[Treacodactyl]

AFAIK it's true about intercepting the signal, some signals can go for miles. Often people just use you internet connection to download whatever they wish. I don't know what you can do other than not go wireless. I'm sure there's some good software out there, anyone use anything?

[dougal]

Yes.
"LAN" stands for Local Area Network - your own, on-site network.
Today's wireless networks use the 802.11b and 802.11g standards. b is slower than g. b and g devices can talk to one another but only at b speed. Even b is rather faster than domestic broadband. "Centrino" is just Intel's branding of the 802 standards, as incorporated in their chipsets. 802 is an alternative to ethernet. Almost every wireless router "routes" between the internet (a wide area network, WAN), and 802 AND ethernet - so you can mix, and interconnect between wired and wireless network devices.) 802 is about *networking*, which involves *sharing*. Sharing of internet access, access to special devices (like a printer) or stored data of whatever sort - family photos, company accounts, web pages, music...
Its worth bearing in mind that this is different in principle to Bluetooth, another short range radio ("wireless"!) replacement for a different sort of wired connection, such as USB, used between a controller and its own private peripheral device. Bluetooth can also be 'insecure', as I believe I read Paris Hilton discovered when her mobile phone was hacked into...

Edited: corrected 802 for 801 - Doh!

[dougal]

Errrr. No.
There is an encryption option in the 802.11 standard called "WEP" supposed to give equivalent security to a wired connection.
Unfortunately, it doesn't achieve anything like that.
It shields traffic from the most casual evesdropping BUT when I said "this is not necessarily protection against the most determined, well-equipped and patient evesdroppers" that is *exactly* what I meant!

Clicking on a comfortingly named setup option could easily give a false sense of security - which is actually more dangerous than a real understanding of the risks.

Let me quote from this paper:
http://www.isaac.cs.berkeley.edu/isaac/wep-draft.pdf

"The primary goal of WEP is to
protect the confidentiality of user data from eavesdrop-
ping. WEP is part of an international standard; it has
been integrated by manufacturers into their 802.11 hard-
ware and is currently in widespread use.
Unfortunately, WEP falls short of accomplishing its se-
curity goals. Despite employing the well-known and
believed-secure RC4 [12] cipher, WEP contains several
major security flaws. The flaws give rise to a number of
attacks, both passive and active, that allow eavesdrop-
ping on, and tampering with, wireless transmissions. In
this paper, we discuss the flaws that we identified and
describe the attacks that ensue."

If you still have any faith in WEP then see:
http://securityfocus.com/infocus/1814 (Dec '04)
(just read the intro...)

There is a newer protocol called "WPA" which is more secure, but not all routers can handle it.
So, reiterating
- lack of range is good security! (and so btw is a rural location - less anonymous neighbours within range!)
- use WEP
- hide your network name (so you aren't advertising your wireless network)
- restrict your wireless network to your own machines
and use a non-trivial password...
Many security experts would also want you to run additional encryption - but if you yourself aren't a bank, don't be too bothered..
It IS damn difficult to completely secure a wireless network. Don't believe anyone that tells you anything different.

[Lloyd]

Dammit, Jesse, just sold the whole setup last week on Ebay!

[Jonnyboy]

I have a Wireless node less than 10 metres from my office but have no signal due to the number of walls between my laptop and it.

[dougal]

AFAIK it's true about intercepting the signal, some signals can go for miles...

[joanne]

Darling Daughter & Darling Son