• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    303 months ago

    I think it’d be more for obfuscation than completely hiding it. As long as there are other hidden networks on the ship you just name it something generic that blends in. I mean this whole thing is a really stupid idea, but naming it something like “COM.NAB_ISO:4133” would draw less attention.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      29
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It’s absolutely mind-boggling that the existing WiFi infrastructure on the military ship didn’t trigger any alarms. This is the kind of thing that you can get from “pro-sumer” grade hardware/software like Ubiquiti, let alone corporate-grade or military-grade stuff. The feature is called “Rogue Access Point Detection” and it’s built into literally every WiFi solution on the market. Like, your local library is analyzing this stuff it’s that basic.

      Edit: To more directly address your point, the name shouldn’t matter at all. Rogue AP detection doesn’t give a shit about the display names of things, it looks at the actual hardware addresses and compares them to known things that are owned by your network.

      • @antimongo
        link
        English
        10
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Yup, I did some on-campus IT work while I was in college and it was super trivial to detect when people would have their own networks in the dorms

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            33 months ago

            At mine it was not. Hotspots and the like that stayed up for too long were flagged and action was taken to have them disabled and the student reprimanded.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              13 months ago

              Well, I can understand that APs wouldn’t be allowed since having lots of APs in one space makes it worse for everyone.

              Wired should be allowed though.