NetStumbler doesn't work with my Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter

M

MaxAttacks

I've seen other posts by people who use the Netgear WG111V2 USB
adapter with Netstumbler under Windows 98 SE, but I just can't get it
to work for me. I currently connect to the internet with another USB
adapter, (made in China, with no FCC ID or brand name), combined with
a wok, (aka: WokTenna), tethered to the end of a 15' active USB cable,
which has enough range to reach the house from our trailer about 300'
away.

I don't know what signal strength I get from this arrangement, but its
slow. About comparable to 150% of what I used to get with dialup. Now,
I'd like to be able to use an old laptop that also has Windows 98 SE
together with the Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter to reach from the shop
to the house where the cable connection and router are located, but it
doesn't have quite as much range as my cheapo made in china adapter
and the shop is just as far away from the house. Which basically means
I'll be looking at building a better antenna using the WG111, but it
sure would be nice to be able to use Netstumbler to help me with
evaluating my results.

The Netgear WG111V2 I have, has the FCC ID PY305400026 and I haven't
been able to find pictures of the innards of this device to see where
I might be able to connect an external antenna. (If anyone knows where
I can find some, please feel free to post a reply.) Also, when I try
to use Netstumbler, with either of the USB adapters I have, (I also
tried some other WG111's that I have that use the same FCC IDD number,
with the same results), Netstumber shows the adapters I have
installed, (they are grayed out), but doesn't show any of them as
being a "suitable device". I currently have drivers for the 1 made in
china adapter and 3 of the WG111's installed and can unplug one and
plug in another without any problems at all, (apart from the WG111's
poorer range). I think Windows treats each of the WG111's as a
separate entity because they use different MAC addresses, but I'm just
guessing on that.

Anyway, if anyone knows how to get Netstumbler to work on my computers
with Win98SE, or has some info on pics of the internal antenna
connections and maybe setting these up with a double biquad and maybe
a 36" round satellite dish, (I just happen to have one kicking
around), for some serious range, I'd appreciate the help.

Thanks!

K.
 
M

MEB

We could attempt to help here, but I think you would have more luck on
forums/groups which deal specifically with Netstumbler and cards/adapters.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=netstumbler&btnG=Google+Search

As for the antenna extension/change, perhaps one of the electrically adept
or old short band/ham radio operators in this group MIGHT be able to help
[they have been "pumping up" signals for years].

Questions might be [I'll leave the Netgear out of the equation for now as
that might bring its own issues with it]:

What was the supposed speed/rating/connection for the Chinese adapter [B, G
what?].

Are there any identifying chip numbers available on the Chinese Adapter?

Did you attempt to relocate OR otherwise change: the BASE
transceiver/router its antenna? {Is it well away from plumbing, duct work,
etc.]

Is there a marked difference between sent and received speeds?

What is the base/transceiver [make and model]?

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________


"MaxAttacks" <kickofthecat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a1cf5838-1ac5-4163-8d78-680d099970a2@u12g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
| I've seen other posts by people who use the Netgear WG111V2 USB
| adapter with Netstumbler under Windows 98 SE, but I just can't get it
| to work for me. I currently connect to the internet with another USB
| adapter, (made in China, with no FCC ID or brand name), combined with
| a wok, (aka: WokTenna), tethered to the end of a 15' active USB cable,
| which has enough range to reach the house from our trailer about 300'
| away.
|
| I don't know what signal strength I get from this arrangement, but its
| slow. About comparable to 150% of what I used to get with dialup. Now,
| I'd like to be able to use an old laptop that also has Windows 98 SE
| together with the Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter to reach from the shop
| to the house where the cable connection and router are located, but it
| doesn't have quite as much range as my cheapo made in china adapter
| and the shop is just as far away from the house. Which basically means
| I'll be looking at building a better antenna using the WG111, but it
| sure would be nice to be able to use Netstumbler to help me with
| evaluating my results.
|
| The Netgear WG111V2 I have, has the FCC ID PY305400026 and I haven't
| been able to find pictures of the innards of this device to see where
| I might be able to connect an external antenna. (If anyone knows where
| I can find some, please feel free to post a reply.) Also, when I try
| to use Netstumbler, with either of the USB adapters I have, (I also
| tried some other WG111's that I have that use the same FCC IDD number,
| with the same results), Netstumber shows the adapters I have
| installed, (they are grayed out), but doesn't show any of them as
| being a "suitable device". I currently have drivers for the 1 made in
| china adapter and 3 of the WG111's installed and can unplug one and
| plug in another without any problems at all, (apart from the WG111's
| poorer range). I think Windows treats each of the WG111's as a
| separate entity because they use different MAC addresses, but I'm just
| guessing on that.
|
| Anyway, if anyone knows how to get Netstumbler to work on my computers
| with Win98SE, or has some info on pics of the internal antenna
| connections and maybe setting these up with a double biquad and maybe
| a 36" round satellite dish, (I just happen to have one kicking
| around), for some serious range, I'd appreciate the help.
|
| Thanks!
|
| K.
 
M

MaxAttacks

After several days of searching the web and newsgroups, I have found a
partial answer to my own problem, that might relate to what I read
somewhere about Netstumbler 0.4.0 only working with the Hermes
chipset, but then I read elsewhere of someone using the same adapter
as I have, (I even opened one of my WG111v2's up to see the chip and
to me it looks like it might be a RealTek with the numbers RTL8187 on
the chip). The other info I found based on this info, is located here:
http://forum1.netgear.com/showthread.php?t=13033&highlight=wg111+chipset

So, maybe I'll be able to get the WG111v2's working under Win98SE
after all, assuming I can find the driver file that has the same info
and do a good cleaning of the registry? I'm still going to have to do
something about the range situation of these adapters, but thats going
to have to wait until I research more sources and options for
antenna's. Any help with that would be appreciated.


K.


MaxAttacks wrote:
> I've seen other posts by people who use the Netgear WG111V2 USB
> adapter with Netstumbler under Windows 98 SE, but I just can't get it
> to work for me. I currently connect to the internet with another USB
> adapter, (made in China, with no FCC ID or brand name), combined with
> a wok, (aka: WokTenna), tethered to the end of a 15' active USB cable,
> which has enough range to reach the house from our trailer about 300'
> away.
>
> I don't know what signal strength I get from this arrangement, but its
> slow. About comparable to 150% of what I used to get with dialup. Now,
> I'd like to be able to use an old laptop that also has Windows 98 SE
> together with the Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter to reach from the shop
> to the house where the cable connection and router are located, but it
> doesn't have quite as much range as my cheapo made in china adapter
> and the shop is just as far away from the house. Which basically means
> I'll be looking at building a better antenna using the WG111, but it
> sure would be nice to be able to use Netstumbler to help me with
> evaluating my results.
>
> The Netgear WG111V2 I have, has the FCC ID PY305400026 and I haven't
> been able to find pictures of the innards of this device to see where
> I might be able to connect an external antenna. (If anyone knows where
> I can find some, please feel free to post a reply.) Also, when I try
> to use Netstumbler, with either of the USB adapters I have, (I also
> tried some other WG111's that I have that use the same FCC IDD number,
> with the same results), Netstumber shows the adapters I have
> installed, (they are grayed out), but doesn't show any of them as
> being a "suitable device". I currently have drivers for the 1 made in
> china adapter and 3 of the WG111's installed and can unplug one and
> plug in another without any problems at all, (apart from the WG111's
> poorer range). I think Windows treats each of the WG111's as a
> separate entity because they use different MAC addresses, but I'm just
> guessing on that.
>
> Anyway, if anyone knows how to get Netstumbler to work on my computers
> with Win98SE, or has some info on pics of the internal antenna
> connections and maybe setting these up with a double biquad and maybe
> a 36" round satellite dish, (I just happen to have one kicking
> around), for some serious range, I'd appreciate the help.
>
> Thanks!
>
> K.
 
