Slashdot Mirror

WiFi Alliance adds interoperability. Complying with the IEEE standard does not guarantee that, as the current situation with mesh networks, and the mid-1990s wireless networking situation demonstrate. There are too many optional things for the standard to cover, so until someone makes some standard subsets with conformance tests, no two manufacturers are going to implement things the same way.

If you want to keep your privacy, you'd better employ passive scanning. Avoids any MAC transmission at all and saves some power while disconnected.

Link in Wi-fi.org

So you're incompetent at your business. OK.

Or your research skills simply suck.

"Our brands", straight from the horse's mouth.

And as a trademark, it's perfectly proper to use it as a generic reference to 802.11 so long as the uses are licensed and the term is not used to refer to wireless communications generally. Again, don't tell me my own business, boy.

I believe that the Wi-Fi Alliance requires that the option be enabled by default, in order to obtain the Wi-Fi certification logo. The desire when this program was instituted was to minimize the number of consumer APs that were installed without any security, at all. The security decision were made mostly by non-security folks, consistently rejecting stronger security procedures recommended by the participants that knew better.

"Not everyone is a geek who can understand how to configure a router" is dwindling as a valid excuse as time goes on. WPS (Wifi Protected Setup) has been available for a while now and it's so disgustingly easy to set up a secure WPA 2 connection.

Wi-Fi Protected Setup with Push Button Configuration:

1. User activates AP
2. User activates client device
3. A network name (SSID) is generated automatically for the AP and broadcast for discovery by clients
4. User pushes buttons on both the AP and client device.
Done!

The steps above are taken from http://www.wi-fi.org/files/wp_18_20070108_Wi-Fi_Protected_Setup_WP_FINAL.pdf

That just annoys me to no end. When I first started setting up Wifi connections i had to come up with my own SSIDs and authentication keys... in the blowing snow, uphill and all that!

There is nothing stopping you from creating an ad-hoc network in the 5 GHz band. Also, in the 5GHz band, 802.11h is implemented as well. One of the requirements is to randomly select the channel to be used (when you create the network that is). Third, the IPAD hasn't been WiFi certified yet. Check WiFi Alliances website: http://www.wi-fi.org/search_products.php?search=1&advanced=1&lang=en&filter_company_id=5&filter_category_id=&filter_subcategory=&filter_cid=&date_from=&date_to=&x=47&y=9 Now, not having it certified doesn't mean that it is automatically banned, but it sure doesn't prove that the device is legal in Israel or Europe (where it is not yet being sold).

The WiFi Direct spec was just released. Hopefully it will address this exactly and get this off of Top Dead Center... http://www.wi-fi.org/news_articles.php?f=media_news&news_id=909

I wouldn't think anything special about Apple being missing given that IBM/Lenovo (depending on how the suit would hit based on time of filing), Sony, Cisco/Linksys are missing. A host of others would be potential targets, too.

ANSI
IEEE
Wifi Alliance

From the Wi-Fi Alliance's Draft 2.0 FAQ (PDF file):

• I heard 802.11n can cause interference problems with other Wi-Fi networks. Is this true?

  In some configurations, 802.11n products can interfere with other Wi-Fi networks when they are trying to achieve the best performance. However, all products that are Wi-Fi CERTIFIED 802.11n draft 2.0 are required to implement a good neighbor protocol that helps ensure that interference is not a problem. Wi-Fi CERTIFIED 802.11n draft 2.0 products will operate in a manner designed to cause the least interference.

Ars Technica had an August 22 news story on the first wave of Draft 2.0 certified gear: 802.11n gets a boost with flood of Draft 2.0-certified gear .

That article also linked to a list of early Draft 2.0 certified gear. Yup, Cisco's Aironet 1250 is there.
http://certifications.wi-fi.org/wbcs_certified_pro ducts.php?search=1&advanced=1&lang=en&filter_compa ny_id=&filter_category_id=&filter_subcategory=&fil ter_cid=&date_from=&date_to=&selected_certificatio ns%5B%5D=33&x=32&y=5

• I heard 802.11n can cause interference problems with other Wi-Fi networks. Is this true?
  In some configurations, 802.11n products can interfere with other Wi-Fi networks when they are trying to achieve the best performance. However, all products that are Wi-Fi CERTIFIED 802.11n draft 2.0 are required to implement a good neighbor protocol that helps ensure that interference is not a problem. Wi-Fi CERTIFIED 802.11n draft 2.0 products will operate in a manner designed to cause the least interference.

So if you want to take advantage of 802.11n speeds without being an a-hole neighbor, I think it's possible if you chose access points that implement the protocol correctly. Unfortunately, it appears we can't rely on the "Draft 2.0 certified" sticker. I guess we have to read reviews that specifically test this function.

Wi-Fi is a trademark owned by the Wi-Fi Alliance, and is based on various parts of 802.11. It is a wireless local area network standard.

