On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 16:47:29 -0700, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ <winstonmvp@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Char Jackson wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 13:41:15 -0700, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ <winstonmvp@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> T wrote:
>>>> On 2/9/22 22:56, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
>>>>> Must be going around.
>>>>> Yesterday,
>>>>
>>>> I get that a lot
>>>>
>>>> Q.  Did you reset the router?
>>>>
>>>> A.  What's a router?
>>>>
>>>> With their permission, I document their settings
>>>> and passwords and place them in a special high
>>>> encryption locker.
>>>>
>>>> I can't tell you how many times folks call me for
>>>> their passwords.
>>>
>>> The secondary problem at my end was MAC filtering(Access Control) was
>>> turned on, but nothing was in the allowed table. All devices that tried
>>> to connect were in the 'list of blocked devices not currently connected
>>> to the network'
>>
>> In around 2004 my neighbor discovered MAC filtering and proudly
>> proclaimed that his WiFi network was now secure. He challenged me to
>> prove him wrong, which took about 2-3 minutes because I hadn't done it
>> before. Good times.
>>
>Correct, it doesn't make it more secure,it does make it more organized
>to designate an ip address and then Access Control allowed devices.
>Access Control prevents access to the internet and communication with
>other connected devices. It does not prevent access to the network, but
>it does prevent issuing a blocked device an ip address.

I basically agree with what you just said. In the anecdote I shared
above, I simply made a short list of MAC addresses that were exchanging
traffic with the neighbor's router, since I knew those addresses were
allowed. I picked one of them as a candidate and changed my NIC to that
MAC. His WiFi encryption was WEP, which is to say he essentialy had none
at all because it's trivial to break, so I logged into his router using
an allowed MAC, then I added a new MAC to the allowed list, signed out
and signed back in with the newly allowed MAC. All very straightforward,
in hindsight, but at the time I was just feeling my way along. It was an
interesting experiment.

Char Jackson wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 16:47:29 -0700, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ <winstonmvp@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Char Jackson wrote:
>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 13:41:15 -0700, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ <winstonmvp@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> T wrote:
>>>>> On 2/9/22 22:56, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
>>>>>> Must be going around.
>>>>>> Yesterday,
>>>>>
>>>>> I get that a lot
>>>>>
>>>>> Q.  Did you reset the router?
>>>>>
>>>>> A.  What's a router?
>>>>>
>>>>> With their permission, I document their settings
>>>>> and passwords and place them in a special high
>>>>> encryption locker.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't tell you how many times folks call me for
>>>>> their passwords.
>>>>
>>>> The secondary problem at my end was MAC filtering(Access Control) was
>>>> turned on, but nothing was in the allowed table. All devices that tried
>>>> to connect were in the 'list of blocked devices not currently connected
>>>> to the network'
>>>
>>> In around 2004 my neighbor discovered MAC filtering and proudly
>>> proclaimed that his WiFi network was now secure. He challenged me to
>>> prove him wrong, which took about 2-3 minutes because I hadn't done it
>>> before. Good times.
>>>
>> Correct, it doesn't make it more secure,it does make it more organized
>> to designate an ip address and then Access Control allowed devices.
>> Access Control prevents access to the internet and communication with
>> other connected devices. It does not prevent access to the network, but
>> it does prevent issuing a blocked device an ip address.
>
> I basically agree with what you just said. In the anecdote I shared
> above, I simply made a short list of MAC addresses that were exchanging
> traffic with the neighbor's router, since I knew those addresses were
> allowed. I picked one of them as a candidate and changed my NIC to that
> MAC. His WiFi encryption was WEP, which is to say he essentialy had none
> at all because it's trivial to break, so I logged into his router using
> an allowed MAC, then I added a new MAC to the allowed list, signed out
> and signed back in with the newly allowed MAC. All very straightforward,
> in hindsight, but at the time I was just feeling my way along. It was an
> interesting experiment.
>
I've a utility that shows neighbors wifi networks, the security mode,
the and channel. This evening it shows 12 other wifi networks excluding
my 2.4 and 5 Ghz. Of those twelve - 3 are open, 3 are using WEP, 5
using WPA2/PSK, and only one other using 5G(channel 40, iirc only 20
Mhz). Of those eleven not using 5G, six are using channel 6, three
channel 1, one channel 3. I'm at the far end - 2.4 Ghz(channel 11) and
5G(40 Mhz, 149-153)

It would seem that maybe further education on your part to him was also
in order.<g> after the system was compromised
- How to change the router admin password(you obviously had it to
logon to his router)
- Why WEP is for the 1990's(I've seen some systems with routers set to
WEP b/c of the presence of ancient Wii consoles).

