# Do motherboards have wireless?



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 13, 2012)

Or do you always have to get a separate wireless card?


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Nov 13, 2012)

vawrvawerawe, welcome to the forum. But you are at 80+ posts a day. You are like a kid in a candy shop. Slow down for goodness sakes! This forum has a maximum "Thanks" count per day... and will likely introduce a maximum "posts" count given the rate you are going at!


----------



## theonedub (Nov 13, 2012)

Some have it built in although those boards are usually a little more expensive, just have to check the specs.


----------



## Jetster (Nov 13, 2012)

not usually


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 13, 2012)

Completely Bonkers said:


> vawrvawerawe, welcome to the forum. But you are at 80+ posts a day. You are like a kid in a candy shop. Slow down for goodness sakes! This forum has a maximum "Thanks" count per day... and will likely introduce a maximum "posts" count given the rate you are going at!



Actually almost all the posts were yesterday; around 150. Was gathering info about my computer build. Now all I have left to buy is CPU and GPU.
Honestly I could care less about post counts.

--

Will it matter if I get a wireless N-300 card vs an N-600 (dual-band) card?


----------



## Ghost (Nov 13, 2012)

Post as much as you want, as long posts are on-topic and identical posts are not posted multiple times.

On-topic: there are several mobos that come with Wi-Fi. They usually have Wi-Fi in their name (GA-Z77X-UD3H-WB WIFI, for example), sometime they don't (Z77 Extreme9).



vawrvawerawe said:


> Will it matter if I get a wireless N-300 card vs an N-600 (dual-band) card?


That depends on whether you need it or not.


----------



## hat (Nov 13, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> Will it matter if I get a wireless N-300 card vs an N-600 (dual-band) card?



You can get more data throughput copying files between devices on your network if your router is N dual band capable, but that's about it. If you're planning on using this wireless card in a gaming machine... I'd recommend finding some way to run a hard wire. Wireless isn't any good for gaming.


----------



## Jetster (Nov 13, 2012)

Wired is 10x as fast as wireless. I dont like transfering files on wireless


----------



## Tatty_One (Nov 13, 2012)

There are a few motherboards around that have wireless cards, mainly from Asus and Gigabyte, if you were contemplating an Ivybridge build for example, here is a Z77 S1155 board from Asus that has it....

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MB-515-AS&groupid=701&catid=5&subcat=2261

Or if you wanna really push the boat out and go for X79 then there is this......

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MB-413-GI&groupid=701&catid=5&subcat=2174


----------



## caleb (Nov 13, 2012)

Had P5K Premium Wifi/AP. It was actually a usb card in a custom slot on pcb.
I actually used it a lot as an access point when I didn't have Internet at home.
I used my android phone connected via USB for internet access (3G). I shared that connection using the onboard Wifi.


----------



## micropage7 (Nov 13, 2012)

some has its own wireless card in their package like mini itx board some may not give any wireless card
btw if you need wireless card its kinda cheap now so if your board doesnt give it just buy it separately and it would be fine


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 13, 2012)

Jetster said:


> Wired is 10x as fast as wireless. I dont like transfering files on wireless



I don't transfer files on wireless. Only Internet. And Wireless-N is the exact same speed download from internet, as Gigabit eithernet, due to limitations of download speed from the internet provider.

ISP: up to 40 Mbps
Wireless-N: 300 Mbps

Even Wireless-G is faster than internet download speed:

Wireless-G: 54 Mbps

So there is no reason to choose ethernet over wireless, unless you pay $150 per month for 100 Mbps internet.


----------



## xenocide (Nov 13, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> I don't transfer files on wireless. Only Internet. And Wireless-N is the exact same speed download from internet, as Gigabit eithernet, due to limitations of download speed from the internet provider.
> 
> ISP: up to 40 Mbps
> Wireless-N: 300 Mbps
> ...



That's not how it works.  You're also not considering latency, there is almost 0 latency when it comes to wired components, but with wireless signals latency is pretty astronomical.  That is why people advocate against using Wireless for gaming, because it screws you over pretty badly.  I also have no damn clue what you are talking about when it comes to Wireless-G being "faster" than Ethernet.


----------



## Ghost (Nov 13, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> I don't transfer files on wireless. Only Internet. And Wireless-N is the exact same speed download from internet, as Gigabit eithernet, due to limitations of download speed from the internet provider.
> 
> ISP: up to 40 Mbps
> Wireless-N: 300 Mbps
> ...




