Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
517 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have a Netgear 54 mbps wireless G router and an Intel Imac, would my downloads go faster by using a wired connection to my router?


I have never tried connecting with wires because the airport just connected itself when I took the Imac out of the box.

thnx
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,087 Posts
If you live in Toronto, your internet connection won't be faster (unless you're shelling out big bucks) than 54Mbps. Many won't top 11Mbps, for that matter.

Most consumer cable and DSL is around the 3-5Mbps range (advertised), with the actual rates in a wider spectrum.

You would only notice a difference in LAN file transfers.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,087 Posts
Do you think people are stealing my signal?
Most probably, someone has 'stolen' your signal at some point in time. It's fairly common, and almost expected, that if a network is left unsecured, it can be used by the general public. When I'm out and about, I'll log onto unsecured networks if the place I'm at doesn't have its own - if you don't secure it, it's almost an invitation.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,771 Posts
if you don't secure it, it's almost an invitation.
And so it should be!

I'm pretty sickened by the egotistic and ignorant attitude of the WEP at all costs crowds :mad:

Fact no1: Encryption can be broken in less than 5 minutes by a hacker with the right software, it is pretty much useless against somebody who is committed to get in

Fact no2: It takes a lot of traffic to slow your connection down; as stated above you could easily have 20 concurrent users and not notice any difference in speed. Encryption on the other hand does slow things down

As noted above, it is extremely convivial to be able to borrow occasionally from somebody else's bandwidth. I remember once when my ISP wouldn't let me back on untill my router had a firmware ugrade and the only way to download the upgrade was through a neighbour's connection... :clap:

Of course you don't want to be the only person with a router in your neighbourhood, but these days are gone. A quick check of the signal around my house has just picked up 12 wifi networks for example.

If you find out that there are dozens of people hoarding your bandwidth, then MAC filtering is a better option: if removes interlopers and doesn't add the processing burden of encryption.

Now I think I'll get off the fence ;)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,087 Posts
And so it should be!

I'm pretty sickened by the egotistic and ignorant attitude of the WEP at all costs crowds :mad:

Fact no1: Encryption can be broken in less than 5 minutes by a hacker with the right software, it is pretty much useless against somebody who is committed to get in
WEP is obsolete. WPA and WPA2 are now the standards in network security, and they cannot be broken in a few minutes. With the freely available KisMac software, I can crack a busy WEP network in under 10 minutes. Big difference.

If you find out that there are dozens of people hoarding your bandwidth, then MAC filtering is a better option: if removes interlopers and doesn't add the processing burden of encryption.
MAC filtering is worthless. It will only stop the casual passer-by. To fake a MAC address is trivial on the new Intel machines, and easily done on any Windows or Linux system.

Fact no2: It takes a lot of traffic to slow your connection down; as stated above you could easily have 20 concurrent users and not notice any difference in speed. Encryption on the other hand does slow things down
False. Unless you have lots of bandwidth (and most consumer-grade DSL and cable connections aren't that great), you can almost certainly notice if someone is sapping some (especially if you or they are downloading something) let alone multiple users. Encryption only slows down LAN transfers (and even then, it's not a big difference), not WAN transfers (unless you're downloading at 6.4MB/s, the physical limit of 54Mbps networking....)

As noted above, it is extremely convivial to be able to borrow occasionally from somebody else's bandwidth. I remember once when my ISP wouldn't let me back on untill my router had a firmware ugrade and the only way to download the upgrade was through a neighbour's connection... :clap:
And yet, in the end, the owner of the network is still liable for any and all content obtained using the connection. An open access point is not an excuse. It is reckless and irresponsible to have an open WiFi network in this day and age.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,575 Posts
I second that, Moscool.

Most people shouldn't bother trying to secure their network these days. Securing access to a network is essential for a business with employees who may unknowingly breach security by installing trojans or turning off security updates. To me it's not worth buying a $150 wireless router vs. a $20 one that works just as well but has crappy security.

Instead, secure your computers and your communications. Home wireless protection is still a baby. Email encryption, firewalls such as Mac OS X's built-in firewall, encrypted filesystems such as Filevault, and encrypted web sessions are more established and easy-to-use security tools and should be enough for most people.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,809 Posts
It doesn't take a $150 router to get WPA or WPA2 encryption.

I'm in favour of also filtering MAC addresses, and hiding the SSID.

Otherwise, as above, assume that someone is using your signal.

For example only, "before I got Sympatico, my neighbours provided occasional easy access. My only beef is that for the hour or two Sympatico has been down these last few years, theirs went down too. It doesn't serve as much of a backup if they are using the same ISP."

Also, think about what it is your neighbours might be downloading on your free wireless. They may even have their own internet access when required, but for stuff they would be embarrassed or imprisoned for, they'll use yours. And the police and your ISP must and will assume that it's you.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,771 Posts
Also, think about what it is your neighbours might be downloading on your free wireless. They may even have their own internet access when required, but for stuff they would be embarrassed or imprisoned for, they'll use yours. And the police and your ISP must and will assume that it's you.
Hey, I'm prepared to live dangerously :D
 
G

·
MAC filtering is worthless. It will only stop the casual passer-by. To fake a MAC address is trivial on the new Intel machines, and easily done on any Windows or Linux system.
One problem with this workaround you're talking about, how do you know what MAC addresses I'm allowing? ;)
 

·
Mac Guru
Joined
·
14,623 Posts
And yet, in the end, the owner of the network is still liable for any and all content obtained using the connection.
Yes and no. If your network or Internet connection is used for illegal purposes, such as viewing or downloading illegal types of pornography, the police may end up on your doorstep, but unless there is forensic proof on your computer, there is a lack of evidence to make a case, let alone convict you of doing it. You will definitely see the headaches of someone else's illegal activity on your network, but if it's reasonably realistic to assume someone else could have abused your connection, then it won't be you facing criminal charges right off the bat, especially if your computer in particular has no evidence to support YOU logged onto said illegal web sites.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top