--
....w¡ñ§±¤ñ
msft mvp 2007-2020

On 2/10/22 12:41, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
> The secondary problem at my end was MAC filtering(Access Control) was
> turned on, but nothing was in the allowed table. All devices that tried
> to connect were in the 'list of blocked devices not currently connected
> to the network'
I feel your pain!
Just out of curiosity, did they have a strong password?

On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 02:07:01 -0700, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ <winstonmvp@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Char Jackson wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 16:47:29 -0700, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ <winstonmvp@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Char Jackson wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 13:41:15 -0700, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ <winstonmvp@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> T wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/9/22 22:56, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
>>>>>>> Must be going around.
>>>>>>> Yesterday,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I get that a lot
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Q.  Did you reset the router?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A.  What's a router?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With their permission, I document their settings
>>>>>> and passwords and place them in a special high
>>>>>> encryption locker.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can't tell you how many times folks call me for
>>>>>> their passwords.
>>>>>
>>>>> The secondary problem at my end was MAC filtering(Access Control) was
>>>>> turned on, but nothing was in the allowed table. All devices that tried
>>>>> to connect were in the 'list of blocked devices not currently connected
>>>>> to the network'
>>>>
>>>> In around 2004 my neighbor discovered MAC filtering and proudly
>>>> proclaimed that his WiFi network was now secure. He challenged me to
>>>> prove him wrong, which took about 2-3 minutes because I hadn't done it
>>>> before. Good times.
>>>>
>>> Correct, it doesn't make it more secure,it does make it more organized
>>> to designate an ip address and then Access Control allowed devices.
>>> Access Control prevents access to the internet and communication with
>>> other connected devices. It does not prevent access to the network, but
>>> it does prevent issuing a blocked device an ip address.
>>
>> I basically agree with what you just said. In the anecdote I shared
>> above, I simply made a short list of MAC addresses that were exchanging
>> traffic with the neighbor's router, since I knew those addresses were
>> allowed. I picked one of them as a candidate and changed my NIC to that
>> MAC. His WiFi encryption was WEP, which is to say he essentialy had none
>> at all because it's trivial to break, so I logged into his router using
>> an allowed MAC, then I added a new MAC to the allowed list, signed out
>> and signed back in with the newly allowed MAC. All very straightforward,
>> in hindsight, but at the time I was just feeling my way along. It was an
>> interesting experiment.
>>
>I've a utility that shows neighbors wifi networks, the security mode,
>the and channel. This evening it shows 12 other wifi networks excluding
>my 2.4 and 5 Ghz. Of those twelve - 3 are open, 3 are using WEP, 5
>using WPA2/PSK, and only one other using 5G(channel 40, iirc only 20
>Mhz). Of those eleven not using 5G, six are using channel 6, three
>channel 1, one channel 3. I'm at the far end - 2.4 Ghz(channel 11) and
>5G(40 Mhz, 149-153)

That reminds me of the time when I logged into the router of each of my
neighbors and moved them to channels 1 and 6, thus clearing channel 11
for myself. That was a silly, if harmless, prank. No one seemed to
notice because clients silently follow their AP to another channel.

>It would seem that maybe further education on your part to him was also
>in order.<g> after the system was compromised
> - How to change the router admin password(you obviously had it to
>logon to his router)
> - Why WEP is for the 1990's(I've seen some systems with routers set to
>WEP b/c of the presence of ancient Wii consoles).

Oh yes, we had a discussion.

T wrote:
> On 2/10/22 12:41, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
>> The secondary problem at my end was MAC filtering(Access Control) was
>> turned on, but nothing was in the allowed table. All devices that
>> tried to connect were in the 'list of blocked devices not currently
>> connected to the network'
>
> I feel your pain!
>
> Just out of curiosity, did they have a strong password?
Lol...
It was my router, stronger than necessary....63 character wifi pw.

Occasionally, the router logs a DoS, but that is about as close as
possible to a false positive - the ip address is always Amazon or Akamai
and coincidental at at exactly same time when accessing my Amazon
account. Typically a handshake not occurring either by the router to
that ip or the ip not ACKnowledging.

