Hello All!
I set up a wireless router at home, and it works very well. I didn't
use WEP becuase my laptop's Wireless NIC doesn't support it. Now I
want to see all the computers currently using my wireless router, is
there a way to do that?
Thanks!
On 19-Feb-2007, "Benny Van" <fyf5555841@yahoo.com.cn> wrote:
> Hello All!
> I set up a wireless router at home, and it works very well. I didn't
> use WEP becuase my laptop's Wireless NIC doesn't support it. Now I
> want to see all the computers currently using my wireless router, is
> there a way to do that?
> Thanks!
>
> SIncerely,
> Ben
Are you certain that your wireless NIC doesn't support WEP? What is the
Make and Model and version number of your wireless NIC?
> Hello All!
> I set up a wireless router at home, and it works very well. I didn't
> use WEP becuase my laptop's Wireless NIC doesn't support it. Now I
> want to see all the computers currently using my wireless router, is
> there a way to do that?
> Thanks!
>
> SIncerely,
> Ben
"me here" <gloaming_agnet@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:45da4654_3@news.chariot.net.au...
> Benny Van wrote:
>
>> Hello All!
>> I set up a wireless router at home, and it works very well. I didn't
>> use WEP becuase my laptop's Wireless NIC doesn't support it. Now I
>> want to see all the computers currently using my wireless router, is
>> there a way to do that?
>> Thanks!
>>
>> SIncerely,
>> Ben
>
>
> Use this freebie. Easy to use.
>
> http://www.snapfiles.com/get/lanspy.html
>
> Very good little app.
>
> Cheers
>
> Rob
>
> --
>
Thanks - this is a cool utility, but there is a minor problem - it does not
detect my Linux boxes connected to the network.
Has anyone else noticed this?
Stuart Miller wrote:
> "me here" <gloaming_agnet@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:45da4654_3@news.chariot.net.au...
>> Benny Van wrote:
>>
>>> Hello All!
>>> I set up a wireless router at home, and it works very well. I didn't
>>> use WEP becuase my laptop's Wireless NIC doesn't support it. Now I
>>> want to see all the computers currently using my wireless router, is
>>> there a way to do that?
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> SIncerely,
>>> Ben
>>
>> Use this freebie. Easy to use.
>>
>> http://www.snapfiles.com/get/lanspy.html
>>
>> Very good little app.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> --
>>
> Thanks - this is a cool utility, but there is a minor problem - it does not
> detect my Linux boxes connected to the network.
> Has anyone else noticed this?
>
> Stuart
>
>
Out of curiosity can you "ping" them from the machine that is running
"Lanspy". One of the family tried the program and them uninstalled it,
reason given was that it hadn't picked up one of the laptops that was
using wireless. This laptop runs ZA Pro and does not respond to being
pinged or allow sharing of any kind, before I could double check the
program and been removed and the laptop had disappeared out of the door.
"Kev" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:WK-dneTUwYTki0PYnZ2dnUVZ8q-mnZ2d@bt.com...
> Stuart Miller wrote:
>> "me here" <gloaming_agnet@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:45da4654_3@news.chariot.net.au...
>>> Benny Van wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello All!
>>>> I set up a wireless router at home, and it works very well. I didn't
>>>> use WEP becuase my laptop's Wireless NIC doesn't support it. Now I
>>>> want to see all the computers currently using my wireless router, is
>>>> there a way to do that?
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> SIncerely,
>>>> Ben
>>>
>>> Use this freebie. Easy to use.
>>>
>>> http://www.snapfiles.com/get/lanspy.html
>>>
>>> Very good little app.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>> Thanks - this is a cool utility, but there is a minor problem - it does
>> not detect my Linux boxes connected to the network.
>> Has anyone else noticed this?
>>
>> Stuart
>>
>>
> Out of curiosity can you "ping" them from the machine that is running
> "Lanspy". One of the family tried the program and them uninstalled it,
> reason given was that it hadn't picked up one of the laptops that was
> using wireless. This laptop runs ZA Pro and does not respond to being
> pinged or allow sharing of any kind, before I could double check the
> program and been removed and the laptop had disappeared out of the door.
