing surprising there, if you're paying
attention to what's going on.

There are proper ways to secure WiFi and other wireless connections.
Using the built in encryption is not one of them.

--
Nate Duehr, spam_OUTnateTakeThisOuTspamnatetech.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\08\05@142021 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
Nate Duehr wrote:

>
> There are a number of open-source packages that will unencrypt standard
> WEP on a standard laptop.  Nothing surprising there, if you're paying
> attention to what's going on.
>
Yes, but if the key is chosen well then the attacker needs to capture
several million packets in order to discover the key.  This can take
days or weeks on a low data rate network, meaning the attacker or their
equipment has to be nearby - close enough to record both sides of the
conversation (ie, not just pointing a directional antenna at the AP).

WEP is reasonably secure, but it can be broken by someone with $50 of
equipment, a laptop, and some time.  Your next door neighbor is more of
a threat to you than the FBI, NSA, or other TLA.

> There are proper ways to secure WiFi and other wireless connections.
> Using the built in encryption is not one of them.

Just like code protecting a uController, you need to be aware of the
ease of breaking the code, and the cost of securing it.  It isn't worth
it to most people to do more than the simple WEP to keep out most of the
casual crackers.

Besides, the Gov't is much lower tech for most investigations.  They'll
have an easier time tossing your house, taking anything electronic, and
sending it off for analysis then setting up a tap (wireless, ethernet,
cable, phone, etc) and listening for days/weeks/months.  They'll only
put that effort into it if the target is particularily worthwhile.

Of course, I could be wrong.  Or perhaps I'm a government plant, trained
at leading everyone into a false sense of security while /the entire
piclist mebership is being tapped!!!/  (insert evil laughter)  Yes, even
you in Australia and Bulgaria.  All your base are belong to us*.

-Adam

*Actually, the US gov't was interested in taking over the world, but
they can't compete with the likes of McDonalds so they've pretty much
given up.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\08\05@144722 by Dwayne Reid

flavicon
face
At 09:50 AM 8/5/2004, Nate Duehr wrote:

>There are proper ways to secure WiFi and other wireless connections.
>Using the built in encryption is not one of them.

Hi there, Nate.

Can you suggest a starting point for me to learn about WiFi security?

I'm thinking seriously about getting a WiFi rig for use at home before
trying to deploy a system for here at work.  Security is one of my main
concerns and I'm not comfortable with installing a wireless network at work
until I have learned enough to secure it.

dwayne

--
Dwayne Reid   <.....dwaynerKILLspamspam@spam@planet.eon.net>
Trinity Electronics Systems Ltd    Edmonton, AB, CANADA
(780) 489-3199 voice          (780) 487-6397 fax

Celebrating 20 years of Engineering Innovation (1984 - 2004)
 .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-
    `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'
Do NOT send unsolicited commercial email to this email address.
This message neither grants consent to receive unsolicited
commercial email nor is intended to solicit commercial email.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\08\05@150137 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
M. Adam Davis wrote:

> Besides, the Gov't is much lower tech for most investigations.  They'll
> have an easier time tossing your house, taking anything electronic, and
> sending it off for analysis then setting up a tap (wireless, ethernet,
> cable, phone, etc) and listening for days/weeks/months.  They'll only
> put that effort into it if the target is particularily worthwhile.
>
> *Actually, the US gov't was interested in taking over the world, but
> they can't compete with the likes of McDonalds so they've pretty much
> given up.

Being an American, I'm constantly amazed at what comes out of Washington
these days. I'm convinced that there ARE people in the Fed bureaucracy
that would love to take over the world... but one they grabbed it, could
they actually be able to RUN it any better than they run it here? YOU
decide!

--Bob, whose email will be probably be delayed by Homeland security again...



--

Replier: Most attachments rejected
      --------------
        Bob Axtell
PIC Hardware & Firmware Dev
  http://beam.to/baxtell
      1-520-219-2363

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\08\05@151214 by David VanHorn

flavicon
face
>
>Being an American, I'm constantly amazed at what comes out of Washington
>these days. I'm convinced that there ARE people in the Fed bureaucracy
>that would love to take over the world... but one they grabbed it, could
>they actually be able to RUN it any better than they run it here? YOU
>decide!