M

MaxAttacks

On May 15, 11:46 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> We could attempt to help here, but I think you would have more luck on
> forums/groups which deal specifically with Netstumbler and cards/adapters.
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=netstumbler&btnG=Google+Search

I actually had planned on posting directly to the Netstumbler furom on
their website, but after I registered I found that there was a message
to new members, saying that we couldn't post for the first week after
registration.

> As for the antenna extension/change, perhaps one of the electrically adept
> or old short band/ham radio operators in this group MIGHT be able to help
> [they have been "pumping up" signals for years].
>
> Questions might be [I'll leave the Netgear out of the equation for now as
> that might bring its own issues with it]:
>
> What was the supposed speed/rating/connection for the Chinese adapter [B, G
> what?].

It's "ISSC Wireless Utility" says that my link quality is 50%, Signal
Strength is -77dbm and noise is -95dbm. It is supposed to be a "g" and
included a CD with a really painful to install utility labeled "Wwu
".

> Are there any identifying chip numbers available on the Chinese Adapter?

I haven't tried opening it up yet and don't know if I have any
software, like maybe Sisoft Sandra, that might tell me the chipset
used. It sure seems to make a difference in range compared to the
WG111. With the WG111 I usually only get the main house from the
trailer and sometimes I can reach my neighbor about 350' away, but I
can't connect unless I go outside with the laptop and walk about 25'
closer. With the made in china adapter, I can pick up another 4 to 8
connections, but can only connect to my the main house, the shop,
(when I have the laptop in there), and to my closest neighbor.

> Did you attempt to relocate OR otherwise change: the BASE
> transceiver/router its antenna? {Is it well away from plumbing, duct work,
> etc.]

The router belongs to the cable company and I don't want to mess with
it, if I can avoid it. Maybe once I get a better, tested setup, I'll
look into options for the router, but I'm still interested in having
something more portable that I can use with the old desktop in my
trailer and with my old laptop that I use with wireless hotspots when
in town.

> Is there a marked difference between sent and received speeds?

Not that I've noticed. Assuming that the software utility that comes
with the WG111's is accurate, it normally shows about 35% signal
strength, which is why I'd like to use one program like Netstumbler
that would report the correct values consistently, based on the same
information, no matter which computer I use it on, (at least in
theory).

> What is the base/transceiver [make and model]?

Not sure of the model off hand, but I can check later when I get into
the house. (I do most of my online stuff from the office in the
trailer, where its quieter.) I do know its a linksys router though.

> --
> MEBhttp://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> --
> _________
 
M

MEB

"MaxAttacks" <kickofthecat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b2bc9102-4f23-401c-8e8a-fa44ee09e43b@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
| On May 15, 11:46 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
| > We could attempt to help here, but I think you would have more luck on
| > forums/groups which deal specifically with Netstumbler and
cards/adapters.
| >
| > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=netstumbler&btnG=Google+Search
|
| I actually had planned on posting directly to the Netstumbler furom on
| their website, but after I registered I found that there was a message
| to new members, saying that we couldn't post for the first week after
| registration.

Okay, as you have found out, the program is extremely limited, though
useful *IF* you can find chip specific adaptations.

There are other programs [perhaps not exactly what your looking for] like
CommView, Wireless Sniffer, other [general listed and searched for as
wireless sniffers]

|
| > As for the antenna extension/change, perhaps one of the electrically
adept
| > or old short band/ham radio operators in this group MIGHT be able to
help
| > [they have been "pumping up" signals for years].
| >
| > Questions might be [I'll leave the Netgear out of the equation for now
as
| > that might bring its own issues with it]:
| >
| > What was the supposed speed/rating/connection for the Chinese adapter
[B, G
| > what?].
|
| It's "ISSC Wireless Utility" says that my link quality is 50%, Signal
| Strength is -77dbm and noise is -95dbm. It is supposed to be a "g" and
| included a CD with a really painful to install utility labeled "Wwu
| ".

If its a G then you may not do much better with the Netgear... the link
quality will be the limiting issue,, likely too many re-sends slowing the
connections.

The Netgear has some issues, if you have looked on the NET.

|
| > Are there any identifying chip numbers available on the Chinese
Adapter?
|
| I haven't tried opening it up yet and don't know if I have any
| software, like maybe Sisoft Sandra, that might tell me the chipset
| used. It sure seems to make a difference in range compared to the
| WG111. With the WG111 I usually only get the main house from the
| trailer and sometimes I can reach my neighbor about 350' away, but I
| can't connect unless I go outside with the laptop and walk about 25'
| closer. With the made in china adapter, I can pick up another 4 to 8
| connections, but can only connect to my the main house, the shop,
| (when I have the laptop in there), and to my closest neighbor.

Sandra Pro might have helped, but I don't have it installed in this
configuration.

http://kbserver.netgear.com/products/WG111.asp


Let's see if someone else wants to post some tools to use, you don't mind
if we wait a few more hours do you?

|
| > Did you attempt to relocate OR otherwise change: the BASE
| > transceiver/router its antenna? {Is it well away from plumbing, duct
work,
| > etc.]
|
| The router belongs to the cable company and I don't want to mess with
| it, if I can avoid it. Maybe once I get a better, tested setup, I'll
| look into options for the router, but I'm still interested in having
| something more portable that I can use with the old desktop in my
| trailer and with my old laptop that I use with wireless hotspots when
| in town.

Okay, maybe one of the MVPs that hangout here will offer some help.

|
| > Is there a marked difference between sent and received speeds?
|
| Not that I've noticed. Assuming that the software utility that comes
| with the WG111's is accurate, it normally shows about 35% signal
| strength, which is why I'd like to use one program like Netstumbler
| that would report the correct values consistently, based on the same
| information, no matter which computer I use it on, (at least in
| theory).

Wow, striking difference in strength. I haven't been working with much
wireless recently as its EXTREMELY vulnerable to attack, so I no longer
recommend it either. But I understand the need to be "connected". Just
another gizmo that was highly touted and now found to be a major security
risk.

WG111 - 54Mbps
http://review.zdnet.com/adapters-nics/netgear-wg111-usb-adapter/4505-3380_16-30791890.html
"the WG111 earned a less remarkable 6.2Mbps score at 200 feet"

|
| > What is the base/transceiver [make and model]?
|
| Not sure of the model off hand, but I can check later when I get into
| the house. (I do most of my online stuff from the office in the
| trailer, where its quieter.) I do know its a linksys router though.
|

Let the group know, the more information the better...

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________
 
M

MaxAttacks

On May 15, 11:30 pm, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "MaxAttacks" <kickofthe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:b2bc9102-4f23-401c-8e8a-fa44ee09e43b@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> | On May 15, 11:46 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> | > We could attempt to help here, but I think you would have more luck on
> | > forums/groups which deal specifically with Netstumbler and
> cards/adapters.
> | >
> | > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=netstumbler&btnG=Google+Search
> |
> | I actually had planned on posting directly to the Netstumbler furom on
> | their website, but after I registered I found that there was a message
> | to new members, saying that we couldn't post for the first week after
> | registration.
>
> Okay, as you have found out, the program is extremely limited, though
> useful *IF* you can find chip specific adaptations.
>
> There are other programs [perhaps not exactly what your looking for] like
> CommView, Wireless Sniffer, other [general listed and searched for as
> wireless sniffers]

I'm a little late getting back to this, but appreciate the help and
mention of other similar products. I tried to reply a couple of days
ago but Google News seemed to think I should wait and try again
another time.

