[174844] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Marriott wifi blocking
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael O Holstein)
Fri Oct 3 16:22:28 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Michael O Holstein <michael.holstein@csuohio.edu>
To: David Hubbard <dhubbard@dino.hostasaurus.com>, NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 20:16:09 +0000
In-Reply-To: <FCD26398C5EDE746BFC47F43EA52A17305EEFC@dino.ad.hostasaurus.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
legality is questionable insofar as "this device must not cause harmful int=
erference" of PartB=0A=
but how it works is by sending DEAUTH packets with spoofed MAC addresses=0A=
"rouge AP" response on Cisco/Aruba works like this.=0A=
=0A=
Regards,=0A=
=0A=
Michael Holstein=0A=
Cleveland State University=0A=
________________________________________=0A=
From: NANOG <nanog-bounces@nanog.org> on behalf of David Hubbard <dhubbard@=
dino.hostasaurus.com>=0A=
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 4:06 PM=0A=
To: NANOG=0A=
Subject: Marriott wifi blocking=0A=
=0A=
Saw this article:=0A=
=0A=
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/03/travel/marriott-fcc-wi-fi-fine/=0A=
=0A=
The interesting part:=0A=
=0A=
'A federal investigation of the Gaylord Opryland Resort and=0A=
Convention Center in Nashville found that Marriott employees=0A=
had used "containment features of a Wi-Fi monitoring system"=0A=
at the hotel to prevent people from accessing their own=0A=
personal Wi-Fi networks.'=0A=
=0A=
I'm aware of how the illegal wifi blocking devices work, but=0A=
any idea what legal hardware they were using to effectively=0A=
keep their own wifi available but render everyone else's=0A=
inaccessible?=0A=
=0A=
David=0A=
