WiFi security issues? Newbie ? for W7

[(PeteCresswell)]

The Linux machine was a nightmare in trying to set it
up to use the print server. There was no help in any of the fourms, and
I would have had to pay Novell for Suse support.

As much as I dis Linux, I have to remind myself that it's
nonetheless a freakin' miracle.

I know that I don't even have a clue as to how complicated an OS
really is.... but even at the level of complexity I can
comprehend it is truly impressive that hundreds (or maybe
thousands) of people can get together, coordinate their work, and
produce/maintain something like Linux.

Truly impressive IMHO.

But I still couldn't get MythTV to work.... and when I installed
SageTV on my XP box, it was basically plug-and-play all the
way.... -)

 

[James Egan]

As an example, the max number of concurrent
connections a Windows workstation O/S version can allow is 10.

In the case of xphome it's 5 and 9x it's unlimited. 9x hasn't been
deliberately nobbled like the others. Perhaps they were after writing
decent software in those days rather than looking to fleece you out of
all your cash on the pretext that you're getting a better product if
it's able to deal with lots of concurrent connections.


Jim

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

I had Linux on my home network and Windows machines too. I had a print
server on the network, which was not a problem setting up with the
Windows machines. The Linux machine was a nightmare in trying to set it
up to use the print server. There was no help in any of the fourms, and
I would have had to pay Novell for Suse support.

The machine with Linux sat there and collected dust, if I couldn't print
to the print server with ease, I had no use for it.

How odd.

I have found it the other way around. Of course if the print server was
talking smb, its pretty useless on Linux.

It can be made to work tho.

If you have a HP jet direct protocol or LPD on the server though, its a
piece of cake.

 

[JEDIDIAH]

....yes. So complicated what with it's dialog boxes and whatnot.

[deletia]

There is nothing complicated about getting a modern Linux to
talk to a network printer.

 

[JEDIDIAH]

Per Steel<""Fake99XX1199999fake\"@(Big)(Steel)theXfactor.com">:

[deletia]
I had Linux on my home network and Windows machines too. I had a print
server on the network, which was not a problem setting up with the
Windows machines. The Linux machine was a nightmare in trying to set it
up to use the print server. There was no help in any of the fourms, and
I would have had to pay Novell for Suse support.

The machine with Linux sat there and collected dust, if I couldn't print
to the print server with ease, I had no use for it.

How odd.

I have found it the other way around. Of course if the print server was
talking smb, its pretty useless on Linux.

Since Linux and MacOS use the same printing mechanism now, it's really
quite odd that it would be a problem for anyone anymore.

OTOH, Windows 7 doesn't want to play nice with Linux samba shares that
worked perfectly well under XP. I've also seen comparable complaints from
friends that are Windows users and have added a new Vista or Win7 box to
a household that has old XP boxes. The new Windows doesn't play nice.

It can be made to work tho.

If you have a HP jet direct protocol or LPD on the server though, its a
piece of cake.

I found that my network printer worked more reliably in Linux and that
even Windows machines printed more reliably when they were going through
samba rather than trying to connect to the printer directly.

Then there's my all time favorite shenanigan from HP. The Windows drivers
for my all-in-one completely disallows using it as a network printer. So I
can't have it sit next to one machine in one room and allow it to be used
across the network (just as a printer) but another Windows machine in another
room.

Macs don't have that problem though. They will happily print to this
all-in-one across the network.

 

[David W. Hodgins]

OTOH, Windows 7 doesn't want to play nice with Linux samba shares that
worked perfectly well under XP. I've also seen comparable complaints from
friends that are Windows users and have added a new Vista or Win7 box to
a household that has old XP boxes. The new Windows doesn't play nice.

To get windows 7 to work with shares from xp, or samba, import the
registry keys ...
https://bugzilla.samba.org/attachment.cgi?id=4988&action=view

See http://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Windows7 for details.

Regards, Dave Hodgins

 

[RayLopez99]

VPN's are neither necessary nor sufficient for secure use of public
networks.  They can be part of the solution, but they are not a "one
size fits all" answer.

Nope. Wrong again. They pretty much are a one-size fits all
solution.

And download times are not necessarily slower - the VPN I use compresses
traffic, which may result in faster transfers.

Weasel word noted "may". If that was true, everybody would compress
traffic routinely--why not?

Actually, https /is/ secure if the site you are accessing implements it
properly (some get it wrong).  The most common error is that the user
first goes to a non-https site, and then selects a link to move to the
https server.  But while they are on the http side, cookies are still
transferred - as they are in plain text, these can be sniffed.  The
trick is to go directly to the https site without going via the http site..

Thanks, that is interesting, so you finally got one right. Indeed if
a HTTP site uses cookies to forward information in the URL redirect to
an HTTPS site, I can see how this would be a security breach.

Of course, if you access other sites with http and there are data leaks
or cookie leaks between the sites, then you can still be sniffed.  But
anything that is transferred over the SSL link can be considered
unbreakable.