I did find out through reading way too many postings about Netstumbler
that, it only works under Windows 98 SE "if" your using an adapter
with a Hermes chipset. As they added support for newer operating
systems, they didn't bother to add support for Win98SE, to allow for
the new chipsets in the newer devices supported. Which means I'm out
of luck when it comes to using Netstumbler unless I update my OS
first.


> |
> | > As for the antenna extension/change, perhaps one of the electrically
> adept
> | > or old short band/ham radio operators in this group MIGHT be able to
> help
> | > [they have been "pumping up" signals for years].
> | >
> | > Questions might be [I'll leave the Netgear out of the equation for now
> as
> | > that might bring its own issues with it]:
> | >
> | > What was the supposed speed/rating/connection for the Chinese adapter
> [B, G
> | > what?].
> |
> | It's "ISSC Wireless Utility" says that my link quality is 50%, Signal
> | Strength is -77dbm and noise is -95dbm. It is supposed to be a "g" and
> | included a CD with a really painful to install utility labeled "Wwu
> | ".
>
> If its a G then you may not do much better with the Netgear... the link
> quality will be the limiting issue,, likely too many re-sends slowing the
> connections.
>
> The Netgear has some issues, if you have looked on the NET.

The only reason I bought the Netgear, is that they seem to be reliable
when modified with an external antenna, (which seems to remove most of
the heat source, aka: antenna, from the adapter), as in the case of
the biquad designs I've seen. (That and they were cheap to experiment
with.) Turns out that I missed a label on the side of the Netgear unit
that says in small print "Made in China".


> | > Are there any identifying chip numbers available on the Chinese
> Adapter?

I couldn't find any meaningful markings on the ISSC unit apart from
the "ISSC IS89C35 802.11bg WLAN USB Adapter" on the outside and the
name of the company "Integrated System Solution Corp." in the .inf
file that was part of the driver on the CD. I opened the unit and it
has Winbond chips, but I'll have to shoot some pictures and enlarge
them to see what numbers are on them. For now, its my most reliable
method for accessing the router. Based on the name of the company, I
found what I believe is their website here: http://www.issc.com.tw/

So its not Made in China. I guess Made in Taiwan isn't a bad thing.

> Let's see if someone else wants to post some tools to use, you don't mind
> if we wait a few more hours do you?

No big rush, but life will be simpler once I get this all straightened
out and can focus on the variety of other things I'm doing. By the
time I catch up on all the other projects here, MS may put out another
OS and Vista might become a stable operating system.


>
> Wow, striking difference in strength. I haven't been working with much
> wireless recently as its EXTREMELY vulnerable to attack, so I no longer
> recommend it either. But I understand the need to be "connected". Just
> another gizmo that was highly touted and now found to be a major security
> risk.

I'm sure there are some people wardriving around here, looking for
vulnerable systems, but not very often. At least, I know enough to not
broadcast my SSID, have my network set up for peer-to-peer and use WPA-
PSK TKIP. Unlike some of my neighbors, (one who insists that his
business and personal info is safe because he is hard wired, but still
doesn't have a firewall), I wouldn't even use a computer without a
firewall and scheduled scanning for viruses, etc. And I'm thinking
using a program called FakeID, if I can find another old computer to
run it on. I might have the wrong name there, but the program I'm
thinking of lets you hide in plain sight by broadcasting thousands of
SSID's.

> WG111 - 54Mbpshttp://review.zdnet.com/adapters-nics/netgear-wg111-usb-adapter/4505-...
> "the WG111 earned a less remarkable 6.2Mbps score at 200 feet"

That score would be an improvement over what I've been getting at 300
feet, but I'm hoping the addition of an external antenna will made a
significant difference. When I'm sitting idle watching the Wwu utility
for this Taiwanese adapter, it shows a speed of 54 mbps, but as soon
as I click on another webpage link it drops down to 1 mbps. If I
recall correctly, when I download files, a 10 Mb file takes about 20
minutes, unless I take the laptop into the house where it can take as
little as 3 minutes. I know I would do way better to upgrade to WinXP,
but until I upgrade my computers, thats something that can wait. For
now, I just need to be able to browse the web and email. The few files
I upload are small and don't contain personal, or business
information, but it would still be nice to have things happening at a
pace that didn't leave me wondering if I should take another coffee
break while I wait.


K.
 
M

MEB

"MaxAttacks" <kickofthecat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b2455119-1f40-493d-9961-83f53720de96@t12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
| On May 15, 11:30 pm, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
| > "MaxAttacks" <kickofthe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
| >
| >
news:b2bc9102-4f23-401c-8e8a-fa44ee09e43b@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
| > | On May 15, 11:46 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
| > | > We could attempt to help here, but I think you would have more luck
on
| > | > forums/groups which deal specifically with Netstumbler and
| > cards/adapters.
| > | >
| > | > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=netstumbler&btnG=Google+Search
| > |
| > | I actually had planned on posting directly to the Netstumbler furom on
| > | their website, but after I registered I found that there was a message
| > | to new members, saying that we couldn't post for the first week after
| > | registration.
| >
| > Okay, as you have found out, the program is extremely limited, though
| > useful *IF* you can find chip specific adaptations.
| >
| > There are other programs [perhaps not exactly what your looking for]
like
| > CommView, Wireless Sniffer, other [general listed and searched for as
| > wireless sniffers]
|
| I'm a little late getting back to this, but appreciate the help and
| mention of other similar products. I tried to reply a couple of days
| ago but Google News seemed to think I should wait and try again
| another time.
|
| I did find out through reading way too many postings about Netstumbler
| that, it only works under Windows 98 SE "if" your using an adapter
| with a Hermes chipset. As they added support for newer operating
| systems, they didn't bother to add support for Win98SE, to allow for
| the new chipsets in the newer devices supported. Which means I'm out
| of luck when it comes to using Netstumbler unless I update my OS
| first.

Well I didn't want to burst your bubble, I have Netstumbler here... and it
is only useful as you indicate.

|
|
| > |
| > | > As for the antenna extension/change, perhaps one of the
electrically
| > adept
| > | > or old short band/ham radio operators in this group MIGHT be able to
| > help
| > | > [they have been "pumping up" signals for years].
| > | >
| > | > Questions might be [I'll leave the Netgear out of the equation for
now
| > as
| > | > that might bring its own issues with it]:
| > | >
| > | > What was the supposed speed/rating/connection for the Chinese
adapter
| > [B, G
| > | > what?].
| > |
| > | It's "ISSC Wireless Utility" says that my link quality is 50%, Signal
| > | Strength is -77dbm and noise is -95dbm. It is supposed to be a "g" and
| > | included a CD with a really painful to install utility labeled "Wwu
| > | ".
| >
| > If its a G then you may not do much better with the Netgear... the link
| > quality will be the limiting issue,, likely too many re-sends slowing
the
| > connections.
| >
| > The Netgear has some issues, if you have looked on the NET.
|
| The only reason I bought the Netgear, is that they seem to be reliable
| when modified with an external antenna, (which seems to remove most of
| the heat source, aka: antenna, from the adapter), as in the case of
| the biquad designs I've seen. (That and they were cheap to experiment
| with.) Turns out that I missed a label on the side of the Netgear unit
| that says in small print "Made in China".

HEHEHE, oh well, CHINA makes what manufacturers dictate...

So let me get this straight, you mentioned a laptop, that ISN"T the one in
the shop is it?

