[174848] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Marriott wifi blocking
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Godmere, Shane)
Fri Oct 3 16:36:00 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: "Godmere, Shane" <Shane.Godmere@SHOPKO.COM>
To: David Hubbard <dhubbard@dino.hostasaurus.com>, NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 20:20:45 +0000
In-Reply-To: <FCD26398C5EDE746BFC47F43EA52A17305EEFC@dino.ad.hostasaurus.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
-----Original Message-----
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces@nanog.org] On Behalf Of David Hubbard
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 3:07 PM
To: NANOG
Subject: Marriott wifi blocking
Saw this article:
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/03/travel/marriott-fcc-wi-fi-fine/
The interesting part:
'A federal investigation of the Gaylord Opryland Resort and Convention Cent=
er in Nashville found that Marriott employees had used "containment feature=
s of a Wi-Fi monitoring system"
at the hotel to prevent people from accessing their own personal Wi-Fi netw=
orks.'
I'm aware of how the illegal wifi blocking devices work, but any idea what =
legal hardware they were using to effectively keep their own wifi available=
but render everyone else's inaccessible?
David
-------
David,
All major WiFi players have some seek-and-destroy function to prevent rogue=
s on/near their network. It is the responsibly of the IT folks to determin=
e how aggressive these settings are, and to what needs deauth sent to clien=
ts. These can be very effective in dropping sessions from clients on unaut=
horized systems. =20
The question here is what is authorized and what is not. Was this to prote=
ct their network from rogues, or protect revenue from captive customers. =20
--
Opinions expressed in this email are mine and not that of my employer.=20
Shane Allan Godmere =20
