Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hidden Networks in TP-Link Routers

jahed.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 230 posts

Re: Hidden Networks in TP-Link Routers

#141

Post by clajiness »

xanaxagoras wrote: post #113
clajiness wrote: post #72

Hard to beat OPNsense on Protectli machines with your favorite flavor of networking hardware (Unifi, Microtik, etc).

I did this during COVID and it took a lot of time and learning, but now I feel like the God of my network and I can do cool stuff that wasn't possible on my old gear. I've read that Protecli boxes are re-branded Qotom machines and I'm sure you can get the same setup for a few hundred less but I'm glad I went with them for the support and coreboot OOTB.

Totally on board with the US-based support. I’ve called them once and they were fantastic. As soon as they offer a model with 10Gb NICs, I’ll buy one of those, too.

As for god mode, I agree. Super customizable and everything works properly. I grew tired of the nonsense routing ubiquiti kept releasing, went to pfsense, and right to opnsense.

Re: Hidden Networks in TP-Link Routers

#142

Post by Namidairo »

I've found similar networks when inspecting other brands of router. It's not an uncommon sight these days with vendors and their 50 different proprietary mesh negotiation protocols.

While I did wonder how they generated the SSID (In this case it was 128-bit hash, underscore then the vendor name), I didn't really look too hard into it as my goal was wiping out the vendor's firmware anyway. I did spot some features like configuration sync that made my "this'll be written properly..." senses go off though.

I do note that there is a Wifi Alliance spec for this kind of thing now though. It's called Wi-Fi EasyMesh. I can't imagine anyone apart from actual SoC vendors taking the effort to implement it though, as it's a 163 page specification, available only on request or by alliance members. (Well the vast majority of chipset manufacturers are members, and the specifications have leaked anyway)

Edit: Scratch that, there were actually 3 different hidden SSIDs. The one mentioned above was a hidden IoT SSID, the other two were VendorMesh_hash and VendorMesh_WPS. :S

Re: Hidden Networks in TP-Link Routers

#143

Post by andrewxdiamond »

azinman2 wrote: post #115
rhizome wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Ubiquity use a standard ad network architecture that allows code from unknown third parties to run within your network?

It’s Ubiquiti advertising their own products.

More specifically, the ads are embedded into the software, not loaded dynamically

Re: Hidden Networks in TP-Link Routers

#144

Post by zamadatix »

cbdumas wrote: post #55

While we're talking routers I'll plug Mikrotik. Some basic knowledge of the Linux networking stack is required so they're not great for a general user, but for ~$50 I got a device that handles my setup with ease (Ipv4 over PPPoE and IPv6 over 6rd) and I'm seeing throughput significantly higher than my previous router which was a Zotac mini computer running pfsense. If you are more toward the power user / networking n…

They also make a great 16 port SFP+ 10G switch (CRS317-1G-16S+RM) usually available for ~$350 which is nice for a prosumer setup. They also have a 10/100/1000/2500/5000/10000 RJ45 transceiver which is nice because it lets you migrate things over without having to upgrade everything or buy a separate multirate gigabit switch.

I do my actual routing on a Ubiquiti EdgeRouter though I've used MikroTik there as well in the past. I avoid most other Ubiquiti products though, particularly the UniFi line.

In both cases HW accelerated NAT and routing greatly outperforms an unaccelerated ARM/x86 Linux/BSD PC. Particularly when it comes to new session latencies not just saturating the bandwidth.

Re: Hidden Networks in TP-Link Routers

#145

Post by Denatonium »

howdydoo wrote: post #104
rocqua wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a specific problem with routers and certification for radio usage. This makes right to repair harder. It's not just a legal issue. The ether is quite full and it mostly works because there are clear rules that devices must meet. With user serviceable routers, bumping up power, or moving to locally forbidden (quieter) frequencies could become lifehacks. There was already an airport whose radio saw interferenc…

My PC has a 5ghz wifi antenna, and I can install any OS I want. Why should a router be any more locked down than my PC? The FCC takes illegal broadcasting VERY seriously and I think that should deter people from becoming criminals.

Most modern wireless cards will do a scan for wireless networks on startup and set their regulatory domain to the one regulatory domain contained in the majority of beacons from surrounding wireless APs. This can't (easily) be overridden and prevents people from setting the wrong country and causing interference, while still allowing a single WLAN card to work globally.

Intel calls this "Location Aware Regulatory".