Those are theoretical speeds which aren't easy to reach.

There will be some sort of  drop in performance depending on performance of router, adapter and work conditions (distance between the two, interference, wall thickness, etc.). Latency/ping will also increase a little.

BTW, I pay 10 euros/month for 100Mbps (40Mbps worldwide) .


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 13, 2012)

Ghost said:


> Those are theoretical speeds which aren't easy to reach.
> 
> There will be some sort of  drop in performance depending on performance of router, adapter and work conditions (distance between the two, interference, wall thickness, etc.). Latency/ping will also increase a little.
> 
> BTW, I pay 10 euros/month for 100Mbps (40Mbps worldwide) .



Who offers $20 for 100 Mbps internet??? That's the price for DSL 2 Mbps


----------



## Frick (Nov 13, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> Who offers $20 for 100 Mbps internet??? That's the price for DSL 2 Mbps



Maybe where you live. Different places, different prices.


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 13, 2012)

Frick said:


> Maybe where you live. Different places, different prices.



You didn't answer the question. I don't believe you.


----------



## Jetster (Nov 13, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> I don't transfer files on wireless. Only Internet. And Wireless-N is the exact same speed download from internet, as Gigabit eithernet, due to limitations of download speed from the internet provider.
> 
> ISP: up to 40 Mbps
> Wireless-N: 300 Mbps
> ...



I was referring to what Hat said. As far as the transferring file. But your statement is not correct considering actual speeds and latency. I was just encouraging you to go wired even with just browsing the interwebs. Wireless is the last resort. But if you have to then fine. And g is not 54mbps its more like 5Mb/s which is about the same as the average ISP if not slower. 600N is about 9MB/s   If you run two nics for dual band you may get 12Mb/s


----------



## remixedcat (Nov 13, 2012)

No, Most motherboards do not include a WLAN chipset. 

Cards or USB adapters must be purchased and installed. 

Please feel free to PM me for any WLAN help and I'll be happy to assist. Thanks. 

I do highly recommend high powered USB adapters if you _must _have wireless (if your house's layout won't permit or if your landlord won't allow you to run cables) I recommend Amped Wireless! very powerful stuff.

Also avoid getting an older router they have very slow processors. Look for ones that have over 500Mhz processors in them and look for ones that have a high simultaneous connections. Also having your wireless on a non-congested channel will help ... use a tool like InSSIDer or the amped wireless analytics tool on android or airmapper from fluke networks android app. those are great for finding weaknesses in wifi setups. 

finally, make sure you have the latest firmware for your router as well as having your security on.


----------



## Frick (Nov 13, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> You didn't answer the question. I don't believe you.



Ok then. Kramnet have 100/100 (globally, not some limited crap) for about €17/month. I'd have to pay €25 for 100/100, Telecom3.


----------



## hat (Nov 13, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> I don't transfer files on wireless. Only Internet. And Wireless-N is the exact same speed download from internet, as Gigabit eithernet, due to limitations of download speed from the internet provider.
> 
> ISP: up to 40 Mbps
> Wireless-N: 300 Mbps
> ...



Just because you have a 20mbit connection doesn't mean wireless is going to give you what you want. Talking raw transfer speed alone, I have a machine here connected to my network though Wireless G, and a 10mbit internet connection. When I do a speed test on the wireless machine, I may hit 6mbit or so. Then I can test on my wired machine and hit full speed. Same test server, same time of day, every variable is the same, the only change being whether I'm using a wired or wireless connection.

So using wireless can slow down your raw transfer speeds, but transfer speed isn't everything. There's also latency to consider. Any wireless connection is going to have significantly more latency than a wired connection, and wireless connections also have the added bonus of random latency spikes that wired connections don't have.

In short, just because your wireless capability is 54mbit and your internet speed is 40mbit doesn't mean that you're going to get the same performance from a wireless connection as you would a wired connection. Wireless sucks.


----------



## Frick (Nov 13, 2012)

hat said:


> Wireless sucks.



It gets better and better though. For phones and laptops and the likes it's excellent.