The two linux machines are configured in normal security, without local
firewall. They both run samba, for workgroup based shares, as I run both xp
and win98 on other machines here. Both are readable & writeable for shares,
one runs as my print server, and both respond properly to ping. It took a
while, bit I finally have it so that everybody can see everybode else.
Everything here lives behind a firewall/router.
My wireless laptop just died, so I have to wait until my son comes by with
his laptop to test the wireless detection.
>> Out of curiosity can you "ping" them from the machine that is running
>> "Lanspy". One of the family tried the program and them uninstalled it,
>> reason given was that it hadn't picked up one of the laptops that was
>> using wireless. This laptop runs ZA Pro and does not respond to being
>> pinged or allow sharing of any kind, before I could double check the
>> program and been removed and the laptop had disappeared out of the door.
>
> The two linux machines are configured in normal security, without local
> firewall. They both run samba, for workgroup based shares, as I run both xp
> and win98 on other machines here. Both are readable & writeable for shares,
> one runs as my print server, and both respond properly to ping. It took a
> while, bit I finally have it so that everybody can see everybode else.
>
> Everything here lives behind a firewall/router.
>
> My wireless laptop just died, so I have to wait until my son comes by with
> his laptop to test the wireless detection.
>
> Stuart
Had a little play this morning.
Lanspy with it's default options.
Laptop1 using wireless with ZA, no sharing and no response to ICMP Echo.
Laptop2 using wireless with Windows firewall , no sharing and no
response to ICMP Echo.
Lanspy does not see either laptop.
If I allow sharing or ICMP Echo on either Laptop then Lanspy will see them.
If I change Lanspy's options to not check "Ping" then it will detect the
MAC addresses of both laptops even if they do not allow sharing or do
not respond to ping. However if the laptops are locked down it takes
forever to do a complete scan of all the checks that Lanspy can carry
out and it is best just to check for MAC addresses if you are checking
to see if anyone is piggybacking onto you network.
Shame it doesn't seem to have an option for continuous scanning.
>If I allow sharing or ICMP Echo on either Laptop then Lanspy will see them.
Where are you plugged in to do your sniffing? Locating a sniffer is
not a trivial exercise. In the typical home system, there is no
single place where you can see all the traffic.
If you're computah running Lanspy, Ethereal, etc is plugged into an
ethernet switch or into the switch on the back of the typical router,
then it will not see any traffic other than broadcasts and it's own
traffic. The purpose of the switch is to not pollute the rest of the
network with un-necessary traffic. If you replaced the switch with an
ethernet hub, which is essentially a repeater where all traffic going
into any port appears on the other ports, you will be able to see the
other traffic.
For sniffing internet traffic (bear with me for this diversion) you
need to add a hub (not a switch). The general arrangement is:
DSL or cable router ====== PC
modem ========== ethernet ======= and ethernet ====== Linux
hub (not switch to other ====== MAC
a switch) computers
|
|
|
\============= monitor computer
running the sniffer
With this arrangement, the monitor computer will see all internet
traffic, including intruders and attacks from the internet.
There are also products specfically available for doing sniffing.
<http://www.netoptics.com>
<http://www.networktaps.com>
<http://www.datacomsystems.com/products/taps/network-taps.asp>
You can also build your own (as I've done because I'm cheap).
If you specifically are trying to minitor just the wireless traffic,
it cannot be done in a "wireless router". That's because there's no
way to "tap" the traffic between the router section and the wireless
access point sections of the "wireless router". If you just plug into
one of the ethernet jacks on the back of the wireless router, you will
see broadcasts from various wireless attackers, but not see their
traffic.
The only place where you will see MOST of a wireless attackers traffic
is on the WAN side of the broadband link. If the wireless traffic is
mostly on the LAN side of the router, you will only see perhaps DNS
lookups from a wireless attacker. Another way is to sniff the
wireless traffic directly over the air, which gets only the wireless
traffic, and not those from the wired ethernet computers.
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> Kev <invalid@invalid.invalid> hath wroth:
>
>> If I allow sharing or ICMP Echo on either Laptop then Lanspy will see them.
