odd XP behavior and other stuff. :dunno:

[Andilinks]

I just bought a Gateway 7320GZ Notebook and am thrilled with it so far...

But there is one odd behavior that I seem to recall as a part of some setting but I can't find it... The mouse pointer will launch whatever it hovers over, but sometimes it doesn't. I'd prefer to launch with a click and not a hover. Where is this setting?

I also detect an unknown unsecured wireless network which seems really fast. I visited some websites with it but understand the dangers of using passwords and other numbers. Can the owner of this network (probably a neighbor) detect me when I log on? Just curious...

Andi

[Wassercrats]

I'm sure even if he can't detect when your online, the ISP can detect that someones online, and if he's being charged per minute, that would be a problem.

I read "...let’s take a look at Tweak UI Tweak which gives you access to User Interface settings not exposed in the Windows XP default user interface....Mouse – here, you can set the menu speed, mouse sensitivity ability to hover and how the mouse selects items."

You can download Tweak UI (and lots of other stuff) here (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/powertoys/xppowertoys.mspx).

[Andilinks]

This behavior has mysteriously stopped. It was happening with a USB trackball as well as the finger pad. The pad sucks--I'll only use it on airplanes, I'll carry my trackball everywhere else. Maybe even on planes. Maybe I should look for the tiniest trackball...

Thanks for the Tweak IU link I haven't used this in a few years.

I have no intention of using my neighbor's network, I was just curious to see if I could actually log-on to it.

As fast as it was it had to be Comcast which is the same service I have piped in here and it's a flat monthly rate for unlimited service.

Now XP is "forgetting" my theme and defaulting to the XP theme when I reboot. So I'm keeping a shortcut to "my favorite theme" on the quick-launch.

Andi

[Wassercrats]

There would still be a problem if the speed is capped if you're on at the same time as him, or if there's a limit on the number of connections.

I used to like using the little red joystick in the keyboard, but I don't remember where.

[Randall]

There would still be a problem if the speed is capped if you're on at the same time as him, or if there's a limit on the number of connections. Comcast would be totally unaware that two people are using the cable line, because the other guy's wireless router is all they can see. Unless Andi is a real bandwidth hog, she's not going to show up on their radar.

The neighbor, on the other hand, may notice if the WLAN light is flashing while his PC is turned off. The router might tell him that another machine is logged on and show the IP and MAC addresses, but wouldn't give her identity away. He'd have to break into her machine to learn that, or maybe triangulate her physical position.

The neighbor is really in the biggest danger here. If someone uses his internet connection for criminal purposes, it would be traced back to his house. I don't know if routers log wireless connections or not.

Looking at my D-Link's logs, it thinks today's date is April 1, 2002, so it wouldn't be much use until I fix the date.

Randall

[Andilinks]

The neighbor is really in the biggest danger here. Well, like I said I have no need to use his broadband, I have my own and not into illegal stuff anyway. But many people are, and with the RIAA and MPAA recklessly abusing the legal system this could be a problem for many.

If I have my wireless turned on, could the neighbors log on to my broadband? Shouldn't there be better controls on this? There is only one neighbor close enough, so I think I'll talk to him, I have only nodded hello for two years...

Andi

[Andilinks]

And oh yes, this does mean that I decided there is not enough room here in this small bedroom for side-by-side Mac and PC systems, so that will have to wait until I return to California...

Andi

[Randall]

If I have my wireless turned on, could the neighbors log on to my broadband? Shouldn't there be better controls on this? I believe that could only happen if (a) your wireless card has really good range; (b) you've "bridged" the cable and wireless connections in Windows, which does not happen by accident; and (c) you're using a hardware router or Internet Connection Sharing on your network.

Bridging essentially acts like a pass-through for networking, as I understand it. I guess they could access your internal network (such as it is) if they assigned themselves an appropriate IP address. But to use your internet connection, they'd also need the router or ICS to do the necessary network address translation. And oh yes, this does mean that I decided there is not enough room here in this small bedroom for side-by-side Mac and PC systems, so that will have to wait until I return to California... I got two words for ya: KVM switch.

Well, I guess that really counts as four words if you spell it out.

Randall

[Andilinks]

KVM switchToo cumbersome. I have had enough lifting and crawling around computers to connect and reconnect endless cables and etc. Even if a KVM switch worked perfectly the first and every time (doubtful) having two separate systems side-by-side is more efficient for learning and more efficient if some process just doesn't work on the new system and must be handled on the old.

Andi

[Randall]

Even if a KVM switch worked perfectly the first and every time (doubtful) That's been my experience. I'm using this one (http://www.linksys.com/products/product.asp?grid=36&scid=45&prid=502) right now as I gradually migrate from the old 266MHz dinosaur to my "new" 2GHz zoom-zoom. It's really just a hardware switch that fools both PCs into thinking that there's a monitor, keyboard and mouse attached at all times. Two taps of the Scroll Lock key and I'm looking at the other machine.

You'd want one with USB instead of PS/2 connectors for use with a Mac and a modern PC (or that new laptop), but the basics are the same.

And the whole idea is to eliminate cables. Believe me, it's far less of a hassle than separate wires for two PCs. And no confusion over which keyboard you're supposed to be typing on.

Randall

[Andilinks]

That's been my experience. I must assume that nothing works right the first time because nothing ever has. I'm not Randall. But it is a moot argument because I won't need to do this until I get back to my spacious loft where having all sides of the computers exposed while running side-by side will be possible.

I think everything should be on one end of the computer, on-off switch, disk bays, all connectors and jacks, everything up front, only the fan vent should be in back. Unsightly to the average person maybe, but very lovely to me.

Andi

[Wassercrats]

Short extension cords for all the jacks in the back would be helpful, especially if they were attached to a wall mounted panel that's labeled to tell you what everything is. I can't move my computer too far away from the wall without unplugging things, so I have to use a mirror and sometimes a flashlight to plug and unplug stuff.

[Randall]

I think everything should be on one end of the computer, on-off switch, disk bays, all connectors and jacks, everything up front, only the fan vent should be in back. That's why they invented rack-mounts, I think.

Well, most of the the stuff is still in the back, but you just walk around to the other side.

Which when you think about it, applies just as well to regular PCs: Put it in a place where you can walk around to the back. :winky:

That's why I use a fold-up typing table at home for a "desk" (open from all angles) and put the PC next to it -- away from the wall -- where I can reach all of the drives and ports, and even open the side panel without having to move anything.

'Course, right now the side panel isn't even closed; it's just propped up against the opening. I haven't put the front bezel back on it, either...

Real men don't use mirrors.

Randall

[Andilinks]

Put it in a place where you can walk around to the back. I have my eMachine on a table with the "backside" facing outward a few feet from the tray table where I place the Gateway. All the cords and cables cascade to the floor where they meet the power strip and cable modem. The "front" of the computer faces the wall just far enough away to allow the cd/dvd trays clearance. Some idiot decided that was a good place to put two of the USB jacks, so inconvenient. The monitor and kb for the eMachine are on an adjacent table so I can easily alternate between notebook and desktop. All for maximum ease of connection/disconnection which is the complete OPPOSITE of every home installation I have ever seen pictured or portrayed.

I only use mirrors for grooming, narcissistic trances, and looking at objects that are closer than they appear.

Andi

[Andilinks]

So now the Times weighs in on the wireless question...Law enforcement officials warn that such connections are being commandeered for child pornography, fraud, death threats and identity and credit card theft.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/19/technology/19wifi.html?hp&ex=1111294800&en=ae02d675a0e3e0e3&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Andi

[Randall]

Yes, and we have a convergence with the pharming thread (http://www.aota.net/forums/showthread.php?t=18991) in this PC World article: Does Your Wi-Fi Hotspot Have an Evil Twin? (http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,120054,00.asp)

Randall

[Andilinks]

And Seth Godin chimes in with a counter-view...

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2005/03/my_wifi_rant.html

It seems he's blaming the Times for FUD, causing quasi-public wifi networks to hide behind passwords.

Andi

[Andilinks]

Oh and to sort of nullify the original topic of this thread I have figured out the touch-pad behavior:

The tap-click feature on the Gateway touch pad is supposed to be "off" as default but was "on" right out of the factory-sealed carton. After reading about how to adjust these properties the touch-pad is much less sucky and I will probably use it when away from home.

The new Kensington track ball is great but when I get some more work space I am going to redesign it. I could improve the "mouse" UI 500%, and make it more ergonomic to boot. I may even patent my ideas. Yes, that's a small niche, but with a billion plus computer users even small niches are huge--yet small enough to discourage widespread knock-offs.

The best people to desgn tools are not engineers but those that use them 12 hours a day...

Andi

[Randall]

And Seth Godin chimes in with a counter-view... I'm more impressed with this counter-counter-article (http://www.arroco.com/cgi-bin/blosxom.cgi/2005/03/19#godin-wifi), which pretty much sums up my reaction to Seth Godin. It's a matter of human nature that security is weakest at the user end -- since that's where we actually spend our time -- which is why we need to keep the outside world on the other side of the router's firewall.

Quite aside from the internal security question, he totally disregards the point of the NY Times story. It's not a television we're talking about; it's something closer to people using your phone line without permission. And there's no way to know what they're using it for.

Randall

[Andilinks]

Yes, I agree, Seth was being cavalier about security...

But duuuuuude, what about everything's supposed to be, like free, huh?

I just checked my neighbor's network again, it seems to be "always on."

So, if I'm at a Starbuck-type establishment that has an advertised hotspot I don't think I'd do any banking or stock trading, but would FTP to my website or checking my email be dangerous?

I guess only if the cracker were interested in my rather dull spam-load, but do people hack websites much anymore? I suppose if the place were a freestanding building without any suspicious lurkers inside it would be a minimal risk. But still a risk. This makes travel less inviting.

Andi

[Randall]

But duuuuuude, what about everything's supposed to be, like free, huh? Actually, I'm all in favor of civic hot spots, and if people want to share their internet access, good for them (just hope that their ISPs don't catch wind of it). But he seems to think that it should be the natural order of things, and that's just selfishness. Ideally, all wireless network would be locked down by default, and opening them up would be at the discretion of the operators -- but only after they'd learned enough about the security implications to understand what they're doing, and how to do it properly.

Instead, we have your neighbor who probably doesn't even know that other people can access his network. So, if I'm at a Starbuck-type establishment that has an advertised hotspot I don't think I'd do any banking or stock trading, but would FTP to my website or checking my email be dangerous? The MIT guy in the PC World story doesn't sound like a professional fearmonger. But he may just be reacting to a media-generated "evil twin" scare (http://www.techworld.com/mobility/features/index.cfm?FeatureID=1147) from a couple of months ago.

I think your FTP and email traffic would actually be more vulnerable, unless you're in the habit of using SSH tunneling like some of the folks here. The web site risks come down standard phishing techniques: hoping that people won't notice the missing lock icon or a bogus URL. SSL was invented to prevent these man in the middle attacks.

I do know that you can't really tell the difference between one router and another, if they're using the same SSID. So an evil twin is easy enough to create. But I don't know how easy that next step is -- intercepting and reading someone else's traffic. Maybe Bruce or some other guru here can answer that one.

When I was in Hawaii with my wireless laptop, my PC kept shutting down with LSASS errors. I wasted a lot of time looking for viruses and spyware before I realized that I had ZoneAlarm disabled. Turns out that I was being hammered by worms trying to get in from other machines on the hotel's network. So you should be worried about everyone in that Starbucks, evil twin or no.

Randall

[kitchin]

SFTP is secure and reaaaly easy to use, and can be free if you use WinSCP. Filezilla has a problem with line endings. (I haven't tested the latest release of Filezilla.)

SSH tunneling for email is a bit of a hassle. I reaaaly wish FQ would support some kind of secure POP/SMTP/IMAP method other than tunneling... even if were only for a limited set of supported email programs.

One problem with tunneling is that Putty+Eudora still tends not to respond gracefully when I lose my connection. Can you guess this would be a problem for a wireless user? :rasberry:

Re: Eudora, when I finally migrate away from it, I plan on trying the tool Eudora Rescue (http://www.members.shaw.ca/qwerky/eudorarescue/) to massage the mbx files into proper shape. Having written my own rudimentary Eudora mbx fixers in the past, I can at least say Eudora Rescue has decent specs. Eudora's file corruption problems are nothing like they were back in 4.x days, but some issues remain and I've seen them. That's why I'm worried about freezes while files are open, and the freezes are due to Putty+Eudora connection aborts.

Note: all the software mentioned above is free, so either I'm a big complainer or it's all good. As they used to say.

[Andilinks]

So it appears that for the average person hotspots are useless for all but the most casual surfing, directions, restaurant reviews, etc.

If I want to do some serious business from my hotel room I have dial-up AOL. Oh well, it has worked before...

Andi