----------



## hat (Nov 14, 2012)

True enough, but nobody uses their smartphone to do things like play Battlefield 3 online. This thread is about desktop pc motherboards with wireless though, and knowing this guy has been digging around trying to figure out the best desktop pc build within a certain budget, and knowing he's planning on using it for gaming, I'm trying to convince him to run a hard wire. I don't think you'll find anyone trying to get him to run a hard wire to his tablet for better internet performance.


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 14, 2012)

Jetster said:


> I was referring to what Hat said. As far as the transferring file. But your statement is not correct considering actual speeds and latency. I was just encouraging you to go wired even with just browsing the interwebs. Wireless is the last resort. But if you have to then fine. And g is not 54mbps its more like 5Mb/s which is about the same as the average ISP if not slower. 600N is about 9MB/s   If you run two nics for dual band you may get 12Mb/s



Actual real-life performance speeds, when downloading torrents I have never gone over 4MBps download speed, whether ethernet or wireless. I tried back and forth over several months and there was no difference in download speed whatsoever. That's why I eventually stopped plugging in my PC to the ethernet cable, because it made no difference whatsoever, just an extra hassle (you see my main PC is a laptop right now.)

Also I think you meant 54Mbps is more like 5 M*B*ps. But in fact it is up to 6.75MBps. 54/8=6.75

You must understand the difference between MB and Mb.

MB = MegaByte
Mb - MegaBit

1MB = 8Mb

To get even 5MBps download speeds over the internet, you have to have DARN FAST internet!!! (40Mbps DL)

Your ISP internet is rated in MegaBIT.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 14, 2012)

hat said:


> True enough, but nobody uses their smartphone to do things like play Battlefield 3 online. This thread is about desktop pc motherboards with wireless though, and knowing this guy has been digging around trying to figure out the best desktop pc build within a certain budget, and knowing he's planning on using it for gaming, I'm trying to convince him to run a hard wire. I don't think you'll find anyone trying to get him to run a hard wire to his tablet for better internet performance.



I have zero issues in any games with a good N300 router and N300 USB wifi cheapy. Ping and latency no worse than anyone I play online with.


----------



## hat (Nov 14, 2012)

In the end it's ultimately up to you, I'm just saying having a hard wired connection is better for a desktop computer, especially for gaming. You won't be moving a desktop computer around as much as you would a laptop, so the stability of a wired connection would be preferable.


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 14, 2012)

hat said:


> In the end it's ultimately up to you, I'm just saying having a hard wired connection is better for a desktop computer, especially for gaming. You won't be moving a desktop computer around as much as you would a laptop, so the stability of a wired connection would be preferable.



For gaming I agree 100%. I always had better online gaming performance when using a wired connection, especially on PS3. 

You're absolutely right - when it comes to gaming, stability of the connection becomes more of a concern. If you click the fire button, every 100th/ms counts. With a Wireless connection, there is always the issue of interference, which is less prevalent in a physical wired connection because the ethernet cable is physically shielded from interference.


----------



## remixedcat (Nov 14, 2012)

with my amped wireless access point wireless connections are just about as good as wireless on most anything... even demanding xbox live games.


----------



## scaminatrix (Nov 14, 2012)

Some things I would take into consideration:

Wired is more secure than wireless (considering your location, I would take security seriously)
Turning the wireless off on your router saves electricity and heat (my router gets noticably hotter with wireless turned on)
My kids' Xbox likes to connect it to automatically when it turns on since I first connected them. I like to control what connects, and when.
No outside interference.


----------



## Frick (Nov 14, 2012)

scaminatrix said:


> Turning the wireless off on your router saves electricity and heat (my router gets noticably hotter with wireless turned on)



Wired routers generally have 12V 1-1.5A while wireless generally have 2A or more. So yeah it is a bit of a different. Electricity isn't that much but heat could be a problem, depending of how you can place it. Stuck between other hot computers/devices is not to recommend unless it has active cooling (yes I've busted a router that way).


----------



## scaminatrix (Nov 14, 2012)

Frick said:


> Wired routers generally have 12V 1-1.5A while wireless generally have 2A or more. So yeah it is a bit of a different. Electricity isn't that much but heat could be a problem, depending of how you can place it. Stuck between other hot computers/devices is not to recommend unless it has active cooling (yes I've busted a router that way).



I'm sure heat caused the death of my last router in the summer. We turn the router off at night now, and only turn it on in the morning as the thought of it running 24/7 just scares me now


----------



## SaltyFish (Nov 14, 2012)

Desktop motherboards, due to the expectation that they will not move much, do not come with integrated wireless. That said, some motherboard manufacturers include wireless cards with their motherboards (e.g. Gigabyte).

If you are not moving your desktop around, you're better off with a wired connection. WiFi, like other wireless technology, is more sensitive to interference. If people around you use their microwaves often or you live on a major flight path with airplanes flying over you every five minutes, your connection may get severed. Then there's the usual obstructions between the router and receiver. Trying to reposition a desktop (especially a full tower case) for optimal reception is a hassle.


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 14, 2012)

scaminatrix said:


> Some things I would take into consideration:
> 
> Wired is more secure than wireless (considering your location, I would take security seriously)
> Turning the wireless off on your router saves electricity and heat (my router gets noticably hotter with wireless turned on)
> ...



I agree; but my wireless is hidden with 32-character random letter, number, symbol, and case for BOTH the SSID and password, which I repeat, are hidden, and are WPA2, run through several routers and other more advanced security measures; you could put 100tb of rainbow tables for a year on my network and never crack it. You'd need a serious supercomputer to crack my network; *and if you can afford a 100-million dollar supercomputer and a world-class hacker, then you have no need to crack my home network*.



scaminatrix said:


> I'm sure heat caused the death of my last router in the summer. We turn the router off at night now, and only turn it on in the morning as the thought of it running 24/7 just scares me now



Did you consider turning down the heat in your room? I keep my room at between 65 and 73 degrees F. At night I keep it closer to 55 degrees. Then again I live in a colder climate where it's easier to keep the room cool when I want to. But you live in England so it really should not be a problem! You are higher latitude than I am. Then again, depends on how far from the ocean your house is. In the summer the warmest it gets here is 85 degrees, maybe 90 1 or 2 days a year. I got a nice window AC unit off craigslist for $50. You should get one.



Frick said:


> Wired routers generally have 12V 1-1.5A while wireless generally have 2A or more. So yeah it is a bit of a different. Electricity isn't that much but heat could be a problem, depending of how you can place it. Stuck between other hot computers/devices is not to recommend unless it has active cooling (yes I've busted a router that way).



Yea, make sure not to let your router overheat 



SaltyFish said:


> Desktop motherboards, due to the expectation that they will not move much, do not come with integrated wireless. That said, some motherboard manufacturers include wireless cards with their motherboards (e.g. Gigabyte).
> 
> If you are not moving your desktop around, you're better off with a wired connection. WiFi, like other wireless technology, is more sensitive to interference. If people around you use their microwaves often or you live on a major flight path with airplanes flying over you every five minutes, your connection may get severed. Then there's the usual obstructions between the router and receiver. Trying to reposition a desktop (especially a full tower case) for optimal reception is a hassle.



There are no microwaves near my room and no airplane fields anywhere near my house, so that interference is not a concern. I've never had any interference issues in my room. Not to mention that my WIFI router is located in my room, feet from my computer.


----------



## scaminatrix (Nov 14, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> You'd need a serious supercomputer to crack my network



Or a couple of good graphics cards.
Not possible to turn down the heat in summer. I know it's England, but we do actually get _some_ heat here  And I live about 300 metres from the sea.


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 15, 2012)

scaminatrix said:


> Or a couple of good graphics cards.
> Not possible to turn down the heat in summer. I know it's England, but we do actually get _some_ heat here. And I live about 300 metres from the sea.



Fifty 680 SLI with 100tb of rainbow tables could not crack my network in a year. You have to know it exists first before you can even begin trying to crack it. And you have to be an expert hacker to crack WPA2 64 random mixed characters of mixed case letters, numbers, and symbols. (32 for SSID and 32 for password). 

Personally, I'm not even sure that cracking the network is even possible. At least, not without some über-advanced algorithm on a 100-million dollar supercomputer from a career CIA hacker.

It would be much easier to pretend to be a friend and become friends and hang out at my house and ask for my password to get on the internet. Then again, I don't even give out my internet password to friends.


----------



## de.das.dude (Nov 15, 2012)

most mini ITX boards have inbuilt Wifi.

since they are aimed at HTPCs (home theatre PC) they come with inbuilt. another reason to ad wifi to miniITX is the lack/restriction on number  of PCI slots. also PCI slots can then be used for GPus.


/thread


----------



## Nordic (Nov 15, 2012)

I have occasional issues with ping and latency when others are active on my same network.


----------



## scaminatrix (Nov 15, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> Fifty 680 SLI with 100tb of rainbow tables could not crack my network in a year... Personally, I'm not even sure that cracking the network is even possible.



One word: Bitcoin

Actually, two: Bitcoin Botnet 

Yes, it's very possible to crack your network. The tools are readily available.


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 15, 2012)

scaminatrix said:


> One word: Bitcoin
> 
> Actually, two: Bitcoin Botnet
> 
> Yes, it's very possible to crack your network. The tools are readily available.



But you have to know it's there first. You can't just randomly try to crack a network when you don't know where it is or if it exists.

You can't crack something you can't see.

If you tried to crack "other network" you'd probably crack one of my neighbor's networks, but not mine.

botnet, however, you're right, but you have to have a specific place to target. Also my router has safeguards against such things.

And anyway you might get through the first router but not the second. If you could even find any of them.


----------



## scaminatrix (Nov 15, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> You can't crack something you can't see.
> And anyway you might get through the first router but not the second. If you could even find any of them.



To someone who is well versed, your router and visibility is the last thing they're going to be worried about.

You can carry on thinking that you have a perfect uncrackable network all you like, I'm just telling you that it is NOT uncrackable. Even though you have clearly taken good steps to protect yourself, you shouldn't think you're invincible.

It is difficult, but rest assured it IS do-able. Not trying to scare you into being more secure, just clearing up your misconception of an invincible network.


----------



## remixedcat (Nov 15, 2012)

scaminatrix said:


> I'm sure heat caused the death of my last router in the summer. We turn the router off at night now, and only turn it on in the morning as the thought of it running 24/7 just scares me now



looks like you need to get a new router!!! wow. mine has never overheated and it's pretty old (Netgear WGR614v9 had it for 6 years) and it's been pretty roughed up.


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 15, 2012)

remixedcat said:


> looks like you need to get a new router!!! wow. mine has never overheated and it's pretty old (Netgear WGR614v9 had it for 6 years) and it's been pretty roughed up.



Agreed! My router has never overheated either.


----------



## scaminatrix (Nov 15, 2012)

Good old BT - I can always trust them to screw up my internet providings.


----------



## Nordic (Nov 15, 2012)

scaminatrix said:


> One word: Bitcoin
> 
> Actually, two: Bitcoin Botnet
> 
> Yes, it's very possible to crack your network. The tools are readily available.



Um... Maybe a botnet... Why a bitcoin botnet? Those went away almost entirely with gpu mining. Now that asics are coming and the block reward is halving I would expect thou them to out right disappear.

There is always ways to crack a network. How many encrypted chips have there been out there that were supposedly uncrackable?


----------



## scaminatrix (Nov 15, 2012)

james888 said:


> Um... Maybe a botnet... Why a bitcoin botnet?



T'was merely an inside joke


----------



## Nordic (Nov 16, 2012)

scaminatrix said:


> T'was merely an inside joke



Ok then...


----------



## 95Viper (Nov 16, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> But you have to know it's there first. You can't just randomly try to crack a network when you don't know where it is or if it exists.
> 
> You can't crack something you can't see.
> 
> If you tried to crack "other network" you'd probably crack one of my neighbor's networks, but not mine.



SSID hidden is hidden, but still transmitted in certain packets. So, SSIDs can be easily retrieved.

It is good your are using WPA2 and a strong password; however, even that is not uncrackable.

You may wish to do a little more reading up on what is what when it comes to Wi-Fi security. 

Debunking Myths: Is Hiding Your Wireless SSID Really More Secure?
Finding Hidden SSID’s
Recover the Network Name from a Wi-Fi network that's not broadcasting its SSID.

Quote from the article link above:


> Simply start scanning the airwaves with one of these tools. As soon as a packet containing the SSID is sent, you’ll see the so-called hidden network name appear. These packets include association and reassociation requests and probe requests and responses. So if someone connects or reconnects, it should appear. However, you probably won’t have to wait till then since probes will likely be broadcasted from connected clients.


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 16, 2012)

You don't understand. Even for an expert it will not be possible to crack my internet password without a supercomputer handy, or a massive botnet, and even then it would take years - and I change my password every six months. So either the best of the best or the worst of the worst. No amateur hacker or neighbor will even be able to crack my internet.