IIRC, the IRS wasn't able to turn a profit at the Mustang ranch...

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\08\05@151215 by David VanHorn

flavicon
face
At 01:46 PM 8/5/2004, Dwayne Reid wrote:

>At 09:50 AM 8/5/2004, Nate Duehr wrote:
>
>>There are proper ways to secure WiFi and other wireless connections.
>>Using the built in encryption is not one of them.
>
>Hi there, Nate.
>
>Can you suggest a starting point for me to learn about WiFi security?

There's not a lot to it.
Turn encryption on, change keys as often as practical.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\08\05@153122 by Matt Pobursky

flavicon
face
On Thu, 5 Aug 2004 14:12:12 -0500, David VanHorn wrote:
> IIRC, the IRS wasn't able to turn a profit at the Mustang ranch...

Which is amazing, since the IRS is already in the same business... ;-)

Matt Pobursky
Maximum Performance Systems

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\08\05@153741 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
M. Adam Davis wrote:

[snippedy snip snip]

> WEP is reasonably secure, but it can be broken by someone with $50 of
> equipment, a laptop, and some time.  Your next door neighbor is more of
> a threat to you than the FBI, NSA, or other TLA.


Yes, I understand this - I was attempting to thwart the implied threat
in the original warning that *only* the NSA could break wireless
encryption.  Any teenager can do it with pre-written software these
days.  That's all I was saying.

[snip happens]

> Of course, I could be wrong.  Or perhaps I'm a government plant, trained
> at leading everyone into a false sense of security while /the entire
> piclist mebership is being tapped!!!/  (insert evil laughter)  Yes, even
> you in Australia and Bulgaria.  All your base are belong to us*.

LOL!

> -Adam
>
> *Actually, the US gov't was interested in taking over the world, but
> they can't compete with the likes of McDonalds so they've pretty much
> given up.

I thought that was $tarbuck$.  Birthplace of bulk god-awful coffee for
$4 a cup.  (And the staff has the verve to put out a TIP jar!  NICE!)

A recent wardriving session (if you can even call it that... I put the
laptop with a standard 802.11g card in the PCMCIA slot and drove home...
no detours, no external antennas... not even trying) found 21 open
access points with zero encryption between my work and home.  Who cares
if WEP is crackable if no one even turns it on?

--
Nate Duehr, natespamKILLspamnatetech.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\08\05@155027 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
Dwayne Reid wrote:

> Hi there, Nate.
>
> Can you suggest a starting point for me to learn about WiFi security?
>
> I'm thinking seriously about getting a WiFi rig for use at home before
> trying to deploy a system for here at work.  Security is one of my main
> concerns and I'm not comfortable with installing a wireless network at
> work
> until I have learned enough to secure it.

Hmmm... the usual network security sites...

http://www.sans.org
http://www.securityfocus.com

Probably the best places to start.  SANS probably has some whitepapers
written by their students that cover the topic deeply.  (As well as just
about every other network/computer security topic under the sun.  In
order to gain an advanced SANS certification, students are required to
publish a practical security document as part of the certification.
They're all posted on the website, and free to read if you register with
them.)

A Google search turned up:
http://www.wi-fi.org/OpenSection/secure.asp?TID=2

Which looks useful for definitions.  A bit too much like "marketing" or
sales information though.

Most corporate wireless installations I've seen (two large ones) were
done with the wireless network being "untrusted" and the users having to
connect to a hardware VPN router using a VPN client from their machines
before they were really "part of the internal network".  Just like if
they had connected from home to the work network.

At the very least:  Use WPA (newer version of WEP with rotating keys,
and other fun) and turning off "Beaconing" on your Access Point is
probably "relatively" secure for a home network.   Keep up with your AP
vendor's latest firmware releases if they have any.  Those two will
generally keep anyone casually sniffing for wireless networks away.

