Not sure where to ask this question, but will try here.

I just set up a network for my mom and step-father. There are two PCs: a
CTX SAK-266 (Windows 98) and an eMachines T1090 (Windows XP Home). Two
Siemens Speedstram 1022 USB Network Adapters running in Ad-Hoc mode connect
them. The eMachines is the internet gateway machine.

1. I was told that files in the "Shared Documents" folder on the CTX
computer would be invisible from the internet, but that the eMachines files
could be seen by a hacker. Is this correct?

2. Do I need a different firewall that ICF?

3. Should I put WEP on? 64-bit? 128-bit? I assume that this would only
matter if someone was within 802.11b range and eavesdropping, and would not
matter for protecting the network from an internet attack. Besides, the
128-bit would be too intensive for the CTX.

Thanks.
-John

John,

You will want to secure your internet connection by disabling file and print
sharing on that connection. On your XP computer, right click on Network
Places from your desktop and select properties. You should then see 2
connections - one to the internet, and a wireless connection to the other
computer. Right click the internet connection and select properties. Under
"connection uses the following protocols", uncheck EVERYTHING except TCP/IP.
This will patch up a couple of security holes in your internet connection.
File sharing to the other home computer should remain unaffected because
it's running through the other network connection.

For casual home use, the ICF included in XP is fine.

You will DEFINITELY want WEP turned on. If it's not on, anyone within range
of your connection can hook up to your network. You should have it set to a
128-bit key. 128-bit over 64-bit won't really affect your resources. WEP is
not the end-all be-all of wireless security, but it really helps to deter
people from snooping around.

Hope this helps,
--Donald

"John Seeliger" <jseelige@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:bl4lbf$822gu$1@ID-146094.news.uni-berlin.de...

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 13:36:40 -0500, "John Seeliger" <jseelige@hotpop.com>
wrote:

vulnerable because it is directly connected. At the minimum make sure the
XP firewall is turned on.

Probably want to get a different firewall. Either something like ZoneAlarm
or Sygate, or even better an external router with firewall built in
encryption is not too much of a load for your older machine. Some of it is
taken care of by the wireless adapters.

"Donald Jacobsen" <dmj@nospam.midsouth.rr.com> wrote in message
news:2Imdb.1036$oC5.367@clmboh1-nws5.columbus.rr.com...
^^ Just thought I'd add that when Ive used ICF Ive experienced a "connection
lag", in particualr when connecting to an IRC server it could take up to
5mins to get through as apposed to the usually few seconds, so if you use
irc and icf and this happens you know what it is.

--
Mimic

"Without Knowledge you have fear, With fear you create your own nightmares."
"There are 10 types of people in this world. Those that understand Binary,
and those that dont."
"C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. C++ makes it harder, but
when you do, it blows away your whole leg"

What's happening is that your computer is not responding to the IRC server's
identd request, because the identd port is blocked by ICF. Try going into
your internet connection's properties, go to the Advanced tab (where the
check box for ICF is), and hit Settings. You should be in the Advanced
Settings window, under the Services tab. Hit "Add", put "identd" as
description of service, "127.0.0.1" as ip address of computer hosting the
service, and for internal and external ports, put port 113 (TCP). Hit OK,
close everything out, and tada... no more IRC connection lag.

--Donald

"Mimic" <null@void.net> wrote in message
news:hOSdnS0ASYy3iuqiU-KYgw@brightview.com...

"JT" <datacare@localhost> wrote in message
news:078bdc4c81d02f55a1f2e95c85167e04@news.teranew s.com...
Got that one on.

CompUSA has a Belkin router $69.99 - $40.00 = $29.99
(http://www.compusa.com/products/prod...=301825&pfp=BR
OWSE). Is the firewall on this one pretty good?

I think I might have confused the 128-bit with something I had read. I
believe I read that it takes a powerful machine to crack 128-bit and I had
confused that with that it takes a powerful machine to encrypt it, which
doesn't make sense, now that I think about it.

Also, I took Donald Jacobsen's advice and removed all protocol's but TCP/IP
from the dial-up connection. Only QoS or something like that was there.
Had to uninstall it as it wouldn't uncheck.

Thanks to all who helped.

"Donald Jacobsen" <dmj@nospam.midsouth.rr.com> wrote in message
news:RfMdb.1078$oC5.897@clmboh1-nws5.columbus.rr.com...
cool thx

--
Mimic

"Without Knowledge you have fear, With fear you create your own nightmares."
"There are 10 types of people in this world. Those that understand Binary,
and those that dont."
"C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. C++ makes it harder, but
when you do, it blows away your whole leg"

yeah.... that one will do you good that way neither of the machines
are directly exposed

Britten

x-- 100 Proof News - http://www.100ProofNews.com
x-- 3,500+ Binary NewsGroups, and over 90,000 other groups
x-- Access to over 800 Gigs/Day - $8.95/Month
x-- UNLIMITED DOWNLOAD