Nope. But hard to break.

VPNs offer a good way for serious road warriors to avoid these
problems. VPNs use encryption to "tunnel" right through insecure
connections. You can rent VPNs by the month or by the year at Witopia
or HotSpotVPN. Hotspot Shield is a free (ad-supported) VPN service
recommended by Sunbelt Software (security software) and others. [more
solutions] [compare] [update]

Wireless hotspot service providers -- e.g., TMobile Hotspot, Boingo
Wireless, iPass -- provide a degree of enhanced security. But they
still recommend that you use a VPN [more].

VPNs connect one computer (or network) to another computer (or network),
so that traffic can pass between these computers without being
interceptible.  But unless you know exactly where the other end of the
tunnel is, you are no better off.  I certainly wouldn't consider some
random ad-supported "VPN service" to be much more reliable than a public
wifi in a caf�.  

Off topic, and noted by the advert earlier. So?

While it is easier to sniff traffic at the public wifi,
it is low risk because it is not of interest to an attacker - who cares
what people are watching on youtube while having a cup of coffee?  The
"VPN service", on the other hand, /is/ an appealing target - because
people think it is secure, there might be all sorts of interesting
traffic such as online banking.  It may be harder to crack, but bribing
some low-paid employee is an easy strategy.

OK so your crack is to bribe an employee? Ha ha ha. OK. Noted. Move
along.

If you want to use a VPN, I recommend making sure you have an end-point
that you can trust, such as a service directly from your ISP (since you
trust them anyway).

Or, doing exactly what the advert recommended: trying a paid VPN
service like Hide My Ass.

 Alternatively, if you have a computer on in your
home and connected by broadband, it is a simple matter to set up a VPN
server and use that.  Use openvpn - it is free, cross-platform,
reliable, and simple to use regardless of routers and things because it
uses a single port that is easily forwarded.

So you are recommending that one use their PC at home as a VPN
server? Meaning it has to be turned on 24/7 (or whenever you are on
the road with your laptop, you would leave your PC at home turned on
for the entire road trip, which may last two or three weeks)? And you
think that's 'simple'? You are one complex guy if so.

The other big issue with VPNs is making sure that all the relevant
traffic actually uses the VPN, rather than the other network ports
(e.g., wifi).  Don't consider your VPN secure or even useful until you
understand exactly where your traffic goes.

Not clear what you mean by "all relevant traffic", unless you are
referring to the one good point you made in this entire thread, with
the HTTP vs HTTPS redirect and cookies.

Goodbye, and Merry Christmas,

RL

 

[RayLopez99]

   Or you could just use Linux and avoid every single bit of what you
just said.

Or, not even use a PC and go back to pencil and paper. About as
practical as Linux.

Merry Xmas Norm,

RL

 

[RayLopez99]

Do you think I care about you? I don't care about you,  and no one
should care about you but you. A Linux user with an attitude what's new?

That's true. And that's why Linux has 1% market share. In any
population you will have 1% that's socially deviant (actually more
like 10%--that's why I'm amazed that Linux, after 15 years of trying,
still has much less than 10% market share). That 1% is attracted to
Linux.

And "attitude" as well as "doing it yourself" is why Neanderthal man
went extinct and was absorbed by (latest evidence, though little
intermingling occurred) or largely killed off by the more socially
networking Cro-Magnum man--modern man. MSFT is like Cro-Magnum man:
modern. It allows users to agree to a de facto standard. It's not
perfect--nothing is--but it's close enough to perfect to allow 90% of
the computing public to move forward. And it makes money for
developers, allowing them to feed their family on Christmas Day, like
Tiny Tim.

Merry Xmas,

RL

 

[RayLopez99]

And there are plenty of situations when Windows is the best solution too
- one size does not fit all.  But for servers, it would take outstanding
circumstances before I'd consider using Windows.

Wrong again (that seems to be one constant with all your posts).

If that was true, why do web hosting companies charge extra for
Windows Server rather than Linux? Don't tell me it's to pay for the
MSFT license' either. Rather, it's because Windows is more feature
rich and superior to Linux for servers--you get what you pay for.

Merry Xmas,

RL

 

[RayLopez99]

I start a sweet job on Jan 3rd 2011, as a .NET developer, my dream
position, and in one of the cities I wanted to get to and live. I am
going to have a lot of fun, and MS is going to put a lot of money in my
pockets. That's all that counts with me. If it was Linux putting the
dollars in my pockets, then I would be using Linux.

Sweet, good for you Steel. I also am in the high-tech business as a
consultant, and in my business I am noticing a small pickup in US
business in the last few months--green shoots? My fear now though is
inflation...time will tell.

Good luck on your new job.

RL

 

[RayLopez99]

Fair enough -
I'll try not to ramble here any more (after this post).

Time for me to go back to Thailand--it's the dry season there and the
sap is rising.