Moreover, you are wrong- the SSID is not even being transmitted, so no, you could not read it over the airwaves.

You keep replying with false answers as if you have not even read my responses.

You're retarded if you think that you could crack a wpa2 password of 64 * 4 = 256 characters under WPA2. Or else just ignorant.

quote from site regarding cracking passwords:



> As of 2011, there are commercial products that claim to be able to generate 2,800,000,000 passwords per second (source: Wikipedia). So, with 12 character passwords made up of letters and numbers, it would take a single computer 3.23x10^21 passwords / 2.8x10^9 passwords/second / 3.154x10^7 seconds/year = 36,513 years to crack. Some purpose-built systems can crack passwords at a much higher rate, but even if processing at 10x or 100x the rate, it will take a long time to crack. Further, an attacker should not have a chance to attack a remote server for such a long time. Thus, we're confident that a 12-character password is quite acceptable for any web site.
> 
> For cases where an attacker might have prolonged access to a password hash to do an off-line attack, we recommend using 14 or more characters. By comparison, a 16 character password would take 539 billion years to crack (2^(log2(62)*16) passwords / 2.8x10^9 passwords/second / 3.154x10^7 seconds/year).
> 
> Using a longer password for such things as AES Crypt is recommended, since hackers might have prolonged access to your data and might use any number of cracking machines in parallel.




p.s. I am doing all the math for you. The numbers are STAGGERING. Will post shortly.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 16, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> I agree; but my wireless is hidden with 32-character random letter, number, symbol, and case for BOTH the SSID and password, which I repeat, are hidden, and are WPA2, run through several routers and other more advanced security measures; you could put 100tb of rainbow tables for a year on my network and never crack it. You'd need a serious supercomputer to crack my network; and if you can afford a 100-million dollar supercomputer and a world-class hacker, then you have no need to crack my home network.



$50 and the cloud server would have your network naked within an hour. Random ASCII characters are not exactly the end all of security.



vawrvawerawe said:


> You don't understand. Even for an expert it will not be possible to crack my internet password without a supercomputer handy, or a massive botnet, and even then it would take years - and I change my password every six months. So either the best of the best or the worst of the worst. No amateur hacker or neighbor will even be able to crack my internet.
> 
> Moreover, you are wrong- the SSID is not even being transmitted, so no, you could not read it over the airwaves.
> 
> ...



Your SSID is being broadcast, just not in the manner you are used to. There are always packets floating around with the SSID in them. Don't take everyone wrong on here they are just reminding you that you are not god your network is not uncrackable. The DoD mainframe isn't uncrackable people have breached the outer layers of its security within 60 seconds on many many occasions. It's level of security makes WPA2 look like an open network.


----------



## Aquinus (Nov 16, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> You don't understand. Even for an expert it will not be possible to crack my internet password without a supercomputer handy, or a massive botnet, and even then it would take years - and I change my password every six months. So either the best of the best or the worst of the worst. No amateur hacker or neighbor will even be able to crack my internet.
> 
> Moreover, you are wrong- the SSID is not even being transmitted, so no, you could not read it over the airwaves.
> 
> ...



Not true. If you're using TKIP someone could crack your network in a couple minutes with a laptop using a man in the middle method where you actually use packets sent between a client and the server to determine what the encryption key is. AES can be cracked, but it certainly hasn't been perfected to anything beyond dictionary and brute force attacks IIRC.

Also, even if the SSID isn't being broadcast, every time you send a packet to your router or one comes from it, the wireless packet has the SSID embedded inside of it, so as long as there is network traffic, your SSID is exposed. There is no way to completely hide it.

Most neighbors who are smart enough to crack WPA2 most likely will have their own internet, you just have to keep the dumb people out.

...and finally, Wi-Fi with a good signal doesn't impact internet speed or latency a whole lot.





This wireless is also the Anthros PCI-E wireless built into my ASUS P9X79 Deluxe.


----------



## scaminatrix (Nov 16, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> You don't understand. you are wrong You keep replying with false answers You're retarded Or else just ignorant.



Goodbye.