>
> Where are you plugged in to do your sniffing?
The PC running Lanspy was wired into a combo modem/router, a speedtouch
variant known as a BT Home Hub( regrettably my Linksys has just died on
me). As there had been several mentions of Lanspy recently one of the
family decided to try to see if it could see all of the computers on the
network, he wasn't interested in actual traffic, and he found he could
not see one laptop. Rather than try to find out why he ditched the
program and went off with the Laptop. Out of curiosity I decided to run
some checks this morning to see why the Laptop hadn't been seen.
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 18:45:56 +0000, Kev <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:
>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> Kev <invalid@invalid.invalid> hath wroth:
>>
>>> If I allow sharing or ICMP Echo on either Laptop then Lanspy will see them.
>>
>> Where are you plugged in to do your sniffing?
>The PC running Lanspy was wired into a combo modem/router, a speedtouch
>variant known as a BT Home Hub
Ok. It may be called a "hub" but it's really a combination modem,
router, wireless?, and ethernet switch. It's the switch part that's
the problem. YOu can't see traffic on one port, that's going to/from
any of the other ports (except broadcasts). Try it by watching the
lights. Copy a big file between two of the ports and see if anything
lights up on a 3rd or 4th port in which you're plugged into. It won't
flash indicating that you cannot use the 3rd or 4th ports to monitor
the traffic on the 1st or 2nd ports. Incidentally, the wireless
access point section is just a 5th port on the ethernet switch and
acts the same as the other ports.
>( regrettably my Linksys has just died on me).
The Linksys whatever wouldn't have helped. The only way you're going
to monitor traffic with such an arrangement is by using seperate boxes
for modem, router, wireless, and ethernet switch. Even so, there's no
single point that will sniff ALL the traffic. Welcome to the
wonderful world of network monitoring. This is one reason why
router/switch based traffic monitoring protocols like SNMP, RMON,
NetFlow, etc are popular.
>As there had been several mentions of Lanspy recently one of the
>family decided to try to see if it could see all of the computers on the
>network, he wasn't interested in actual traffic, and he found he could
>not see one laptop. Rather than try to find out why he ditched the
>program and went off with the Laptop. Out of curiosity I decided to run
>some checks this morning to see why the Laptop hadn't been seen.
If the laptop is running Windoze XP, it might be that the firewall is
configured to reject just about everything. As I vaguely recall, ICMP
ping is blocked in the default configuration.
Control Panel -> Windoze Firewall -> Exceptions -> Advanced
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 18:45:56 +0000, Kev <invalid@invalid.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> Kev <invalid@invalid.invalid> hath wroth:
>>>
>>>> If I allow sharing or ICMP Echo on either Laptop then Lanspy will see them.
>>> Where are you plugged in to do your sniffing?
>
>> The PC running Lanspy was wired into a combo modem/router, a speedtouch
>> variant known as a BT Home Hub
>
> Ok. It may be called a "hub" but it's really a combination modem,
> router, wireless?, and ethernet switch. It's the switch part that's
> the problem. YOu can't see traffic on one port, that's going to/from
> any of the other ports (except broadcasts). Try it by watching the
> lights. Copy a big file between two of the ports and see if anything
> lights up on a 3rd or 4th port in which you're plugged into.
The "Hub" doesn't have such niceties, it came as a freebie when we
upgraded to "up to 8Mb" broadband. http://tinyurl.com/zghtn
> It won't
> flash indicating that you cannot use the 3rd or 4th ports to monitor
> the traffic on the 1st or 2nd ports. Incidentally, the wireless
> access point section is just a 5th port on the ethernet switch and
> acts the same as the other ports.
>
>> ( regrettably my Linksys has just died on me).
>
> The Linksys whatever wouldn't have helped.
No, but it worked well for the last 3 years with only minor hiccups and
lately had been used to allow visitors to access the web without having
to use my main wireless network.
> The only way you're going
> to monitor traffic with such an arrangement is by using seperate boxes
> for modem, router, wireless, and ethernet switch. Even so, there's no
> single point that will sniff ALL the traffic. Welcome to the
> wonderful world of network monitoring. This is one reason why
> router/switch based traffic monitoring protocols like SNMP, RMON,
> NetFlow, etc are popular.