Other techniques that work well in home networks but aren't as easy to
implement in corporate ones is the use of natural RF shielding... an
example... if you live in a house -- put the AP in the basement!  Keeps
the RF generally on your property and makes it a lot harder to sniff it
from anywhere other than your front and back lawn.  ;-)

I'll look around for a better all-encompassing primer on WiFi
security... so far I can't think of one that would cover everything or a
FAQ that would.

--
Nate Duehr, .....nateKILLspamspam.....natetech.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\08\06@055954 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Dave,

On Thu, 5 Aug 2004 14:12:56 -0500, David VanHorn wrote:

> >Can you suggest a starting point for me to learn
about WiFi security?
>
> There's not a lot to it.
> Turn encryption on, change keys as often as practical.

There's also: Choose as high a number of bits for the
encryption key that you can.  As I understand it, it's a
geometric progression - 128 bits isn't twice as hard as
64, it's 64 times as hard.

Some, generally older, hardware will only do the lower
numbers of bits (I think it started at 40 then went up
to 64) - I personally wouldn't use any less than 128
bits.

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2004\08\06@060215 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Nate,

On Thu, 5 Aug 2004 13:37:08 -0600, Nate Duehr wrote:

> A recent wardriving session (if you can even call it
that... I put the
> laptop with a standard 802.11g card in the PCMCIA slot
and drove home...
> no detours, no external antennas... not even trying)
found 21 open
> access points with zero encryption between my work and
home.  Who cares
> if WEP is crackable if no one even turns it on?

As a matter of interest, what software did you use?  The
stuff I've seen wouldn't record this for you over a
session, just show you it "live".  I presume you weren't
operating it yourself while driving!  :-)

Cheers,

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2004\08\06@061653 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> > >Can you suggest a starting point for me to learn
> about WiFi security?
> >
> > There's not a lot to it.
> > Turn encryption on, change keys as often as practical.
>
> There's also: Choose as high a number of bits for the
> encryption key that you can.  As I understand it, it's a
> geometric progression - 128 bits isn't twice as hard as
> 64, it's 64 times as hard.


Probably ~~ 2^64 times as hard.

64 bits can be cracked in hours using eg ?Net Stumbler.
Last time I read up on this (over a year ago) 128 bits was theoretically
crackable but in practice was believed to be essentially secure to all but
perhaps the experts with a serious grudge and very serious computing power.
Has this changed since then?



       RM

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2004\08\06@100153 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Fri, 2004-08-06 at 06:16, Russell McMahon wrote:
> > > >Can you suggest a starting point for me to learn
> > about WiFi security?
> > >
> > > There's not a lot to it.
> > > Turn encryption on, change keys as often as practical.
> >
> > There's also: Choose as high a number of bits for the
> > encryption key that you can.  As I understand it, it's a
> > geometric progression - 128 bits isn't twice as hard as
> > 64, it's 64 times as hard.
>
>
> Probably ~~ 2^64 times as hard.
>
> 64 bits can be cracked in hours using eg ?Net Stumbler.
> Last time I read up on this (over a year ago) 128 bits was theoretically
> crackable but in practice was believed to be essentially secure to all but
> perhaps the experts with a serious grudge and very serious computing power.
> Has this changed since then?

Yes. While you are correct with a brute force attack against 128 bit
encryption a brute force attack is rarely used to break into things.

With WiFi there is a design flaw in the way encryption is done,
basically there are certain combinations of packets that are easier to
crack then others, so to break into a WEP based WiFi connection you just
have to sit there sniffing packets until you see enough of the
"interesting" ones, once you have enough you start a brute force type
attack on that small subset, which doesn't take very long at all. Most
of your time is spent waiting for the interesting packets.

This is often how encryption is broken BTW, even Enigma was broken in a
kinda similar way (they had an idea of what was being sent and could
chug away combinations until the result made sense).

Moral of the story? WEP is good for keeping someone out for a short
while, but anybody with time can break it with little effort.

