Re: Hopefully not too OT

["Paul D. Robertson" <paul () compuwar net>]

On Mon, 2 May 2005 jimmy () chickenhollow net wrote:

>   I have been pondering putting an 802.11 jammer on site at each
> location (again, we don't use wireless, so it should not impair
> anything) and thought that might be a cheaper option.

Depending on where you are, this can be illegal (in the U.S. signal
jamming and jammers are illegal,) and may also affect other devices in the
same spectrum.  Security cameras, RFID, Cellular, wireless phones,
emergency services radio- the chance for interferrence can be worrisome-
let alone if someone decides to do detonation nearby- I'd not want to
hazard the liability under most circumstances.

>   Have any of you done something like this, and have any tips from your
> experiences with this sort of scenario.

Someone's selling metal-based paint that will theoretically block signals,
it may be worth some experimentation, but it's not cheap.

Better to control what's on the network and how it's configured, so that
you don't fight the same battle as frequencies and technologies change.

If you're just worried about dumb users, put an AP at each site configured
open and not connected to anything.


Paul
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Robertson      "My statements in this message are personal opinions
paul () compuwar net       which may have no basis whatsoever in fact."
_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards