Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[Ham-80211] Access control suggestions

dubose at texas.net dubose at texas.net
Wed Nov 3 17:38:16 UTC 2004


The HSMM tried that 2 years ago with no interest on the part of the major
manufacturers of ham gear.  However one executive from Agere said that they
might be able to make a change at the end of a large production run to
accommodate this if someone would buy the units.  This would include changes in
frequencies, power and inclusion of the capability of each unit having a
hardware name (callsign) that was transmitted periodically.

The question is who would buy 10,000 units.

If some one were to buy them, then you could use common PCI adapters and bridges
like the WET11 for stand alone bridges by replacing the PCMCI card...and perhaps
create an AP on the line of the WET11/WAP11.

Walt/K5YFW

> Here's a thought.  How about we work with major
> manufacturers such as Icom (who already has wifi
> products), yaesue, kenwood, etc. to get them to
> produce a ham radio specific WiFi solution.  The
> technology would be identical to existing products. 
> Only difference would be is setting the RF equipment
> to work on ham radio frequences that do not fall on
> the shared part 15 frequencies.  If they contracted
> with companies such as Orinoco, Linksys, Cisco and
> other wifi producers, there would be very little
> startup costs.  Just  a matter of firmware
> modification (I think) to use ham specific frequences.
>  If that could happen, then we would not have to worry
> about the mixup between part 15 and part 97 users.
> 
> IF they can do this for under $50, even under $100, I
> could jump out and buy one.  
> 
> Thoughts?
> --- dubose at texas.net wrote:
> 
> > Please don't get "overly" concerned about access
> > restrictions.
> > 
> > Rmember that just as repeaters are open...they are
> > however on amateur radio
> > frequencies...this does not prevent someone who is
> > not licensed from
> > transmitting on that frequency.  You take normal
> > precautions against improper use.
> > 
> > With 802.11b you are sharing the frequency with
> > un-licensed individuals so you
> > need to make a reasonable attempt to restrict access
> > to you AP/network.you rig
> > is any of these are operating under Part 97.
> > 
> > MAC, IPs in the 44. domain or a published WEP are a
> > reasonable attempt to keep
> > unauthorized access to your Part 97 operation. 
> > Clearly if you see unauthorized
> > operation as the station controller, you take
> > appropriate action but other than
> > that, if you believe that you have taken reasonable
> > care to prevent unauthorized
> > access, then that solves the problem....but feel
> > free to lock it down as tight
> > as you please.
> > 
> > I have chosen to use the Public WEP key published on
> > the ARRL/HSMM web pages.
> > 
> > Walt/K5YFW
> > 
> > 
> > > On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 09:31:28AM -0800, Steven
> > Phillips wrote:
> > > > That still leaves one question open.  The AP is
> > still
> > > > being used under part 97 rules.  Is using static
> > IP
> > > > assignments under AMPERNET sufficient access
> > > > restriction?  Part 15 users can still connect to
> > the
> > > > AP, but they will not get any network access and
> > can't
> > > > do anything beyond connecting to the AP.  This
> > is
> > > > because they will not have an IP address.  The
> > only
> > > > exception I can think of is if the general
> > public
> > > > discovers the AMPRNET IP scheme and assigns
> > themselves
> > > > an IP address?  Simple solution.  When a person
> > > > applies for access to the network, require them
> > to
> > > > provide the unique MAC address of their WLAN
> > card(s)
> > > > and do a MAC check during authentication.  If a
> > person
> > > > does spoof an IP, they still won't have access
> > because
> > > > they do not have an authorized MAC address.
> > > > 
> > > > So, there's my $20 worth.  Let me know what you
> > think
> > > > and if you have any thoughts about my
> > suggestions.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Steve,
> > > 
> > > MAC authentication is very weak.  One need only
> > eavesdrop on your AP to
> > > find out the authorized MACs.  Ditto IP address
> > authentication.
> > > 
> > > Keep in mind that for a person to "operate" your
> > Part 97 AP, their
> > > computer needs only to send your AP an 802.11
> > packet.  Virtually any
> > > 802.11 management request (Probe, Authentication,
> > Association) will induce
> > > your AP to send a response.  Also, your AP will
> > probably produce a CTS
> > > response to any RTS packet, regardless the
> > RTS-sender's authentication
> > > status.  Sending your AP a data packet will
> > likewise yield an 802.11 ACK,
> > > or even a Deauthenticate response.  As a matter of
> > course, your Part 97 AP
> > > is going to receive Probe Requests from 802.11
> > stations that are scanning
> > > for APs.  A clever and malicious person may be
> > able to make your Part
> > > 97 AP send a flood of packets all day long,
> > without ever authenticating.
> > > 
> > > Dave
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > David Young             OJC Technologies
> > > dyoung at ojctech.com      Urbana, IL * (217)
> > 278-3933
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > ham-80211 mailing list
> > > ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org
> > >
> >
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > ham-80211 mailing list
> > ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org
> >
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 		
> __________________________________ 
> Do you Yahoo!? 
> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. 
> www.yahoo.com 
>  
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ham-80211 mailing list
> ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211
> 






More information about the ham-80211 mailing list