The only way I can see this working is if you:

a) know and define the subnet the fixed addresses will be in

b) don't ever need to get to that subnet on the Internet (or at least
not at the same time as you're using a wireless device).

Better ways: DHCP. It's pretty easy to write a .bat or .sh which
releases and renews -- with a little more work and snort you could
probably autosense when that sort of activity was required?

I'll assume you know about the big ugly holes recently discovered in WEP
and have heard the stories about driving around with a laptop and an
antenna...

The risks aren't new (WEP == wired equivalent protocol and imagine a
hub with a patch cable reaching out to the street for anyone to use),
but they are recently publicized which means lots more script kiddies
know about it.

-- 
Jack Coates
Monkeynoodle: It's what's for dinner!

On Fri, 20 Apr 2001, Scott C. Best wrote:

>
>       Heyaz. Curious for any leads, pointers, suggestions,
> patient explanations here.
>
>       Here's the situation: given a Linux based NAT'ing
> firewall/router in between a modem and a 802.11 access point,
> I'd like to support an 802.11 network device that arrives on
> the network which is preconfigured "incorrectly". That is,
> suppose my LAN is 192.168.x.y, but a new device is configured
> with a static IP# (and static DNS, and even a static proxy) in
> some *other* range (say, in 206.184.139.137/24 somewhere).
>
>       Presuming the firewall ruleset is flexible enough,
> how much of this would common IP-masquerading be able to
> handle already? Certainly the DNS and and proxy stuff would
> require some careful forwarding...but what about the NAT'ing
> and the routing? I've been noodling on this most of the day,
> and have fairly well convinced myself that it should be
> fairly straightforward with the NAT'ing, but a bit trickier
> with the ad-hoc ip-aliasing of the internal interface (so
> it would appear as the default gateway, DNS, and proxy for
> multiple devices differently).
>       Anyhow...thanks in advance for any thoughts on this.
>
> cheers,
> Scott
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leaf-devel mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
>


_______________________________________________
Leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel

Reply via email to