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 16, 2012)

THE MATH I PROMISED:


THE MATH:

32 symbols
10 numerals
26 lowercase
26 uppercase

= 94 possible characters each

94^64 = 1,906,262,174,603,609,240,179,178,656,657,625,086,945,986,037,788,719,949,935,941,357,851,066,322,596,406,102,384,587,670,757,587,004,664,979,877,271,875,661,328,285,696 
possible combinations

1906262174603609240179178656657625086945986037788719949935941357851066322596406102384587670757587004664979877271875661328285696[possible combinations]/2800000000[number of passwords per second for one PC using software]

680,807,919,501,289,014,349,706,663,092,008,959,623,566,442,067,399,982,119,979,056,375,380,829,498,716,465,137,352,739,556,281,073,094,635,670,454,241,307
seconds

seconds in one year: 31,556,926 (rounded up from 31,556,925.9936)

How many years would it take for one PC to crack a 64 character password (ONLY using the symbols on a keyboard, not counting other symbols), using commercial-grade top-of-the-line software on a single home PC (BARE PASSWORD, NOT INCLUDING WPA2 ALGORITHM)?

Answer: 680807919501289014349706663092008959623566442067399982119979056375380829498716465137352739556281073094635670454241307[seconds to crack]/31556925.9936[seconds in one year] = 
*21,573,961,913,760,600,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years*

THERE IS NOT A NAME FOR A NUMBER THAT LARGE!!! THE HIGHEST THE NUMERICAL SYSTEM GOES IS THE GOOGOL (where Google got its name). THE GOOGOL HAS 100 ZEROS AFTER IT. THIS NUMBER IS 21.5 x 10^108 - that is, 109 ZEROS AFTER 21 (36 SETS OF THREE). So let's just say it like this: *It would take 21,573,961,91 GOOGOL YEARS to crack the password.*

PERSPECTIVE: The universe will cease to exist (big crunch) in 100 billion years.

So, 21573961913760600000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000[YEARS TO CRACK IT]/114000000000[time from big bang to big crunch]=
189,245,279,945,268,421,052,631,578,947,368,421,052,631,578,947,368,421,052,631,578,947,368,421,052,631,578,947,368,421,052,631,578 TIMES FOR THE UNIVERSE TO EXPAND AND COLLAPSE BEFORE YOU COULD CRACK THE PASSWORD.

In other words, 1.8924528 x 10^98, in lamen terms:
*IT WOULD TAKE ALMOST 19 MILLION GOOGOL (19 with 106 zeros after it) TIMES FOR THE UNIVERSE TO GO FROM THE BIG BANG TO THE BIG CRUNCH, IN ORDER TO CRACK THE PASSWORD!!!*

*AND THAT'S ***BEFORE*** WE HAD ANY KIND OF ALGORITHM LIKE WPA2!!!*

Unfortunately this would actually even be possible because the proposed *HEAT DEATH OF THE UNIVERSE* will be in 10^150 years from now.


--

NOW, let's calculate what it would be WITH WPA2:

WPA2 uses a military-grade 256-bit algorithm that uses a logarithmic scale. If you use the standard ASCII characters, then that leaves you with 94 possibilites for each of 64 characters.

In short, the same as the SSID and password themselves, since I used 32 characters each.

Thus, the solution is quite easy without delving into much math (we're not even going to delve into the other factors of WPA2 that would multiply this solution exponentially. the number would be so outrageously large it would be completely pointless to even write:
(94^64)[SSID+Password]^[To the POWER OF](94^64)[WPA2]
In short, (94^64)^(94^64)

As we know from before, this is 1,906,262,174,603,609,240,179,178,656,657,625,086,945,986,037,788,719,949,935,941,357,851,066,322,596,406,102,384,587,670,757,587,004,664,979,877,271,875,661,328,285,696 ^ 
1,906,262,174,603,609,240,179,178,656,657,625,086,945,986,037,788,719,949,935,941,357,851,066,322,596,406,102,384,587,670,757,587,004,664,979,877,271,875,661,328,285,696

*SORRY, I HAD TO STOP. THE BIG NUMBER CALCULATOR GAVE ME AN ERROR, "SORRY, WE CAN'T CALCULATE NUMBERS THAT BIG!!!"* 
*(Apparently even trying to calculate this would make such an outrageously large number that  it would be completely pointless to even write)*)







I tried it in Google too but Google basically said "I'm not going to even touch that."