The new encryption standard for WiFi (WPA) fixes these flaws (along with
other flaws) and is far more secure. TTYL

TTYL

-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2004\08\06@131153 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
On Aug 6, 2004, at 4:01 AM, Howard Winter wrote:
> As a matter of interest, what software did you use?  The
> stuff I've seen wouldn't record this for you over a
> session, just show you it "live".  I presume you weren't
> operating it yourself while driving!  :-)

Definitely not operating while driving (other than an occasional
glance).  Know better than to do that -- too many years of mobile
DF'ing and knowing what happens to people who don't bring along a
helper when doing that.  (They end up in the ditch on a dirt road
somewhere.)

Was using NetStumbler.  http://www.netstumbler.com/downloads/

Audible alerts when in/out of range of an AP, will hook up to a GPS if
desired and track locations where different AP's heard, has it's own
proprietary log file output or you can export to a number of other
formats... etc.

It's been around a long time.  Does have limitations on what cards it
will work with, read the Release Notes.

Their MiniStumbler for PocketPC devices is pretty nifty too.  Good
security tool for network admins to go hunting for unauthorized WiFi
AP's inside their buildings/on their networks.

--
Nate Duehr, EraseMEnatespam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTnatetech.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2004\08\06@132458 by David VanHorn

flavicon
face
At 12:09 PM 8/6/2004, Nate Duehr wrote:

>On Aug 6, 2004, at 4:01 AM, Howard Winter wrote:
>>As a matter of interest, what software did you use?  The
>>stuff I've seen wouldn't record this for you over a
>>session, just show you it "live".  I presume you weren't
>>operating it yourself while driving!  :-)
>
>Definitely not operating while driving (other than an occasional
>glance).  Know better than to do that -- too many years of mobile
>DF'ing and knowing what happens to people who don't bring along a
>helper when doing that.  (They end up in the ditch on a dirt road
>somewhere.)
>
>Was using NetStumbler.  http://www.netstumbler.com/downloads/


I found a couple screenfuls of unsecured APs here in Muncie, the technological armpit of farm country.  I can only imagine what it must be like in tech-friendly areas.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2004\08\06@184922 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
On Fri, 6 Aug 2004 12:24:23 -0500, David VanHorn wrote:

> At 12:09 PM 8/6/2004, Nate Duehr wrote:
>
>...<
> >Was using NetStumbler.
http://www.netstumbler.com/downloads/
>
> I found a couple screenfuls of unsecured APs here in
Muncie, the technological armpit of farm country.  I can
only imagine what it must be like in tech-friendly
areas.

Well I just downloaded it and went for a quick drive of
a couple of miles around what is basically a village,
and got 13 hits, only 3 of which were using encryption,
and 8 of which were using the default SSID for their
Access Point (Linksys, Netgear, belkin54g, etc) so the
odds are they haven't changed the admin password either!
:-)

Interesting choice of channels, too - only six different
between them, with 6 and 11 being particularly popular.

Thanks for the pointer, Nate!

Cheers,

Howard Winter
St.Albans, England

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2004\08\06@185455 by David VanHorn

flavicon
face
>
>Well I just downloaded it and went for a quick drive of
>a couple of miles around what is basically a village,
>and got 13 hits, only 3 of which were using encryption,
>and 8 of which were using the default SSID for their
>Access Point (Linksys, Netgear, belkin54g, etc) so the
>odds are they haven't changed the admin password either!
>:-)

Makes you wonder why anyone pays for wireless internet, doesn't it?

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2004\08\06@212554 by Josh Koffman

face picon face
There are a couple reasons for that. First, most people have no idea
what the channel setting means, so they don't touch it. Second, the
way things are laid out in the band is kind of screwy. There are only
3 non overlapping channels I believe, so some of the products I've
seen will only let you select one of the three.

Josh
--
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools.
       -Douglas Adams

On Fri, 6 Aug 2004 23:49:17 +0100, Howard Winter <hdrwspamspam_OUTh2org.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Interesting choice of channels, too - only six different
> between them, with 6 and 11 being particularly popular.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2004\08\07@104446 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
>> Can you suggest a starting point for me to learn about WiFi security?
>>
>> I'm thinking seriously about getting a WiFi rig for use at home before
>> trying to deploy a system for here at work.  Security is one of my main
>> concerns and I'm not comfortable with installing a wireless network at
>> work
>> until I have learned enough to secure it.