If its a desktop, an internal adapter can provide MUCH more ability to
modify than a plugin USB. Think of modifications that the old CB users used
to make....

|
|
| > | > Are there any identifying chip numbers available on the Chinese
| > Adapter?
|
| I couldn't find any meaningful markings on the ISSC unit apart from
| the "ISSC IS89C35 802.11bg WLAN USB Adapter" on the outside and the
| name of the company "Integrated System Solution Corp." in the .inf
| file that was part of the driver on the CD. I opened the unit and it
| has Winbond chips, but I'll have to shoot some pictures and enlarge
| them to see what numbers are on them. For now, its my most reliable
| method for accessing the router. Based on the name of the company, I
| found what I believe is their website here: http://www.issc.com.tw/
|
| So its not Made in China. I guess Made in Taiwan isn't a bad thing.

Contrary to popular opinion, China does ship some good products.. and
Taiwan has been providing the world with a large part of its technologies
and hardware for decades.

Actually, looking at the site, ISSC amalgamated with Alinks Communications,
Inc. in Silicon Valley in 2000 so what do you actually have, or does it
really matter.. they seem to be making their own designs, so though not
POPULAR and WELL ADVERTISED, they may make better products and chips.

|
| > Let's see if someone else wants to post some tools to use, you don't
mind
| > if we wait a few more hours do you?
|
| No big rush, but life will be simpler once I get this all straightened
| out and can focus on the variety of other things I'm doing. By the
| time I catch up on all the other projects here, MS may put out another
| OS and Vista might become a stable operating system.

ROFLMAO,,,, right, like that will happen in my lifetime, VISTA stable,,,
sshhshshhs, they just found another batch of new vulnerabilities, and in
Vista's UAC....

|
|
| >
| > Wow, striking difference in strength. I haven't been working with much
| > wireless recently as its EXTREMELY vulnerable to attack, so I no longer
| > recommend it either. But I understand the need to be "connected". Just
| > another gizmo that was highly touted and now found to be a major
security
| > risk.
|
| I'm sure there are some people wardriving around here, looking for
| vulnerable systems, but not very often. At least, I know enough to not
| broadcast my SSID, have my network set up for peer-to-peer and use WPA-
| PSK TKIP. Unlike some of my neighbors, (one who insists that his
| business and personal info is safe because he is hard wired, but still
| doesn't have a firewall), I wouldn't even use a computer without a
| firewall and scheduled scanning for viruses, etc. And I'm thinking
| using a program called FakeID, if I can find another old computer to
| run it on. I might have the wrong name there, but the program I'm
| thinking of lets you hide in plain sight by broadcasting thousands of
| SSID's.

Ah, heard of those [have to say that]. Guess you haven't done that sniffer
search I suggested.
You might just use a dedicated firewall server if you can find that extra
machine... much more to them than just the normal "software firewall".
Several free Linux stand-alone versions out there...

As for your neighbor without the firewall, likely bought into the "routers
are the only firewall I need" sales hype, or maybe "mine has a hardware
firewall built in", yep, and so did the CISCO and others that were recently
wacked....

And of course:
Over 1.5 million pages were affected by the recent SQL injection attacks.
SQL Injection attacks lead to wide-spread compromise of IIS servers[hmm,
another Microsoft product] and giess what, they were behind firewalls and
routers...


|
| > WG111 -
54Mbpshttp://review.zdnet.com/adapters-nics/netgear-wg111-usb-adapter/4505-.
...
| > "the WG111 earned a less remarkable 6.2Mbps score at 200 feet"
|
| That score would be an improvement over what I've been getting at 300
| feet, but I'm hoping the addition of an external antenna will made a
| significant difference. When I'm sitting idle watching the Wwu utility
| for this Taiwanese adapter, it shows a speed of 54 mbps, but as soon
| as I click on another webpage link it drops down to 1 mbps. If I
| recall correctly, when I download files, a 10 Mb file takes about 20
| minutes, unless I take the laptop into the house where it can take as
| little as 3 minutes. I know I would do way better to upgrade to WinXP,
| but until I upgrade my computers, thats something that can wait. For
| now, I just need to be able to browse the web and email. The few files
| I upload are small and don't contain personal, or business
| information, but it would still be nice to have things happening at a
| pace that didn't leave me wondering if I should take another coffee
| break while I wait.
|
|
| K.

Ouch, I'm still using phoneline for this identity... but you already know
that isn't going to happen with the Netgear, it won't even connect at 300
now...

Okay, so it IS the laptop then. Well, if you get the time, play around with
the antenna conversion, and maybe research some boosters.
But if you're going that route, might as well make it the one that
presently works to boost. At least that already has a signal indicating a
better potential outcome.

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________
 
M

MaxAttacks

On May 23, 12:06 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "MaxAttacks" <kickofthe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:b2455119-1f40-493d-9961-83f53720de96@t12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> | On May 15, 11:30 pm, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> | > "MaxAttacks" <kickofthe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> | >
> | >news:b2bc9102-4f23-401c-8e8a-fa44ee09e43b@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> | > | On May 15, 11:46 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> | > | > We could attempt to help here, but I think you would have more luck
> on
> | > | > forums/groups which deal specifically with Netstumbler and
> | > cards/adapters.
> | > | >
> | > | > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=netstumbler&btnG=Google+Search


> | > Okay, as you have found out, the program is extremely limited, though
> | > useful *IF* you can find chip specific adaptations.
> | >
> | > There are other programs [perhaps not exactly what your looking for]
> like
> | > CommView, Wireless Sniffer, other [general listed and searched for as
> | > wireless sniffers]
> |
> | I'm a little late getting back to this, but appreciate the help and
> | mention of other similar products. I tried to reply a couple of days
> | ago but Google News seemed to think I should wait and try again
> | another time.
> |
> | I did find out through reading way too many postings about Netstumbler
> | that, it only works under Windows 98 SE "if" your using an adapter
> | with a Hermes chipset. As they added support for newer operating
> | systems, they didn't bother to add support for Win98SE, to allow for
> | the new chipsets in the newer devices supported. Which means I'm out
> | of luck when it comes to using Netstumbler unless I update my OS
> | first.
>
> Well I didn't want to burst your bubble, I have Netstumbler here... and it
> is only useful as you indicate.

I managed to locate a used 500 mhz cpu for the desktop in the house,
but my old montherboard doesn't support it very well so, when I find
time I'll be updating and going with XP on that computer. At least
I'll have one system that I can use to check signal strength for
connections to the laptop and my other desktop in the trailer. I've
mainly been using the laptop in the yard and when in town at hotspots,
but with only Win98SE on it and being too old to upgrade, I think it
will soon be time for something newer.

> So let me get this straight, you mentioned a laptop, that ISN"T the one in
> the shop is it?
>
> If its a desktop, an internal adapter can provide MUCH more ability to
> modify than a plugin USB. Think of modifications that the old CB users used
> to make....
> |
> | > | > Are there any identifying chip numbers available on the Chinese
> | > Adapter?
> |
> | I couldn't find any meaningful markings on the ISSC unit apart from
> | the "ISSC IS89C35 802.11bg WLAN USB Adapter" on the outside and the
> | name of the company "Integrated System Solution Corp." in the .inf
> | file that was part of the driver on the CD. I opened the unit and it
> | has Winbond chips, but I'll have to shoot some pictures and enlarge
> | them to see what numbers are on them. For now, its my most reliable
> | method for accessing the router. Based on the name of the company, I
> | found what I believe is their website here:http://www.issc.com.tw/
> |
> | So its not Made in China. I guess Made in Taiwan isn't a bad thing.
>
> Contrary to popular opinion, China does ship some good products.. and
> Taiwan has been providing the world with a large part of its technologies
> and hardware for decades.
>
> Actually, looking at the site, ISSC amalgamated with Alinks Communications,
> Inc. in Silicon Valley in 2000 so what do you actually have, or does it
> really matter.. they seem to be making their own designs, so though not
> POPULAR and WELL ADVERTISED, they may make better products and chips.