--
....w¡ñ§±¤ñ

On 2/11/22 12:18, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
> Lol...
> It was my router

YOUR'S !!!! TELL ME IT WASN'T SO !!!!!!
Chuckle.
:-)

T wrote:
> On 2/11/22 12:18, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
>> Lol...
>> It was my router
>
>
> YOUR'S !!!!  TELL ME IT WASN'T SO !!!!!!
>
> Chuckle.
>
> :-)
>
Well, it was powered off for a month, just the wifi ip's.
....and as noted, I could have fat fingered/moused the reset in router
admin panel
This was one, where the wiser choice was import the config file rather
than wade through the router settings.

Another case of backing up is always a good thing to do.

--
....w¡ñ§±¤ñ

On 2/11/22 15:13, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
> T wrote:
>> On 2/11/22 12:18, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
>>> Lol...
>>> It was my router
>>
>>
>> YOUR'S !!!!  TELL ME IT WASN'T SO !!!!!!
>>
>> Chuckle.
>>
>> :-)
>>
> Well, it was powered off for a month, just the wifi ip's.
> ...and as noted, I could have fat fingered/moused the reset in router
> admin panel
I NEVER do that! What?? Well maybe..
You probably did not. Those reset button are
obnoxions to get at and hard to trigger on purpose.
>  This was one, where the wiser choice was import the config file rather
> than wade through the router settings.
>
> Another case of backing up is always a good thing to do.
I am a backup whole. I even backup my customer's
Antivirus settings.
I usually only take screen shots of their routers.
That is a form of backup too.

T wrote:
> On 2/11/22 15:13, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
>> T wrote:
>>>
>> Well, it was powered off for a month, just the wifi ip's.
>> ...and as noted, I could have fat fingered/moused the reset in router
>> admin panel
>
> I NEVER do that!  What??  Well maybe..
>
> You probably did not.  Those reset button are
> obnoxions to get at and hard to trigger on purpose.

Not the one(reset button) with the tiny hole and paper clip. The reset
to defaults(oobe condition) available in the router admin panel.
>
>>   This was one, where the wiser choice was import the config file
>> rather than wade through the router settings.
>>
>> Another case of backing up is always a good thing to do.
>
> I am a backup whole.  I even backup my customer's
> Antivirus settings.
>
> I usually only take screen shots of their routers.
> That is a form of backup too.
>
>
>
Likewise, I've kept a few screen shots. Had a Micron built pc once.
Printed out the BIOS manual, and market it up with the default settings
for every single item as-shipped, and notes on what I changed.
Came in handy a few times.

Sometimes it's good to be a 'backup whole'.

--
....w¡ñ§±¤ñ

On 2/12/22 15:46, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
> Sometimes it's good to be a 'backup whole'.
Did I mispell "whore"? Dang!

T wrote:
> On 2/12/22 15:46, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
>> Sometimes it's good to be a 'backup whole'.
>
> Did I mispell "whore"?  Dang!

:)
The latter certainly might be better than the former.

--
....w¡ñ§±¤ñ

On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 at 16:58:39, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote (my
responses usually follow points raised):
>On 2/12/22 15:46, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
>> Sometimes it's good to be a 'backup whole'.
>
>Did I mispell "whore"? Dang!

Twice (-:
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

If you want to make people angry, lie to them. If you want to make them
absolutely livid, then tell 'em the truth.

On 2/9/22 12:21, T wrote:
> On 2/9/22 05:26, micky wrote:
>> In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Tue, 8 Feb 2022 23:45:44 -0800, T
>> <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> W10
>>>
>>> The smallest time frame I am finding is daily and
>>> only once per day.
>>>
>>> What am I missing?
>>
>> I used the built i scheduler to run every hour, but I'm on a differe3nt
>> box right now.  It had to do with starting each day at a certain time
>> and then repeating every +60, or something like that.  YOu could start
>> at 1AM.   I have to catch a plane but maybe on Sunday I can check back.
>
> Hi Micky,
>
> What I missed was the "advanced" setting.   I
> had been programming for hours and had a bit
> of a dehydration headache and was not
> at the top of my forum.
>
> -T

Dang, did it again!
“Anyone who can only think of one way to spell
a word obviously lacks imagination.”
-- Mark Twain