> At the very least:  Use WPA (newer version of WEP with rotating keys,
> and other fun) and turning off "Beaconing" on your Access Point is
> probably "relatively" secure for a home network.   Keep up with your AP
> vendor's latest firmware releases if they have any.  Those two will
> generally keep anyone casually sniffing for wireless networks away.
>
> Other techniques that work well ...

I've seen some AP/router combinations that allow restricting connections to
a selection of MACs. I'm not sure whether this applies also to pure APs.

Gerhard

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email @spam@listservKILLspamspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2004\08\07@183642 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
On Aug 7, 2004, at 7:44 AM, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:

> I've seen some AP/router combinations that allow restricting
> connections to
> a selection of MACs. I'm not sure whether this applies also to pure
> APs.
>
Oooh.  Like MAC addresses are SO secure!

BillW

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email KILLspamlistservKILLspamspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2004\08\07@185754 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
Dwayne Reid wrote:

> Can you suggest a starting point for me to learn about WiFi security?
>
Treat your wireless link as if the data that goes across it goes across
the wide open internet.  Securing it is as simple as securing the
internet connection coming into your building, and all your wireless
clients are on the other end of the internet.  A robust VPN solution is
about as good as it gets.

However, consider the cost/performance ratio.  I use a simple 128bit WEP
key for my private home network.  It's not something I'm going to spend
too much time protecting since there are so many other targets out
there.  A hacker will go to an open connection long before they'll
settle down and attack me, unless they are specifically targetting me,
which I don't believe is a very likely thing.  Futher, I've placed my
access point in the basement, so it basically goes up into the house,
and doesn't get good signal outside of the home (aluminum siding).

My ADSL modem is the router and AP, so securing it is harder since I
cannot change the operation of the router, or seperate the AP from the
router and from the internet connection.  Otherwise I might consider
another layer of protection (VPN with a rate limited tunnel for public
internet access).  But it's another piece of equipment to secure, and an
option I'm not going to take right now since it would require disabling
my current AP and adding a seperate one.

But that's the best advice I can give on securing a wireless connection
- pretend that your data passes directly through your worst enemy's
computer between the AP and the client.

-Adam

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email RemoveMElistservTakeThisOuTspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2004\08\09@051645 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
Gerhard Fiedler wrote:

> I've seen some AP/router combinations that allow restricting connections to
> a selection of MACs. I'm not sure whether this applies also to pure APs.

True, but if you've either been reading unencrypted packets between a
node and the AP or you've cracked their WEP, you can then easily spoof
their MAC address, and gain full access to their network.  It's not
difficult to change MAC addresses these days, most cards will let you
override their manufacturer's default MAC in software.

--
Nate Duehr, spamBeGonenatespamBeGonespamnatetech.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\08\09@071915 by Anthony Toft

flavicon
face
> True, but if you've either been reading unencrypted packets between a
> node and the AP or you've cracked their WEP, you can then easily spoof

Seconding this statement...

Regardless of WEP encryption, the MAC address is clear text. MAC address
limiting _IS NOT_ a form of security, it is not even a reasonable
identification method.

The two facets of security, "access restriction" and "data privacy" are
not adequately addressed by WEP, as is evidenced by the amount of
software freely available to crack it.

The only way to truly secure wireless is to step up to IPSec and use
public/private key encryption (for at least part of the packet, the rest
is symmetrical) with a VLAN router having strict rules not to forward
pure wireless traffic. Even then you are only stopping access from an
unknown on wireless to your services (including internet services) you
will not stop 2 unknown people from talking to each other using your AP.
So you are still vulnerable to (varying levels of) DOS attacks

We have been dealing with this at work as we are trying to connect an
insecure Wireless network to the corporate LAN.

Anthony
--
Anthony Toft <TakeThisOuTtoftatEraseMEspamspam_OUTcowshed.8m.com>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2004 , 2005 only
- Today
- New search...