Everything can be Secured, "Centrally" in the home

For discussions about security.
Message
Author
jamesbond
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon 26 Feb 2007, 05:02
Location: The Blue Marble

#31 Post by jamesbond »

rcrsn51 wrote:4. You can set up a dedicated Puppy machine as a "repeater" using a pair of WiFi cards. But a much more effective solution would be something like powerline Ethernet and a second WiFi router.
It's not about repeaters ... it's about routing all traffic through Puppy so it can be "secured". Go figure :wink:
Fatdog64 forum links: [url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=117546]Latest version[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/ke8sn5H]Contributed packages[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/se8scrb]ISO builder[/url]

gcmartin

#32 Post by gcmartin »

Powerline
There is a problem in some building/homes with "powerline" as a solution. Some have power distributed via several differing utility entry points to the premises. This was found about 14 years ago with a solution IBM used to freely provide in the SmartHome package you got with any of their PCs (Windows/OS2). Mainly used for lighting and wall sockets, this like powerline works as long as the send and receive are serviced via the same fusebox (or distribution panel) and as long as the external electric utility circuits (where there are 2/more) are not bridged.

This is NOT all cases, but, are problematic and is the primary cause for the many returns of powerline devices.

Ethernet - Wired
This of course is an excellent way to dedicate signaling from the router to a PC somewhere in the home. It is NOT subject to the interferes that can occur on radio (WIFi) transmissions. And would serve for providing an

Ethernet - Wireless
This arrangement offers one distinct advantage over the other 2 and is why it is so very popular today. Flexibility! It can be placed anywhere the PC can be powered up and can receive a wireless signal for regeneration.


Using a device
Yes, these work very well, but at a cost. With your PC, you can control the upgrades by merely changing or adding WiFi to your central PC. This you have control of changing technology at a much reduced cost. And, you also have control of any expansion in mission for your home Center. This can be useful if you have a PC which is generally running all the time. Some of us, do have a PC ever-ready for use all the time which can now serve to provide this kind of home mission.

Again, on using a device, the risk is reduced because if the device does not function properly, your family or colleagues WONT BLAME YOU.

FATDOG currently has some/much of what would/could make this happen, OOTB.

Question
With the components present, what would be a good approach to make this happen? (I am tempted to setup a DDWRT on a WRT4GX to see a method of how they do this.) The reason for the question is how whether this can be a simple step/UI/Menu to activate.

User avatar
rcrsn51
Posts: 13096
Joined: Tue 05 Sep 2006, 13:50
Location: Stratford, Ontario

#33 Post by rcrsn51 »

gcmartin wrote:Using a device
Yes, these work very well, but at a cost. With your PC, you can control the upgrades by merely changing or adding WiFi to your central PC. This you have control of changing technology at a much reduced cost.
Here are two choices:

1. Spend $50 (or less) on a good-quality external WiFi router that is guaranteed to work with any system.

2. Spend $25 on an internal PCI WiFi card, provided that it has Linux drivers and is able to run as an AP. And then hide its antennae behind the metal case of your server.
With the components present, what would be a good approach to make this happen? (I am tempted to setup a DDWRT on a WRT4GX to see a method of how they do this.) The reason for the question is how whether this can be a simple step/UI/Menu to activate.
Acronyms aside, I don't understand this statement. Is a WRT4GX not an external router? I thought that the point was to have the hardware INSIDE the server.

User avatar
rcrsn51
Posts: 13096
Joined: Tue 05 Sep 2006, 13:50
Location: Stratford, Ontario

#34 Post by rcrsn51 »

Here is some test data:

1. A USB WiFi adapter with Atheros chips set up as an AP. I can connect to it from across the house, one storey down.

2. An internal PCI WiFi card with Ralink chips and dual antennae. I must be in the same room to connect!

3. My external WiFi router. I can connect to it from down the street.
Last edited by rcrsn51 on Wed 10 Sep 2014, 12:08, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
rcrsn51
Posts: 13096
Joined: Tue 05 Sep 2006, 13:50
Location: Stratford, Ontario

#35 Post by rcrsn51 »

Testing continued...

Computer #1 with the crappy PCI wifi card set up as an AP (eth0 -> wlan0).

Computer #2 with internal wifi and the good USB adapter set up as a repeater/extender/bridge (wlan0 -> wlan1) in the same room.

Computer #3 at the far side of the house connected to the Internet through Computer #2. It's rock solid and can stream video with no pauses. Posting from it now.

User avatar
cimarron
Posts: 292
Joined: Fri 31 May 2013, 01:57

#36 Post by cimarron »

If you're interested in DD-WRT's options, you can play with an online mock-up to see the interface and all the settings available:
http://www.dd-wrt.com/demo/

I've been using DD-WRT on a router to handle all the traffic for our little communal group (maybe 30 devices) for about a year now. Works great, no problems, looks very secure as far as I can tell. We use OpenDNS, too, for DNS lookups (and some filtering).

gcmartin

#37 Post by gcmartin »

Thanks @Rcrsn51 for your observations. It shows several things one of which is how differing adapters affect the performance one gets. Not all adapters yield the same results. This has been pointed out, as well, in comparison reviews over the years. This kind of comparing is also demonstrated in vendor router comparison over the years, as well.

But, the most important things you are showing us, I think, is that using PUPPY Linux, the points discussed here, can be done. Puppy can provide services in the home as discussed. I am willing to mimic and report the vary items you share for each case you present. Both of us know how important it is to keep tests as close to the same as possible.

Would you share anything you are willing to about how you setup your tests and I (and anyone else following this thread) can test and report finding.

Out of this comes pathways for Puppy Linux users to begin exploiting PUPPY taking advantage of these "new" configuration options not explained or explored in the forum before.

Users not only can have explanations to these options but can expand of these as well.

Old PCs and laptops can be dispatched to a greater degree as in our past,yet still maintain the great personal use and performance at the same time.

BTW: There are several typos done before I rushed off, in the prior thread by me. Answer: WRT54GX was a widely used WiFi router and a stalwart in DDWRT tests and documentation.

User avatar
neerajkolte
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon 10 Feb 2014, 07:05
Location: Pune, India.

#38 Post by neerajkolte »

Hello everyone,

Please see @rcrsn51's RouterMaker.
Looks nice.

- Neeraj.
"One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."
- Ken Thompson

“We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run.â€￾
- Amara’s Law.

gcmartin

#39 Post by gcmartin »

Yes, @Rcrsn51 has provided a tool, RouterMaker. which can only be gotten by request at the fore-mentioned URL. It works and works rather well.

This provides an excellent PUPPY approach for a feature of a Central LAN services PC. By adding a syslog monitor-reporter in a PUPPY with this ability, there is real-time messaging on the health/activity on the LAN usage. Although NOT required.

After testing in concluded, I would guess that we may see this technology offer show up as either an option or a PET in future PUPs. I would imagine that this could also be built-in, as well, to certain PUPs for the advantages it brings to us.

Thanks @Rcrsn51

anikin
Posts: 994
Joined: Thu 10 May 2012, 06:16

#40 Post by anikin »

Can you share some technical details of "an excellent PUPPY approach for a feature" you have already implemented. What worked for you, what didn't and why?

Post Reply