>
>> As there had been several mentions of Lanspy recently one of the
>> family decided to try to see if it could see all of the computers on the
>> network, he wasn't interested in actual traffic, and he found he could
>> not see one laptop. Rather than try to find out why he ditched the
>> program and went off with the Laptop. Out of curiosity I decided to run
>> some checks this morning to see why the Laptop hadn't been seen.
>
> If the laptop is running Windoze XP, it might be that the firewall is
> configured to reject just about everything. As I vaguely recall, ICMP
> ping is blocked in the default configuration.
> Control Panel -> Windoze Firewall -> Exceptions -> Advanced
>
>
Thanks for all the info.,it has been very informative.
The easiest way for Lanspy to "see" the locked down laptops was to
disable the ping check, in options, and only look for MAC addresses.
"Kev" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:iKednUiVR8v2h33YRVnyvQA@bt.com...
> Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 18:45:56 +0000, Kev <invalid@invalid.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>>> Kev <invalid@invalid.invalid> hath wroth:
>>>>
>>>>> If I allow sharing or ICMP Echo on either Laptop then Lanspy will see
>>>>> them.
>>>> Where are you plugged in to do your sniffing?
>>
>>> The PC running Lanspy was wired into a combo modem/router, a speedtouch
>>> variant known as a BT Home Hub
>>
>> Ok. It may be called a "hub" but it's really a combination modem,
>> router, wireless?, and ethernet switch. It's the switch part that's
>> the problem. YOu can't see traffic on one port, that's going to/from
>> any of the other ports (except broadcasts). Try it by watching the
>> lights. Copy a big file between two of the ports and see if anything
>> lights up on a 3rd or 4th port in which you're plugged into.
>
> The "Hub" doesn't have such niceties, it came as a freebie when we
> upgraded to "up to 8Mb" broadband.
> http://tinyurl.com/zghtn
>
>
> > It won't
>> flash indicating that you cannot use the 3rd or 4th ports to monitor
>> the traffic on the 1st or 2nd ports. Incidentally, the wireless
>> access point section is just a 5th port on the ethernet switch and
>> acts the same as the other ports.
>>
>>> ( regrettably my Linksys has just died on me).
>>
>> The Linksys whatever wouldn't have helped.
>
> No, but it worked well for the last 3 years with only minor hiccups and
> lately had been used to allow visitors to access the web without having to
> use my main wireless network.
>
>> The only way you're going
>> to monitor traffic with such an arrangement is by using seperate boxes
>> for modem, router, wireless, and ethernet switch. Even so, there's no
>> single point that will sniff ALL the traffic. Welcome to the
>> wonderful world of network monitoring. This is one reason why
>> router/switch based traffic monitoring protocols like SNMP, RMON,
>> NetFlow, etc are popular.
>>
>>> As there had been several mentions of Lanspy recently one of the family
>>> decided to try to see if it could see all of the computers on the
>>> network, he wasn't interested in actual traffic, and he found he could
>>> not see one laptop. Rather than try to find out why he ditched the
>>> program and went off with the Laptop. Out of curiosity I decided to run
>>> some checks this morning to see why the Laptop hadn't been seen.
>>
>> If the laptop is running Windoze XP, it might be that the firewall is
>> configured to reject just about everything. As I vaguely recall, ICMP
>> ping is blocked in the default configuration.
>> Control Panel -> Windoze Firewall -> Exceptions -> Advanced
>>
>>
> Thanks for all the info.,it has been very informative.
> The easiest way for Lanspy to "see" the locked down laptops was to disable
> the ping check, in options, and only look for MAC addresses.
I enabled Ping, DNS name, MAC and Server, and disabled everything else.
It found the linux machines and reported properly
When I get more time I'll try to find out which test gets confused by the
linux servers.
On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 10:58:51 +0000, Kev <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:
>The "Hub" doesn't have such niceties, it came as a freebie when we
>upgraded to "up to 8Mb" broadband.