One good thing about Thailand: you can get quality Windows software
for dirt cheap: For example, Autocad, a several thousand dollar
program, for $5. "I don't know how they do it" <--and that's my
defense with US Customs, should it come to that.

RL

*Ramble On, And now's the time, the time is now, to sing my song.
I'm goin' 'round the world, I got to find my girl, on my way.
I've been this way ten years to the day, Ramble On,
Gotta find the queen of all my dreams.

More lyrics: http://www.lyricsfreak.com/l/led+zeppelin/#share

 

[RayLopez99]

   There is nothing complicated about getting a modern Linux to
talk to a network printer.

For you, an "enthusiast" maybe. But for the rest of us--college
educated, doctors, rocket scientists, IQs of 140 and above,
millionaires--and I count myself as all of the above--the rest of us
could not get Linux to work right.

But for you...Linux is perfect and "just works". Good luck with it.

Happy Xmas,

RL

 

[Mike Easter]

f/ups cols

why do web hosting companies charge extra for Windows Server rather
than Linux? Don't tell me it's to pay for the MSFT license' either.

That license is one reason; another more important reason is because the
windows system is less reliable and requires more
upkeep/maintenance/admin than does the linux.

bitly preview enabled http://bit.ly/fVnxzI+ Why is Linux Web Hosting
Cheaper than Windows Web Hosting? - the web hosting company has to
account for the added cost of keeping the Windows servers running
smoothly. Since the web hosting company has to hire and pay staff to
maintain the integrity of the Windows servers, this cost is then
transferred to the end customer


The only reason for using a windows based webhost is if you are going to
be using some feature which is windows only.

 

[RayLopez99]

Thanks....

They can't find senior level .Net developers, with architect
experience. The demand is high in the US. The demand is high for .Net
developers in the US. They have to go to India to get them, a shame
for college kids looking for their entry level position in the US, as
the kids from India are sucking up those positions and working dirt
cheap via placement firms out of India, and the US companies don't
have to pay benefits for them.

Gates made a mistake establishing a MS facility over their in India
equal to Redmond only to have Indian developers suck up US jobs in
IT.

THanks. I feel bad for you US programmers. But check my header--I'm
posting offshore (Greece) soon to be heading to SE Asia. I also code
for friends mostly, though some strangers, and my 'real job' is a tech
consultant that requires no coding (I code for fun). I also use .NET
C# code behind. BTW as a US citizen it pays to be offshore: your
first $90k or so is tax free.

Like you say the entry level jobs are no longer in the USA--that's a
long term bad for the USA as some of these Indian programmers will
eventually have the experience it takes to do your senior level job
too (15 years from now).

RL

 

[Norman Peelman]

That's true. And that's why Linux has 1% market share. In any
population you will have 1% that's socially deviant (actually more
like 10%--that's why I'm amazed that Linux, after 15 years of trying,
still has much less than 10% market share). That 1% is attracted to
Linux.

And "attitude" as well as "doing it yourself" is why Neanderthal man
went extinct and was absorbed by (latest evidence, though little
intermingling occurred) or largely killed off by the more socially
networking Cro-Magnum man--modern man. MSFT is like Cro-Magnum man:
modern. It allows users to agree to a de facto standard. It's not

de facto standard... hah ahha ahhahahahahah

 

[Norman Peelman]

Wrong again (that seems to be one constant with all your posts).

If that was true, why do web hosting companies charge extra for
Windows Server rather than Linux? Don't tell me it's to pay for the
MSFT license' either. Rather, it's because Windows is more feature
rich and superior to Linux for servers--you get what you pay for.

Merry Xmas,

RL

I know you asked not to be told this but, it's to cover the M$
license(s)...

 

[Norman Peelman]

THanks. I feel bad for you US programmers. But check my header--I'm
posting offshore (Greece) soon to be heading to SE Asia. I also code
for friends mostly, though some strangers, and my 'real job' is a tech
consultant that requires no coding (I code for fun). I also use .NET
C# code behind. BTW as a US citizen it pays to be offshore: your
first $90k or so is tax free.

Like you say the entry level jobs are no longer in the USA--that's a
long term bad for the USA as some of these Indian programmers will
eventually have the experience it takes to do your senior level job
too (15 years from now).

RL

Between your desire for illegal $5 copies of expensive software and
your ability to avoid taxes... your hypocrisy is astounding!

 

[JEDIDIAH]

MythTV is quite a challenge to configure. Give XBMC a try and see if it
works for you.

The challenging part of MythTV is the recorder configuration and all
of the fiddly bits that can go with it including things that aren't
really software issues. Even a Tivo is fiddly in this respect.

XBMC doesn't have that feature. So it doesn't have the bother that
comes with it.

As far as a pure media player, XBMC wipes the floor with everything
else. SageTV and MythTV included.

 

[RayLopez99]

   Between your desire for illegal $5 copies of expensive software and
your ability to avoid taxes... your hypocrisy is astounding!

Hypocrisy is not the right word. I'm consistent. Perhaps cheapskate
is a better word.

RL