From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-x22e.google.com (mail-ob0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA30B21F11C; Wed, 8 Apr 2015 13:02:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by oblw8 with SMTP id w8so105685036obl.0; Wed, 08 Apr 2015 13:02:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=JMPk2kRFG8X+qGh542CJE+KlU3S388SBDiAJKtwiQbs=; b=jrlgq0va1hFHjh2e1h4LpZaZqJdearLC0mOr//h7L/jrLPf57OkZSniH/5UAUoBKaA /A2MgUg2+m97dSKgBsHLugOoZf00C4+WK4zpwrbFy1WonaBC9wS8Qdkb23YZ/JSL1Wmf xBhKrjCA2ErU4fT6zDcHZssBUaLGtzRoI6UlcyPKq9yF9ugCIZBaBzefB2h7P+tZsDmW oSiHM7/GGiakufxDB5SMW2BB0K8v9sRFc6shpapjZ5iRl/0lKXXCi6F0IqFyZTAVQ3PY DKzy0pYmCf8eALDlHjBzoWgk1ozLmq0Uru3cHTnAR8sFDeSYX7owAvVAkW7qJ+jJ/Z4J zhhg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.61.40 with SMTP id m8mr34660600oer.20.1428523377769; Wed, 08 Apr 2015 13:02:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.51.66 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Apr 2015 13:02:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 13:02:57 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: leetminiwheat Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: cerowrt-devel , bloat Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Suggestions/advice for captive portal on gw00/gw10? X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2015 20:03:27 -0000 On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 11:01 AM, leetminiwheat wr= ote: > Sorry if this is an inappropriate place to ask this, but does anyone have > suggestions for a captive portal to use? And is there anything specific I > need to be aware of when implementing a captive portal package from OpenW= RT? > I know Cero does firewall rules and zones a bit differently and admittedl= y I > still don't fully understand it all. I just need a simple splash page tha= t > has an agree to terms type thing. This is one of the few places where I have let my politics interfere with the science or the perceived needs of cerowrt=C2=B4s userbase. There is ZERO sign that the captive portal feature has saved anyone a lawsuit. It has all been a useless shuck to make wifi even less usable than it already is, and create a new entry point to the wholesale corruption of the public=C2=B4s airspace by commercial entities like xfiniti, etc and further encroachments planned by the LTE providers into the 5Ghz spectrum. Captive portals creates a barrier to what bob frankston calls ambient connectivity[1], and for my whole life, that is what I have worked for as a goal - expecting, by now, for that to happen, and for internet on the move - to be essentially free, to all, with no metering, and no barriers to accepting a phone or videocall or file transfer from anywhere from any device on my person, anywhere there was a signal. I will have no part of captive portals for cerowrt. There is at least one captive portal in openwrt. Use that. I am also bugged by the total insecurity built into WPA that has also led to this decline in ambient connectivity over the last 10 years. Anyone can capture a key exchange, or force one, to gain full access to that nodes wifi traffic - and people NOT co-operating on channel access and locking off their individual sessions with useless crypto keys, instead of something that works, while delusionally thinking they were "secure" - are helping *ruin* wifi for everyone. e2d encryption is far, far saner than basic WPA2. [2]. People are under the delusion that this form of crypto helps, it doesnt, all it is doing is messing up the air with management frames and blocking ambient connectivity. Wifi is a commons. No amount of locking it down can prevent the waves from escaping or interfering. All people - even the corporations trying to repurpose it for their purposes - need to understand that. I worked REALLY HARD in 1998-2004 to convince multiple VCs to not use up this precious spectrum with another metricom - and thus, in part due to that effort, we ALL have wifi, it is uncontrolled, and nearly unregulated, and the world is a vastly freer better place for that. And it is going to hell, because no-one understands it or cares about it, enough. I have loved being freed from wires for 17 years now, haven=C2=B4t you? Isn=C2=B4t wifi worth saving? So, please, dont use captive portals. In a system with a decent and secure guest network implementation, as cerowrt has, please share your access with open APs or a simple shared certificate. Please co-ordinate with your neighbors on channel selection - and radio placement - or pool your resources to get one big fast internet connect to share, fairly - now that the fq_codel technology is widely available to make that transparent. Build meshy networks. Take back the internet w e once had.... Lastly - there are only 24 hours left on this kickstarter - we CAN start to take back the edge of the internet - if we can only find another 12k of funding. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/onetswitch/onetswitch-open-source-hard= ware-for-networking The same FPGA is also useful for SDR applications, but it is the pcie interface and switch design - and reducing the cost from 7000 to 700 bucks - that is the important part of getting this board completed - so that more of htb + fq_codel can move into hardware that anyone can build and use. There is a get one give one program that I asked meshsr to put in. There are people on these lists with money, and there are those with time, and it would be great if more of those people could line up with each other. I put in all I could spare (8500 dollars). I have one of their high end boards, already. It=C2=B4s great. > > Also, does anyone have a connlimit module for the 3.10-50-1 kernel? I'd l= ike > to limit max connections per IP on guest wireless. Or can someone point m= e > in the right direction to build one? OpenWRT's build instructions are har= d > to follow and/or really outdated. CeroWrt is effectively dead so long as it remains unfunded. What little time, funding, and energy I can spare I am pouring into make-wifi-fast and openwrt chaos calmer. [1] http://frankston.com/public/?n=3DIAC.UAC [2] Take an aircap, then take it apart via wireshark: https://wiki.wireshark.org/HowToDecrypt802.11 > > Thanks > > P.S. Solid uptime on 3.10.50-1, and my SQM bugs fixed with latest > sqm-scripts. (using ones from late march 2015) on default scripts, egress > wasn't getting throttled sometimes and many duplicate interfaces on SQM > restarts. Also, dnscrypt-proxy packages from > https://github.com/black-roland/exOpenWrt working great. > > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht We CAN make better hardware, ourselves, beat bufferbloat, and take back control of the edge of the internet! If we work together, on making it: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/onetswitch/onetswitch-open-source-hard= ware-for-networking