>http://tinyurl.com/zghtn
The tinyurl didn't show anything. I got a blank page. However, I
found the BT Hub elsewhere. Only one ethernet jack. One would think
that plugging a cheap ethernet hub (not a switch) into this port and
you will see all the traffic. Nope. There's still a 3 port switch
inside the box. One port to the router, one to the wireless, and one
to the external ethernet connector. Same problem as before. You
don't see any of the traffic not specifically designed to or from the
monitoring PC. In order for this to be useful for external
monitoring, you would have to divorce the router from the wireless
access point sections (which can't be done), or simply disable the
wireless section, and use an external wireless access point.
>Thanks for all the info.,it has been very informative.
Thanks. That's what I try to be.
>The easiest way for Lanspy to "see" the locked down laptops was to
>disable the ping check, in options, and only look for MAC addresses.
Yep. That's the passive sniff mode, which will pickup broadcasts. You
should see those on any port since packets (such as broadcasts) that
have no specific destination MAC address, go to ALL the ports on a
switch.
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 10:58:51 +0000, Kev <invalid@invalid.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> The "Hub" doesn't have such niceties, it came as a freebie when we
>> upgraded to "up to 8Mb" broadband.
>> http://tinyurl.com/zghtn
>
> The tinyurl didn't show anything. I got a blank page.
Not noticed that before, it seems that if I try to do a tinyurl for any
of the specification pages on the BT Shop website it produces a blank page.
> However, I
> found the BT Hub elsewhere. Only one ethernet jack.
>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 10:58:51 +0000, Kev <invalid@invalid.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The "Hub" doesn't have such niceties, it came as a freebie when we
>>> upgraded to "up to 8Mb" broadband.
>>> http://tinyurl.com/zghtn
>>
>> The tinyurl didn't show anything. I got a blank page.
>
>Not noticed that before, it seems that if I try to do a tinyurl for any
>of the specification pages on the BT Shop website it produces a blank page.
That's usually what happens with a web site that uses a "content
management system" or "web applications framework". The various pages
are assembled on the fly, are often dependent on what was previously
viewed, and often have URL's that only work for a specific session.
The URL's are sometimes impossible to bookmark.
>> However, I
>> found the BT Hub elsewhere. Only one ethernet jack.
Chuckle. I used Google images. I just wanted a general clue as to
what it looked like. See:
<http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=bt+home+hub>
for a variety of BT Home Hubs. I assumed it was one of the 2Wire
devices, some of which have only one ethernet jack. I guess not.
>Now I want to see all the computers currently using my wireless router, is there a way to do that?
>Thanks!
>SIncerely,
>Ben
On the user interface for my DD-WRT router there is a "Wireless
Status" screen, it lists "Wireless Clients" - MAC address, signal,
etc.
Which is probably what you want to know, check if there are any
strangers getting on your LAN, right?
There is also a DHCP lease table in DD-WRT' - it shows the MAC address
and Host Name of addresses given out by the router recently. Besides
showing who's on the ethernet LAN it can also indicate if somebody
connected wirelessly recently but may be off now. Anybody who
recently got a DHCP lease that is -
Of course, that only works if you have a DD-WRT kind of router.
On Feb 19, 3:29 pm, "Benny Van" <fyf5555...@yahoo.com.cn> wrote:
> Hello All!
> I set up a wireless router at home, and it works very well. I didn't
> use WEP becuase my laptop's Wireless NIC doesn't support it. Now I
> want to see all the computers currently using my wireless router, is
> there a way to do that?
> Thanks!
>
> SIncerely,
> Ben
On the user interface for my DD-WRT router there is a "Wireless
Status" screen, it lists "Wireless Clients" - MAC address, signal,
etc. Which is probably what you want to know, check if there are any
strangers getting on your LAN, right?
There is also a DHCP client table in DD-WRT' - it shows the MAC
address and Host Name of addresses given out by the router recently.
Besides showing who's on the ethernet LAN it can also indicate if
somebody connected wirelessly recently but may be off now. Anybody who
recently got a DHCP lease that is -
Of course, this only works if you have a DD-WRT router.
How to check computers connected? 
Linear Mode
