Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

139

No, you are just being paranoid. You were probably already connected to him over WiFi. There are many attacks he could have run this way without additional devices. Also if he would have wanted to hack you, he would not have thrown his strange hacking device in your face. He would have hidden it below the table. Side note: I feel like most of the people ...


121

Yes, you should be worried. You should contact the hotel staff, and you should not use the network any more. It is likely the router’s DNS is manipulated. It is possible that the hotel wants to make some money on the side by injecting ads. However, this script looks evil. It tries to open a dialog that tricks you into installing a trojan by displaying a ...


115

Perhaps he was using one of these wireless chargers that are built into the tables. It certainly fits your description.


84

Enforce Consequences for Students Found on the Network The first thing you need to do is ensure you have a written policy outlining what devices are allowed on the network. However, if you are not consistent in the enforcement of your policy, it is useless. This should also cover the usage policies for the Teachers, including locking their computers when ...


55

Unprotected Wifi networks, particularly in public places, are most certainly a threat. This is because you are connecting to a network without knowing who else could be on the network. 'Free Wifi' provided by cafes, restaurants, etc serve as excellent places for harvesting passwords. The attacker will perform a Man in the Middle attack, typically by ...


50

Yes they can but unless your neighbor has the required technical expertise, its highly doubtful. To view incoming and outgoing traffic you need specific software to monitor network packets and the tech knowledge to actually do it. Most routers only keep a syslog and unless they are using software like wireshark to monitor/capture your packets, they cannot ...


47

Most probably the blocker is designed to let images through, maybe because they are hotlinking some images on the page where they ask for you to login. Appending ?.jpg to the URL makes the blocker think that the URL is an image. On the other hand, anything after the ? doesn't change the actual webpage requested, it only changes the GET headers. (so ...


46

You are trying to solve the wrong problem. They are thousands and you are one. Since you are not a security expert (as far as I understand, sorry if I'm mistaken) and they aren't either but they are a horde, you are just bound to lose if you fight a conventional war. @AviD gave a great answer in a comment: Here is a non-technical idea: This is a ...


44

Something left unsaid, Why is the user wanting a WiFi? As long as the user feels they have a legitimate need they will continue to find workarounds to any of your attempts at blocking it. Discuss with the users what they are trying to accomplish. Perhaps create an official wifi network ( use all the security methods you wish - it will be 'yours' ). Or, ...


42

If you get a VPN and use that for browsing, that will hide all your traffic from both your neighbour and their ISP.


40

The risk here is in believing that a "hidden SSID" changes anything to the security. A non-hidden SSID means that the router will shout at regular intervals "hello everybody, I am Joe the Router, you may talk to me !". A hidden SSID means that the client machine (not the attacker's machine) will shout at regular intervals "Hey, Joe, where are you ? Please ...


39

If you're using a machine controlled by the LAN administrator, then you have to assume they can read anything you do on it. They could have software to log your activity, they could have installed extra SSL certificates that allow them to MITM your connection to GMail. If you believe your computer has not been tampered with and is not under the control of ...


37

First of all that would entirely depend on the encryption used by the access point. There are several types of possible encryption. Mostly on consumer wireless access points these are: WEP WPA WPA2 WPS WEP Let's first dive into WEP. WEP was the first algorithm used to secure wireless access points. Unfortunately it was discovered that WEP had some ...


36

I don't know what that gizmo is, but unless you've got a really bizarre laptop, it wouldn't be useful for attacking your computer. Outside of a laboratory setting, attacking a computer means using its standard input or output capabilities. An ordinary wifi or Bluetooth antenna can reach your laptop from anywhere in the room; a directional antenna can ...


35

You can't allow customers to be on the same network as your own computers. A lot of new WiFi access-points take care of this for you, by creating two wifi networks, where the "guest" network does not have access to internal computers. The Cisco/Linksys 4200 is what I have at home for guests, and it's easy to setup, but there are many other systems that have ...