WiMax is a trademark owned by the WiMax forum, and is 802.16d (Fixed WiMax) and 802.16e (Mobile WiMax) [.16e is not yet ratified by IEEE]. These are wireless metro or wide area network standards (depending on where you feel that difference lies)

The two network technologies will likely co-exist in the future. See this article for how their interaction might work out (in the first few paragraphs) [the article refers to fixed WiMax].

The Wi-Fi Alliance issued a press release last October ("Wi-Fi Alliance Will Not Certify Pre-Standard 802.11n Features") that says some pre-standard 802.11g products did not meet the final standard. I guess the earliest adapters got burned.

Other highlights from the press release:

• The Wi-Fi Alliance will not certify 802.11n products until the standard is ratified.
• The 802.11n standard will be completed in approximately November 2006.
• "Pre-standard products always present an inherent risk for technology adopters"
• "Vendors took advantage of unsuspecting buyers when they touted pre-standard technology for 802.11g that later did not meet the standard. Left unchecked, the industry is unfortunately poised to repeat itself with 802.11n."

Just unplug your ethernet cable and your Windows box will be safe from worms!

Beware the airborne version.

Good read, the near future should bring some pretty amazing advances to Wi-Fi security (look forward to AES)

Wi-Fi Security

Well, in fact it was 1999, but WiFi did exist in 1997, which is when the 802.11 spec was released.

The Wi-Fi Alliance is a nonprofit international association formed in 1999 to certify interoperability of wireless Local Area Network products based on IEEE 802.11 specification.

Next time check your facts before you spout off-- both of you.

Looks like you should do so yourself. There was no such thing as Wi-Fi in 1997. There was 802.11, but Wi-Fi is a certification that certifies that products from different vendors interoperate.

This PDF http://www.wi-fi.org/opensection/pdf/whitepaper_wi -fi_security4-29-03.pdf from the WIFI alliance talks about WPA2 near the very end of the document. According to this, WPA2 will use the same 802.1x authentication current used by WPA in enterprise deployments or the PSK mode currently used in home deployments of WPA.

This PDF http://jcbserver.uwaterloo.ca/cs436/handouts/misce llaneous/Intel_Wireless_3.pdf has some interesting technical details about how the AES encryption in 802.11i works.

Unfortunately, it looks like the actual 802.11i specification isn't publically available yet. According to this page http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/ IEEE 802 drafts are publicly available 6 months after they are first published in PDF. I'm assuming this means that the 802.11i standard will be publicly available in 6 months?

Many cryptographers are confident that Wi-Fi Protected Access addresses all the known attacks on WEP. It also adds strong user authentication, which as absent in WEP.

Ok, user authentication is good, but what are the "known attacks on WEP"? I'm using a Linksys access point which obviously can't be upgraded to WPA with this update, so should I be concerned that my 128-bit WEP key isn't good enough?

Slashdot had a long discussion on WiFi security late last hear (Replacing WEP for Wireless Security). ComputerBits has a relatively short overview (Wireless Hot Spot Security) for those who prefer something more organized. Then there's the Unoffical 802.11 Security Page, the website of the WiFi Alliance (the industry group for 802.11) and a nifty google search on WiFi Security.

This sign points to who is behind it. In other words, The Usual Corporate Suspects - not just Microsoft and Intel, but Apple, AMD, etc. etc.

For "global brand" read "US Brand" and this brand gives you the right to...

Actually it gives you the right to do nothing. The point here is that they are aiming to be an "approved" networking solution, so you would only connect to "approved" solutions providers, and your local coffee shop would not be approved but Starbucks sure as hell would be.

Welcome to the corporatisation of community efforts. They don't like Mom and Pop doing this, so they are starting a plan

1) Create a brand
2) Start calling it "approved"
3) Complain to councils and goverments about "un-approved" networks that are causing interfernce.
4) Get unapproved networks stopped.
5) Ramp up the price.

Of course they'd need to sign up the hardware vendors to ensure proper lock down... oh.... they've already thought of that

I believe WiFi alliance membership costs money.

Wi-Fi alliance membership costs $20,000 per year, according to their web site.

In no particular order:

Wi-Fi - IEEE 802.11b compliant products

IEEE - Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

EFF - Electronic Frontier Foundation, an organization dedicated to preserving online rights

NAT - Network Address Translation, typically used to provide Internet address for a local area network while using only one external IP address

ISP - Internet Service Provider, an organization who provides access to the Internet

Wireless Fidelity. WECA's mission is to certify interoperability of Wi-Fi (IEEE 802.11) products and to promote Wi-Fi as the global wireless LAN standard across all market segments.

Unlike what some people have said above, 802.11 is only wireless. 802 includes other LAN standards -- Ethernet, Token Ring, etc. At IEEE you can see the complete list of IEEE 802 Working Groups and a detailed summary of 802.11 work groups.

Some of them are:

• 802.11b - up to 11Mbps at 2.4GHz (also marketed as "Wi-Fi")
• 802.11g - up to 22Mbps at 2.4GHz
• 802.11a - up to 54Mbps at 5GHz

Yes. IEEE 802.11b is a standard that all manufacturers are (supposed) to adhere to. Check out The official 802.11b (WiFi) site for a list of certified compatible hardware.