They sell these on eBay for about $0.99 each but the shipping is
inflated to around $12.00.

> |
> | > Let's see if someone else wants to post some tools to use, you don't
> mind
> | > if we wait a few more hours do you?
> |
> | No big rush, but life will be simpler once I get this all straightened
> | out and can focus on the variety of other things I'm doing. By the
> | time I catch up on all the other projects here, MS may put out another
> | OS and Vista might become a stable operating system.
>
> ROFLMAO,,,, right, like that will happen in my lifetime, VISTA stable,,,
> sshhshshhs, they just found another batch of new vulnerabilities, and in
> Vista's UAC....

Ok, so I was getting a flashback to a MAC/PC commercial. If they
didn't make other OS's like Linux and Ubutu sound like old Unix, I'd
consider going that route, but then I'd have to hunt up new equipment
and drivers to make it all work.

> |
> | I'm sure there are some people wardriving around here, looking for
> | vulnerable systems, but not very often. At least, I know enough to not
> | broadcast my SSID, have my network set up for peer-to-peer and use WPA-
> | PSK TKIP. Unlike some of my neighbors, (one who insists that his
> | business and personal info is safe because he is hard wired, but still
> | doesn't have a firewall), I wouldn't even use a computer without a
> | firewall and scheduled scanning for viruses, etc. And I'm thinking
> | using a program called FakeID, if I can find another old computer to
> | run it on. I might have the wrong name there, but the program I'm
> | thinking of lets you hide in plain sight by broadcasting thousands of
> | SSID's.
>
> Ah, heard of those [have to say that]. Guess you haven't done that sniffer
> search I suggested.
> You might just use a dedicated firewall server if you can find that extra
> machine... much more to them than just the normal "software firewall".
> Several free Linux stand-alone versions out there...

I poked around abit, but so far most sniffers are aimed at Linux, or
WinXP. Maybe its me and I've got some sort of obsessive compulsive
thing going on with USB adapters, but I've actually been looking at a
USB firewall adapter. Its hardware based, but as easy to get up and
running as plugging it in to a USB port.

> As for your neighbor without the firewall, likely bought into the "routers
> are the only firewall I need" sales hype, or maybe "mine has a hardware
> firewall built in", yep, and so did the CISCO and others that were recently
> wacked....
>
> And of course:
> Over 1.5 million pages were affected by the recent SQL injection attacks.
> SQL Injection attacks lead to wide-spread compromise of IIS servers[hmm,
> another Microsoft product] and giess what, they were behind firewalls and
> routers...

The neighbor in question thinks that the ISP's firewall is enough and
they actually run a business taking and using credit cards for most
transactions. I shake my head every time I see another poor sap going
there to do business with them, but I've tried to report this to the
parent company they contract with and to the media, but they're all
paranoid about making accusations and potential liability. Oh well.

> |
> | > WG111 -
> 54Mbpshttp://review.zdnet.com/adapters-nics/netgear-wg111-usb-adapter/4505-.
> ..
> | > "the WG111 earned a less remarkable 6.2Mbps score at 200 feet"
> |
> | That score would be an improvement over what I've been getting at 300
> | feet, but I'm hoping the addition of an external antenna will made a
> | significant difference. When I'm sitting idle watching the Wwu utility
> | for this Taiwanese adapter, it shows a speed of 54 mbps, but as soon
> | as I click on another webpage link it drops down to 1 mbps. If I
> | recall correctly, when I download files, a 10 Mb file takes about 20
> | minutes, unless I take the laptop into the house where it can take as
> | little as 3 minutes. I know I would do way better to upgrade to WinXP,
> | but until I upgrade my computers, thats something that can wait. For
> | now, I just need to be able to browse the web and email. The few files
> | I upload are small and don't contain personal, or business
> | information, but it would still be nice to have things happening at a
> | pace that didn't leave me wondering if I should take another coffee
> | break while I wait.
> |
> |
> | K.
>
> Ouch, I'm still using phoneline for this identity... but you already know
> that isn't going to happen with the Netgear, it won't even connect at 300
> now...

Until a few months ago, I was using dialup and paying more than if I
had cable internet. I finally made the break and hope I'll never have
to go back.

> Okay, so it IS the laptop then. Well, if you get the time, play around with
> the antenna conversion, and maybe research some boosters.
> But if you're going that route, might as well make it the one that
> presently works to boost. At least that already has a signal indicating a
> better potential outcome.

When I was deciding on which USB WiFi adapter to use, I couldn't find
any side by side comparisons showing dBi of gain for each. So, I went
with a brand name and moderate model of adapter. I had seen some
complaints about the WG111v2, but not many compared to some other
models. I had also seen someone on eBay who was selling preassembled
biquad antenna's using a Netgear USB adapter and when I spotted
someone else selling several of them at a good price and cheap
shipping, I bit the bullet and bought a few.

So, the designs on these pages are what I'm looking at, apart from the
fact that I'm "thinking" of going with the "double" biquad design in
the last link. I haven't decided on just how fancy I want to get yet.
The single biquad design seems easier and I do have an unused
satellite dish I could use with it, (using the biquad as the feed
horn), if I decide to do that at a later date.

http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~redwood4/
http://www.trevormarshall.com/biquad.htm
http://martybugs.net/wireless/biquad/
http://martybugs.net/wireless/biquad/double.cgi

I was just browsing that last website and came up with a link to an
eBay store that sells kits for the antenna's, so I might go that
route since the shipping seems pretty reasonable. If anyone is
interested, here's the link:
http://stores.ebay.com/War-Driving-World

As you suggested, I mainly want the external antenna for the laptop,
but it wouldn't hurt to have a stronger antenna and signal for my
other computers. I've found that most laptops have very weak signals
from internal antenna's and both my desktop and laptop do far better
when I use an active USB cable, (3 meters long), and put the adapter
as far away as possible from the computer. One other use I have for
the laptop, is when I go camping with my travel trailer and want to
use a "hotspot" at the local Walmart, or Staples, etc, but can't park
close enough to get a good signal. Or when I'm in a campground that
has internet access and I end up at the far end where the signal can
be very weak.

Anyway, I think I've covered everything and I feel better informed. I
will be continuing to hunt for a sniffer that works with my adapters
and Win98SE as I have time, but if anyone knows of one similar to
NetStumbler, feel free to post it here.

Have a good day!

K.
 
M

MEB

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"MaxAttacks" <kickofthecat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef40c3fd-6ef5-4645-b283-f43396c25ad2@u6g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
| On May 23, 12:06 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
| > "MaxAttacks" <kickofthe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
| >
| >
news:b2455119-1f40-493d-9961-83f53720de96@t12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
| > | On May 15, 11:30 pm, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
| > | > "MaxAttacks" <kickofthe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
| > | >
| > |
>news:b2bc9102-4f23-401c-8e8a-fa44ee09e43b@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
| > | > | On May 15, 11:46 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
| > | > | > We could attempt to help here, but I think you would have more
luck
| > on
| > | > | > forums/groups which deal specifically with Netstumbler and
| > | > cards/adapters.
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=netstumbler&btnG=Google+Search
|
|
| > | > Okay, as you have found out, the program is extremely limited,
though
| > | > useful *IF* you can find chip specific adaptations.
| > | >
| > | > There are other programs [perhaps not exactly what your looking
for]
| > like
| > | > CommView, Wireless Sniffer, other [general listed and searched for
as
| > | > wireless sniffers]
| > |
| > | I'm a little late getting back to this, but appreciate the help and
| > | mention of other similar products. I tried to reply a couple of days
| > | ago but Google News seemed to think I should wait and try again
| > | another time.
| > |
| > | I did find out through reading way too many postings about Netstumbler
| > | that, it only works under Windows 98 SE "if" your using an adapter
| > | with a Hermes chipset. As they added support for newer operating
| > | systems, they didn't bother to add support for Win98SE, to allow for
| > | the new chipsets in the newer devices supported. Which means I'm out
| > | of luck when it comes to using Netstumbler unless I update my OS
| > | first.
| >
| > Well I didn't want to burst your bubble, I have Netstumbler here... and
it
| > is only useful as you indicate.
|
| I managed to locate a used 500 mhz cpu for the desktop in the house,
| but my old montherboard doesn't support it very well so, when I find
| time I'll be updating and going with XP on that computer. At least
| I'll have one system that I can use to check signal strength for
| connections to the laptop and my other desktop in the trailer. I've
| mainly been using the laptop in the yard and when in town at hotspots,
| but with only Win98SE on it and being too old to upgrade, I think it
| will soon be time for something newer.

Don't expect much from that 500Mhz with XP, its a hog for CPU needs and
memory, if that's your intent.

|
| > So let me get this straight, you mentioned a laptop, that ISN"T the one
in
| > the shop is it?
| >
| > If its a desktop, an internal adapter can provide MUCH more ability to
| > modify than a plugin USB. Think of modifications that the old CB users
used
| > to make....
| > |
| > | > | > Are there any identifying chip numbers available on the Chinese
| > | > Adapter?
| > |
| > | I couldn't find any meaningful markings on the ISSC unit apart from
| > | the "ISSC IS89C35 802.11bg WLAN USB Adapter" on the outside and the
| > | name of the company "Integrated System Solution Corp." in the .inf
| > | file that was part of the driver on the CD. I opened the unit and it
| > | has Winbond chips, but I'll have to shoot some pictures and enlarge
| > | them to see what numbers are on them. For now, its my most reliable
| > | method for accessing the router. Based on the name of the company, I
| > | found what I believe is their website here:http://www.issc.com.tw/
| > |
| > | So its not Made in China. I guess Made in Taiwan isn't a bad thing.
| >
| > Contrary to popular opinion, China does ship some good products.. and
| > Taiwan has been providing the world with a large part of its
technologies
| > and hardware for decades.
| >
| > Actually, looking at the site, ISSC amalgamated with Alinks
Communications,
| > Inc. in Silicon Valley in 2000 so what do you actually have, or does it
| > really matter.. they seem to be making their own designs, so though not
| > POPULAR and WELL ADVERTISED, they may make better products and chips.
|
| They sell these on eBay for about $0.99 each but the shipping is
| inflated to around $12.00.

Right, seems everyone follows what the purported *hot* item is, even if its
not all that good.

|
| > |
| > | > Let's see if someone else wants to post some tools to use, you
don't
| > mind
| > | > if we wait a few more hours do you?
| > |
| > | No big rush, but life will be simpler once I get this all straightened
| > | out and can focus on the variety of other things I'm doing. By the
| > | time I catch up on all the other projects here, MS may put out another
| > | OS and Vista might become a stable operating system.
| >
| > ROFLMAO,,,, right, like that will happen in my lifetime, VISTA
stable,,,
| > sshhshshhs, they just found another batch of new vulnerabilities, and in
| > Vista's UAC....
|
| Ok, so I was getting a flashback to a MAC/PC commercial. If they
| didn't make other OS's like Linux and Ubutu sound like old Unix, I'd
| consider going that route, but then I'd have to hunt up new equipment
| and drivers to make it all work.

Most of those "old" issue have been resolved. The newer Linuxes are rather
nice and get some pretty good ratings.
Seems there are a lot more people headed that way.

|
| > |
| > | I'm sure there are some people wardriving around here, looking for
| > | vulnerable systems, but not very often. At least, I know enough to not
| > | broadcast my SSID, have my network set up for peer-to-peer and use
WPA-
| > | PSK TKIP. Unlike some of my neighbors, (one who insists that his
| > | business and personal info is safe because he is hard wired, but still
| > | doesn't have a firewall), I wouldn't even use a computer without a
| > | firewall and scheduled scanning for viruses, etc. And I'm thinking
| > | using a program called FakeID, if I can find another old computer to
| > | run it on. I might have the wrong name there, but the program I'm
| > | thinking of lets you hide in plain sight by broadcasting thousands of
| > | SSID's.
| >
| > Ah, heard of those [have to say that]. Guess you haven't done that
sniffer
| > search I suggested.
| > You might just use a dedicated firewall server if you can find that
extra
| > machine... much more to them than just the normal "software firewall".
| > Several free Linux stand-alone versions out there...
|
| I poked around abit, but so far most sniffers are aimed at Linux, or
| WinXP. Maybe its me and I've got some sort of obsessive compulsive
| thing going on with USB adapters, but I've actually been looking at a
| USB firewall adapter. Its hardware based, but as easy to get up and
| running as plugging it in to a USB port.

Okay I suppose, but remember that these extra USB devices are sharing
bandwidth on the channel. Its not like your adding a bunch of USB drives
that only use the channel when accessed. Throw a printer, camera, IPod, hard
drive, thumb drive, and other gizmos on USB and your running into sharing
issues.

|
| > As for your neighbor without the firewall, likely bought into the
"routers
| > are the only firewall I need" sales hype, or maybe "mine has a hardware
| > firewall built in", yep, and so did the CISCO and others that were
recently
| > wacked....
| >
| > And of course:
| > Over 1.5 million pages were affected by the recent SQL injection
attacks.
| > SQL Injection attacks lead to wide-spread compromise of IIS servers[hmm,
| > another Microsoft product] and guess what, they were behind firewalls
and
| > routers...
|
| The neighbor in question thinks that the ISP's firewall is enough and
| they actually run a business taking and using credit cards for most
| transactions. I shake my head every time I see another poor sap going
| there to do business with them, but I've tried to report this to the
| parent company they contract with and to the media, but they're all
| paranoid about making accusations and potential liability. Oh well.

Big company? Well you might remind them that the loss CAN be charged back
to someone when they are at fault for that loss and failed to ensure
protection, or may be held otherwise liable.
And if they were instrumental in ID theft, they could have a suit on their
hands.

|
| > |
| > | > WG111 -
| >
54Mbpshttp://review.zdnet.com/adapters-nics/netgear-wg111-usb-adapter/4505-.
| > ..
| > | > "the WG111 earned a less remarkable 6.2Mbps score at 200 feet"
| > |
| > | That score would be an improvement over what I've been getting at 300
| > | feet, but I'm hoping the addition of an external antenna will made a
| > | significant difference. When I'm sitting idle watching the Wwu utility
| > | for this Taiwanese adapter, it shows a speed of 54 mbps, but as soon
| > | as I click on another webpage link it drops down to 1 mbps. If I
| > | recall correctly, when I download files, a 10 Mb file takes about 20
| > | minutes, unless I take the laptop into the house where it can take as
| > | little as 3 minutes. I know I would do way better to upgrade to WinXP,
| > | but until I upgrade my computers, thats something that can wait. For
| > | now, I just need to be able to browse the web and email. The few files
| > | I upload are small and don't contain personal, or business
| > | information, but it would still be nice to have things happening at a
| > | pace that didn't leave me wondering if I should take another coffee
| > | break while I wait.
| > |
| > |
| > | K.
| >
| > Ouch, I'm still using phoneline for this identity... but you already
know
| > that isn't going to happen with the Netgear, it won't even connect at
300
| > now...
|
| Until a few months ago, I was using dialup and paying more than if I
| had cable internet. I finally made the break and hope I'll never have
| to go back.

Right, there is nothing presently that compares for the general consumer.
The DSL offerings get close but ... SAT could easily blow the doors off
Cable if they wished to do it, but the cells are likely to pick up that
area.
Personally, I'm not very happy being bombarded with all this massive amount
of microwave and other..

|
| > Okay, so it IS the laptop then. Well, if you get the time, play around
with
| > the antenna conversion, and maybe research some boosters.
| > But if you're going that route, might as well make it the one that
| > presently works to boost. At least that already has a signal indicating
a
| > better potential outcome.
|
| When I was deciding on which USB WiFi adapter to use, I couldn't find
| any side by side comparisons showing dBi of gain for each. So, I went
| with a brand name and moderate model of adapter. I had seen some
| complaints about the WG111v2, but not many compared to some other
| models. I had also seen someone on eBay who was selling preassembled
| biquad antenna's using a Netgear USB adapter and when I spotted
| someone else selling several of them at a good price and cheap
| shipping, I bit the bullet and bought a few.

So your adapter has already been modified?

|
| So, the designs on these pages are what I'm looking at, apart from the
| fact that I'm "thinking" of going with the "double" biquad design in
| the last link. I haven't decided on just how fancy I want to get yet.
| The single biquad design seems easier and I do have an unused
| satellite dish I could use with it, (using the biquad as the feed
| horn), if I decide to do that at a later date.
|
| http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~redwood4/
| http://www.trevormarshall.com/biquad.htm
| http://martybugs.net/wireless/biquad/
| http://martybugs.net/wireless/biquad/double.cgi
|

OKAY, there are some good materials to work from.. seems the antenna aspect
is being done, but did you find anything that works on the actual
output/signal strength? Wait a min, that's likely a violation of FCC Rules
and/or other controls.

| I was just browsing that last website and came up with a link to an
| eBay store that sells kits for the antenna's, so I might go that
| route since the shipping seems pretty reasonable. If anyone is
| interested, here's the link:
| http://stores.ebay.com/War-Driving-World
|
| As you suggested, I mainly want the external antenna for the laptop,
| but it wouldn't hurt to have a stronger antenna and signal for my
| other computers. I've found that most laptops have very weak signals
| from internal antenna's and both my desktop and laptop do far better
| when I use an active USB cable, (3 meters long), and put the adapter
| as far away as possible from the computer. One other use I have for
| the laptop, is when I go camping with my travel trailer and want to
| use a "hotspot" at the local Walmart, or Staples, etc, but can't park
| close enough to get a good signal. Or when I'm in a campground that
| has internet access and I end up at the far end where the signal can
| be very weak.
|
| Anyway, I think I've covered everything and I feel better informed. I
| will be continuing to hunt for a sniffer that works with my adapters
| and Win98SE as I have time, but if anyone knows of one similar to
| NetStumbler, feel free to post it here.
|
| Have a good day!
|
| K.
 
M

MEB

Let me put the sig where its supposed to be>>

"MaxAttacks" <kickofthecat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef40c3fd-6ef5-4645-b283-f43396c25ad2@u6g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
| On May 23, 12:06 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
| > "MaxAttacks" <kickofthe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
| >
| >
news:b2455119-1f40-493d-9961-83f53720de96@t12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
| > | On May 15, 11:30 pm, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
| > | > "MaxAttacks" <kickofthe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
| > | >
| > |
>news:b2bc9102-4f23-401c-8e8a-fa44ee09e43b@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
| > | > | On May 15, 11:46 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
| > | > | > We could attempt to help here, but I think you would have more
luck
| > on
| > | > | > forums/groups which deal specifically with Netstumbler and
| > | > cards/adapters.
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=netstumbler&btnG=Google+Search
|
|
| > | > Okay, as you have found out, the program is extremely limited,
though
| > | > useful *IF* you can find chip specific adaptations.
| > | >
| > | > There are other programs [perhaps not exactly what your looking
for]
| > like
| > | > CommView, Wireless Sniffer, other [general listed and searched for
as
| > | > wireless sniffers]
| > |
| > | I'm a little late getting back to this, but appreciate the help and
| > | mention of other similar products. I tried to reply a couple of days
| > | ago but Google News seemed to think I should wait and try again
| > | another time.
| > |
| > | I did find out through reading way too many postings about Netstumbler
| > | that, it only works under Windows 98 SE "if" your using an adapter
| > | with a Hermes chipset. As they added support for newer operating
| > | systems, they didn't bother to add support for Win98SE, to allow for
| > | the new chipsets in the newer devices supported. Which means I'm out
| > | of luck when it comes to using Netstumbler unless I update my OS
| > | first.
| >
| > Well I didn't want to burst your bubble, I have Netstumbler here... and
it
| > is only useful as you indicate.
|
| I managed to locate a used 500 mhz cpu for the desktop in the house,
| but my old montherboard doesn't support it very well so, when I find
| time I'll be updating and going with XP on that computer. At least
| I'll have one system that I can use to check signal strength for
| connections to the laptop and my other desktop in the trailer. I've
| mainly been using the laptop in the yard and when in town at hotspots,
| but with only Win98SE on it and being too old to upgrade, I think it
| will soon be time for something newer.

Don't expect much from that 500Mhz with XP, its a hog for CPU needs and
memory, if that's your intent.

|
| > So let me get this straight, you mentioned a laptop, that ISN"T the one
in
| > the shop is it?
| >
| > If its a desktop, an internal adapter can provide MUCH more ability to
| > modify than a plugin USB. Think of modifications that the old CB users
used
| > to make....
| > |
| > | > | > Are there any identifying chip numbers available on the Chinese
| > | > Adapter?
| > |
| > | I couldn't find any meaningful markings on the ISSC unit apart from
| > | the "ISSC IS89C35 802.11bg WLAN USB Adapter" on the outside and the
| > | name of the company "Integrated System Solution Corp." in the .inf
| > | file that was part of the driver on the CD. I opened the unit and it
| > | has Winbond chips, but I'll have to shoot some pictures and enlarge
| > | them to see what numbers are on them. For now, its my most reliable
| > | method for accessing the router. Based on the name of the company, I
| > | found what I believe is their website here:http://www.issc.com.tw/
| > |
| > | So its not Made in China. I guess Made in Taiwan isn't a bad thing.
| >
| > Contrary to popular opinion, China does ship some good products.. and
| > Taiwan has been providing the world with a large part of its
technologies
| > and hardware for decades.
| >
| > Actually, looking at the site, ISSC amalgamated with Alinks
Communications,
| > Inc. in Silicon Valley in 2000 so what do you actually have, or does it
| > really matter.. they seem to be making their own designs, so though not
| > POPULAR and WELL ADVERTISED, they may make better products and chips.
|
| They sell these on eBay for about $0.99 each but the shipping is
| inflated to around $12.00.

Right, seems everyone follows what the purported *hot* item is, even if its
not all that good.

|
| > |
| > | > Let's see if someone else wants to post some tools to use, you
don't
| > mind
| > | > if we wait a few more hours do you?
| > |
| > | No big rush, but life will be simpler once I get this all straightened
| > | out and can focus on the variety of other things I'm doing. By the
| > | time I catch up on all the other projects here, MS may put out another
| > | OS and Vista might become a stable operating system.
| >
| > ROFLMAO,,,, right, like that will happen in my lifetime, VISTA
stable,,,
| > sshhshshhs, they just found another batch of new vulnerabilities, and in
| > Vista's UAC....
|
| Ok, so I was getting a flashback to a MAC/PC commercial. If they
| didn't make other OS's like Linux and Ubutu sound like old Unix, I'd
| consider going that route, but then I'd have to hunt up new equipment
| and drivers to make it all work.