35

The schemes you mention are protocols for securing 802.11x traffic over wireless networks. They don't mandate how the AP password is encrypted or hashed during storage. However, the security of the protocol does rely on making the key secure. WEP relies on a broken RC4 implementation and has severe flaws in various aspects of its protocol which make ...


35

HTTPS is secure over public hotspots. Only a public key and encrypted messages are transmitted (and these too are signed by root certificates) during the setup of TLS, the security layer used by HTTPS. The client uses the public key to encrypt a master secret, which the server then decrypts with its private key. All data is encrypted with a function that ...


30

What about using tor? Keep in mind that your speed will be affected*. As other people said, using any private mode in your browser is not going to be of any help. *EDIT: The slowdown heavily depends on the network topology, the number of nodes, how much traffic the nodes are handling and what you are downloading. Here you can find some explanations about ...


27

After some discussion with @epeleg in chat, I think I may have a more thorough and (hopefully) clear answer. TL;DR: The protection afforded to a Wi-Fi network by encryption with a PSK is directly proportional to the complexity of the PSK, and the effort taken to safeguard that PSK. For any environment, this requires striking a careful balance between ...


25

Yes they can actually. What it boils down to is that they can see which websites you are running by looking at: Clear HTTP traffic DNS requests sent One thing you could do is purchase an encrypted VPN and run all your internet traffic through the VPN. This way your neighbours will not be able to see what you are doing.


23

An attacker can always determine the client's MAC address if they can sniff packets to or from the client. This is true regardless of whether encryption is used or not. The MAC address is in the outer encapsulation layer of the 802.11 packet, and there is no encryption applied to that level. Here's a good link at Microsoft that lays out the packet ...


23

To complement @David's and @Steve's answers: If the attacker ("Adam", in your case) has administrative access to your machine, then he can learn all your secrets. Installing an extra root CA, under his control, to run routine MitM interception on your SSL connections is a popular tools for honest (but nosy) sysadmins: it is a one-time installation which ...


23

According to Whatsapp, all message traffic between the server and your phone are encrypted. The same applies for iMessage. The initial contact for iMessage is initiated via normal SMS, and does not travel through the wifi network. Therefore, it will not be possible (barring homebrew crypto security flaws) for your employer to read messages that pass ...


22

If someone knows my wifi password (be it WEP or WPA) what can they see on my screen? Do they just see URLs I visit, or can they see everything in my browser,....or can they see everything I do on my computer? Does using HTTPS make any difference? They can't see anything on your screen (unless you've enabled some sort of unencrypted remote desktop screen ...


21

They're stumbling blocks, but not insurmountable. SSID hiding can provide some protection from people looking for any SSID they can get their hands on, and MAC filtering can keep casual riffraff out. As the only methods of protecting a WLAN they're pretty weak. For someone who wants your network specifically encryption (most especially un-broken encryption) ...


21

MAC address filtering is a very weak form of wifi protection: the MAC addresses of your devices can be easily eavesdropped with tools like wireshark the MAC addresses of their devices can be easily changed (OS dependent, but typically an option in Network Settings). MAC address filtering is annoying to maintain. You have to login to your router ...


20

Yep. Open wireless networks are entirely unencrypted; anyone can see all the data you send (even if they aren't connected to the network).


19

Yes and no. They may not have your password in plaintext, but they have enough to potentially guess it and verify that guess (i.e. offline brute forcing). WPA2 authentication is performed through a four-way handshake. Instead of just sending your password in plaintext to any access point you connect to, this handshake ensures that unless both parties ...


19

Anyone who witnesses the association process of a new client can eavesdrop on their connection. As reassociations can be forced by a rogue host that sends a forged disassociation packet in the name of the target, it is practically always possible to listen in on all connections on a WPA(2) network with a preshared key. You can even try it for yourself in ...


19

As David says, the provider of your network usually can't see data passed over https connections. However, your Gmail address is not necessarily passed only over https connections. For example, if you log into StackExchange using your secret Gmail account and visit the http (not https) version of your user profile page, then your Gmail address is sent to ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible