Sharing folders

Hi,

I've got a network of 2 computers (WinXP) that access the internet
through a wireless router. These 2 computers share some resources, such
as folders.

Are those resources visible to the outside (internet)? Should I close
some port on the router's firewall?

I've set mac address restriction and WPA encryption.

PS I apologize for my ignorance... O:-)

"Fernando" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:1123444688.685097.291410
@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> Hi,
>
> I've got a network of 2 computers (WinXP) that access the internet
> through a wireless router. These 2 computers share some resources, such
> as folders.
>
> Are those resources visible to the outside (internet)? Should I close
> some port on the router's firewall?

The router is going to have the Windows Networking ports closed by default
and the machines will be protected behind the router from the Internet
while networking.

The link discusses the ports.

http://www.petri.co.il/what's_port_445_in_w2k_xp_2003.htm

>
> I've set mac address restriction and WPA encryption.

That's good and you might want to disable the DHCP server on the router and
only use static IP(s).

http://compnetworking.about.com/od/w...fisecurity.htm

Duane

"Fernando" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:1123444688.685097.291410
@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> Hi,
>
> I've got a network of 2 computers (WinXP) that access the internet
> through a wireless router. These 2 computers share some resources, such
> as folders.
>

I also like to use the Authenticated Users group on shares.

http://labmice.techtarget.com/articl...ychecklist.htm

Duane

> That's good and you might want to disable the DHCP server on the router and
> only use static IP(s).

Why?

David Taylor wrote:

>> That's good and you might want to disable the DHCP server on the router
>> and only use static IP(s).
>
> Why?

Why not?

> >> That's good and you might want to disable the DHCP server on the router
> >> and only use static IP(s).
> >
> > Why?
>
> Why not?

Because it only makes local config more effort yet doesn't provide
anything useful. If you're thinking it adds security, just run kismet
and note the ip address range.

David.

"David Taylor" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) d.com...
>> >> That's good and you might want to disable the DHCP server on the
>> >> router
>> >> and only use static IP(s).
>> >
>> > Why?
>>
>> Why not?
>
> Because it only makes local config more effort yet doesn't provide
> anything useful. If you're thinking it adds security, just run kismet
> and note the ip address range.

The next door neighbor who has wireless and taps into someone's wireless
network by happenstance is not going to know that. So I think it provides a
little protection from those type of potential intruders.

> The next door neighbor who has wireless and taps into someone's wireless
> network by happenstance is not going to know that. So I think it provides a
> little protection from those type of potential intruders.

Right but if you've configured even WEP with a 64 bit key, that
automatic association isn't going to happen hence the ip addressing
scheme is irrelevant.

However, to the script kiddy that breaks that WEP key in under half an
hour (he needs a drink and pee break), then kismet to reveal the IP
scheme isn't going to take more than a few extra minutes if any if he
was already running kismet.

David.

David Taylor wrote:

>> The next door neighbor who has wireless and taps into someone's wireless
>> network by happenstance is not going to know that. So I think it provides
>> a little protection from those type of potential intruders.
>
> Right but if you've configured even WEP with a 64 bit key, that
> automatic association isn't going to happen hence the ip addressing
> scheme is irrelevant.
>
> However, to the script kiddy that breaks that WEP key in under half an
> hour (he needs a drink and pee break), then kismet to reveal the IP
> scheme isn't going to take more than a few extra minutes if any if he
> was already running kismet.
>
> David.

That's why one gets a router that provides logging and a logviewer so one
can see the remote IP(s) being connected to and from what LAN IP(s) are
doing it.

> That's why one gets a router that provides logging and a logviewer so one
> can see the remote IP(s) being connected to and from what LAN IP(s) are
> doing it.

But DHCP or not, is irrelevant in that case. In fact, arguably it's
favourable if logging is your intention because an ip address have been
given out and there's a log of it.

If the client comes in with a static address then there's no logged
entry.

Like I said, turning off DHCP does nothing for security and only
increases the admin burden.

David.