Most of those "old" issue have been resolved. The newer Linuxes are rather
nice and get some pretty good ratings.
Seems there are a lot more people headed that way.

|
| > |
| > | I'm sure there are some people wardriving around here, looking for
| > | vulnerable systems, but not very often. At least, I know enough to not
| > | broadcast my SSID, have my network set up for peer-to-peer and use
WPA-
| > | PSK TKIP. Unlike some of my neighbors, (one who insists that his
| > | business and personal info is safe because he is hard wired, but still
| > | doesn't have a firewall), I wouldn't even use a computer without a
| > | firewall and scheduled scanning for viruses, etc. And I'm thinking
| > | using a program called FakeID, if I can find another old computer to
| > | run it on. I might have the wrong name there, but the program I'm
| > | thinking of lets you hide in plain sight by broadcasting thousands of
| > | SSID's.
| >
| > Ah, heard of those [have to say that]. Guess you haven't done that
sniffer
| > search I suggested.
| > You might just use a dedicated firewall server if you can find that
extra
| > machine... much more to them than just the normal "software firewall".
| > Several free Linux stand-alone versions out there...
|
| I poked around abit, but so far most sniffers are aimed at Linux, or
| WinXP. Maybe its me and I've got some sort of obsessive compulsive
| thing going on with USB adapters, but I've actually been looking at a
| USB firewall adapter. Its hardware based, but as easy to get up and
| running as plugging it in to a USB port.

Okay I suppose, but remember that these extra USB devices are sharing
bandwidth on the channel. Its not like your adding a bunch of USB drives
that only use the channel when accessed. Throw a printer, camera, IPod, hard
drive, thumb drive, and other gizmos on USB and your running into sharing
issues.

|
| > As for your neighbor without the firewall, likely bought into the
"routers
| > are the only firewall I need" sales hype, or maybe "mine has a hardware
| > firewall built in", yep, and so did the CISCO and others that were
recently
| > wacked....
| >
| > And of course:
| > Over 1.5 million pages were affected by the recent SQL injection
attacks.
| > SQL Injection attacks lead to wide-spread compromise of IIS servers[hmm,
| > another Microsoft product] and guess what, they were behind firewalls
and
| > routers...
|
| The neighbor in question thinks that the ISP's firewall is enough and
| they actually run a business taking and using credit cards for most
| transactions. I shake my head every time I see another poor sap going
| there to do business with them, but I've tried to report this to the
| parent company they contract with and to the media, but they're all
| paranoid about making accusations and potential liability. Oh well.

Big company? Well you might remind them that the loss CAN be charged back
to someone when they are at fault for that loss and failed to ensure
protection, or may be held otherwise liable.
And if they were instrumental in ID theft, they could have a suit on their
hands.

|
| > |
| > | > WG111 -
| >
54Mbpshttp://review.zdnet.com/adapters-nics/netgear-wg111-usb-adapter/4505-.
| > ..
| > | > "the WG111 earned a less remarkable 6.2Mbps score at 200 feet"
| > |
| > | That score would be an improvement over what I've been getting at 300
| > | feet, but I'm hoping the addition of an external antenna will made a
| > | significant difference. When I'm sitting idle watching the Wwu utility
| > | for this Taiwanese adapter, it shows a speed of 54 mbps, but as soon
| > | as I click on another webpage link it drops down to 1 mbps. If I
| > | recall correctly, when I download files, a 10 Mb file takes about 20
| > | minutes, unless I take the laptop into the house where it can take as
| > | little as 3 minutes. I know I would do way better to upgrade to WinXP,
| > | but until I upgrade my computers, thats something that can wait. For
| > | now, I just need to be able to browse the web and email. The few files
| > | I upload are small and don't contain personal, or business
| > | information, but it would still be nice to have things happening at a
| > | pace that didn't leave me wondering if I should take another coffee
| > | break while I wait.
| > |
| > |
| > | K.
| >
| > Ouch, I'm still using phoneline for this identity... but you already
know
| > that isn't going to happen with the Netgear, it won't even connect at
300
| > now...
|
| Until a few months ago, I was using dialup and paying more than if I
| had cable internet. I finally made the break and hope I'll never have
| to go back.

Right, there is nothing presently that compares for the general consumer.
The DSL offerings get close but ... SAT could easily blow the doors off
Cable if they wished to do it, but the cells are likely to pick up that
area.
Personally, I'm not very happy being bombarded with all this massive amount
of microwave and other..

|
| > Okay, so it IS the laptop then. Well, if you get the time, play around
with
| > the antenna conversion, and maybe research some boosters.
| > But if you're going that route, might as well make it the one that
| > presently works to boost. At least that already has a signal indicating
a
| > better potential outcome.
|
| When I was deciding on which USB WiFi adapter to use, I couldn't find
| any side by side comparisons showing dBi of gain for each. So, I went
| with a brand name and moderate model of adapter. I had seen some
| complaints about the WG111v2, but not many compared to some other
| models. I had also seen someone on eBay who was selling preassembled
| biquad antenna's using a Netgear USB adapter and when I spotted
| someone else selling several of them at a good price and cheap
| shipping, I bit the bullet and bought a few.

So your adapter has already been modified?

|
| So, the designs on these pages are what I'm looking at, apart from the
| fact that I'm "thinking" of going with the "double" biquad design in
| the last link. I haven't decided on just how fancy I want to get yet.
| The single biquad design seems easier and I do have an unused
| satellite dish I could use with it, (using the biquad as the feed
| horn), if I decide to do that at a later date.
|
| http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~redwood4/
| http://www.trevormarshall.com/biquad.htm
| http://martybugs.net/wireless/biquad/
| http://martybugs.net/wireless/biquad/double.cgi
|

OKAY, there are some good materials to work from.. seems the antenna aspect
is being done, but did you find anything that works on the actual
output/signal strength? Wait a min, that's likely a violation of FCC Rules
and/or other controls.

| I was just browsing that last website and came up with a link to an
| eBay store that sells kits for the antenna's, so I might go that
| route since the shipping seems pretty reasonable. If anyone is
| interested, here's the link:
| http://stores.ebay.com/War-Driving-World
|
| As you suggested, I mainly want the external antenna for the laptop,
| but it wouldn't hurt to have a stronger antenna and signal for my
| other computers. I've found that most laptops have very weak signals
| from internal antenna's and both my desktop and laptop do far better
| when I use an active USB cable, (3 meters long), and put the adapter
| as far away as possible from the computer. One other use I have for
| the laptop, is when I go camping with my travel trailer and want to
| use a "hotspot" at the local Walmart, or Staples, etc, but can't park
| close enough to get a good signal. Or when I'm in a campground that
| has internet access and I end up at the far end where the signal can
| be very weak.
|
| Anyway, I think I've covered everything and I feel better informed. I
| will be continuing to hunt for a sniffer that works with my adapters
| and Win98SE as I have time, but if anyone knows of one similar to
| NetStumbler, feel free to post it here.
|
| Have a good day!
|
| K.
--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
I need help with my network adapter
Replies
0
Views
119
HB607540
H
H
Can someone help me with my network adapter?
Replies
0
Views
92
HB607540
H
F
Why is my wifi adapter causing lag spikes?
Replies
0
Views
67
F L5
F
R
Internet connection sharing explanation
Replies
0
Views
61
Richard Hostetler
R
L
Problems with Wifi USB Adapter
Replies
0
Views
62
Ludovico Latini
L
Back
Top Bottom