Re: Hidden Networks in TP-Link Routers

#146

Post by wtallis »

estaseuropano wrote: post #92
chronogram wrote: post #28

Last week I bought a TP-Link AX55 and went through the settings and enabled all the neat things and disabled all the regular consumer ease of access things (WPS, meshing things), and the only hidden networks in my area with the same app are several decibel away with a different MAC address. Either it’s not around in the newer models or it’s part of one of the regular consumer ease of access things.

Why disable mesh? I thought that will ensure the devices work together rather than compete (looking at fritzbox, but it seems they are all compatible).

A mesh network is entirely different from and inferior to a network with multiple access points each with a wired connection. If you've built your network to be the latter, you don't want anything to start acting as a wireless repeater and wasting lots of airtime.

Re: Hidden Networks in TP-Link Routers

#147

Post by paavoova »

jorvi wrote: post #81
synergy20 wrote: post #41

Buy routers that can work with Openwrt, period. TP-Link actually has quite a few(not the newest models though, but the not-newest-model should work for 95% of the customers) that runs openwrt well. All my routers are running non-vendor firmware(e.g. openwrt) for the last 15 years, never had any troubles.

Sadly OpenWRT doesn’t support band steering.

If you set the SSID and password identical for both bands, the clients should prefer to negotiate the optimal band. I just checked and all clients save for some legacy devices on my OpenWRT router are on 5GHz. So I'm now wondering for which cases is band-steering helpful?

Re: Hidden Networks in TP-Link Routers

#148

Post by sgtnoodle »

aceazzameen wrote: post #137
sgtnoodle wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had OpenWRT running on an Archer C7 for a while, but the wifi was "unreliable". It's like the 5Ghz would just randomly stop flowing packets. I never root caused it, but since I stopped using it my home wifi experience has been generally boring in a good way. I live near main street in a small touristy coastal town, and there's tons of access point beacons flying around. I only have a 10,000 sq. ft. lot and have thr…

Maybe my area is low then. There's 12 other 5Ghz APs in my area. I also wonder if it's luck of the draw with some of these cheaper routers? My C7 is also a newer variant, a v5 I think.

Could be! I think mine is a V2. My guess is an overheating component somewhere.

Re: Hidden Networks in TP-Link Routers

#149

Post by r1ch »

londons_explore wrote: post #136
r1ch wrote: post #117

For those curious about the "Wi-Fi spam" comment: even though nothing is connected to the network and it's a hidden SSID, it still has to broadcast beacons every 100ms. The 802.11 standard says beacons must be sent at the lowest rate the AP supports, so your ~350 byte beacon at 1mbps (2.4 GHz) uses around 5% of the frequency. It doesn't take many SSIDs on the same 2.4 GHz channel to make the throughput fall through t…

Would there have been a better way to do design beacons? The general problem is a device needing to advertise itself for other devices to connect to, other devices which might not be capable of any faster rate... Beacons being 350 bytes is pretty stupid though... They could have been 20 bytes long, saying "I'm a device with mac address XXX, plz contact me to know what services I have on offer".

In retrospect, definitely. But a huge part of why Wi-Fi is so successful is the wide compatibility, so we're stuck with a design that is 20+ years old. Beacons also serve to do power saving wake-ups and various other things these days, and there's room to optimize them if the Wi-Fi alliance were stricter - some vendors are broadcasting their manufacturer and model (and sometimes serial number!) every 100ms as well as lots of other unnecessary information elements.

Re: Hidden Networks in TP-Link Routers

#150

Post by salawat »

tablespoon wrote: post #56
msla wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Right of repair" being focused on hardware is a neat little trick to enforce the illusion that changing software is beyond your rights as a consumer. Yes, you can fix the antenna when it breaks, and focus on how hard the fight was to get the right to fix the hardware you own... which you don't own as long as the company uses software to control what the hardware can and cannot do. But you sure physically own those m…

> "Right of repair" being focused on hardware is a neat little trick to enforce the illusion that changing software is beyond your rights as a consumer. Is it a trick, or just limited imagination? My impression is that "right of repair" came from mechanically-minded people seeking to maintain their traditional ability to repair physical devices in the face of corporate hostility (e.g. farmers vs. John Deere). > Yes,…

Hate to break it to ya, but anyone with any mechanical aptitude has what it takes to do whatever may need doing with software.

Heck, Before I received any formal instruction in programming I was tracing things via symbols and strings just like I did hardware connections.

Post reply on HN