*Now you see why you would have to be retarded to think you could crack it.*


----------



## Aquinus (Nov 16, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> THE MATH I PROMISED:
> 
> 
> THE MATH:
> ...



What's more retarded is how I only need one sentence to say that you're ignorant for thinking that brute force is the only way to compromise a network. 

Edit: You're also pissing people off, so no one is really going to care at this point. It might have something to do with you posting a million times a day and now for being aggressive and ignorant.


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 16, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> What's more retarded is how I only need one sentence to say that you're ignorant for thinking that brute force is the only way to compromise a network.



Sure there are other ways besides brute force. You could kidnap them and torture them. You could break into their house and steal their router and computer and search for it. You could hire a Russian spy to get it in whatever way possible including espionage.

But here we are talking about *CRACKING A PASSWORD*. Specifically.

Please read before posting. Thanks.

p.s. don't post stupid stuff like posting a million times per day. I think I posted like 10 times today, 10 times yesterday, 20 times the day before. only day I posted more was on day one.


----------



## Aquinus (Nov 16, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> Sure there are other ways besides brute force. You could kidnap them and torture them. You could break into their house and steal their router and computer and search for it. You could hire a Russian spy to get it in whatever way possible including espionage.
> 
> But here we are talking about *CRACKING A PASSWORD*. Specifically.



Sometimes you don't need to "crack" the password to obtain it. Man in the middle attacks tend to work well if you want to sniff the packets between the AP and the wireless client.


----------



## GSquadron (Nov 16, 2012)

150 posts in a day! LOL!
Truly a Guinness world record


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 16, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> Sometimes you don't need to "crack" the password to obtain it. Man in the middle attacks tend to work well if you want to sniff the packets between the AP and the wireless client.



True. As you saw from the math, without other ways like man in the middle and packet sniffing and other things which I prefer not to learn about, then it would be literally impossible to gain access to many people's networks.



Aleksander Dishnica said:


> 150 posts in a day! LOL!
> Truly a Guinness world record



lol yeah, day one was like 150 posts!! lol but seriously it was necessary in order to gather the information to build the PC.


----------



## scaminatrix (Nov 16, 2012)

I suggest you read up on "ways to crack a wireless netowrk" as you clearly think that there is only one way. And no, we're not talking about kidnapping anyone. You're ignorance and failure to listen has ensured that people aren't going to help you - unless you stop believing this crap you have in your head.
Instead of listening to the people who clearly know more than you, you're pulling numbers from web-sites and calculators. You do realise some people here *have cracked many-a network* in their time (I know of at least 2 TPU members that are VERY well versed in it); but they're not going to show themselves. And why should they? You'll probably accuse them of being retarded too.

Stop saying impossible, there is no such thing.


----------



## Aquinus (Nov 16, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> without other ways like man in the middle and packet sniffing



But those ways do exists and they're not going anywhere. That is the point. If you truly want a secure network, don't use wireless. It is as simple as that. In all honestly, I doubt you have anything interesting enough for someone to actually want to go through the hassle of cracking your wireless specifically. So this entire thread is practically moot. Not just in the sense that it doesn't really matter but that half of what you (and other people,) are saying is just wrong.

Just throwing that out there. Good day.



scaminatrix said:


> Stop saying impossible, there is no such thing.



+1: Thank you.


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 16, 2012)

scaminatrix said:


> I suggest you read up on "ways to crack a wireless netowrk
> 
> Stop saying impossible, there is no such thing.





Aquinus said:


> +1: Thank you. [no such thing as impossible]



no, you're right, there are many ways besides cracking the password (brute force). Never said there wasn't.

*There is definitely such thing as "impossible".* You must open your mind to be able to see such things. I believe you are smart enough to conceive it. Don't be like the people who accept whatever they hear instead of using their own mind to make logical deductions about the state of reality.

For example:
Breathe in space (on your own)
turn invisible (on your own)
etc.

and of course those which are logical impossibilities:
Finite infinity
cylindrical box
etc.


----------



## scaminatrix (Nov 16, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> You must open your mind





I'm out


----------



## XL-R8R (Nov 16, 2012)

At this point, this guy is obviously trolling.


Why he continues to gain attention and trolololololololololol you guys is shocking..... the thread title has got its answer (within the first 5 posts) and this is massive derailment meant to boost his ego/epeen while he argues with you for THE LULS....


Any normal thread would of been left to rot by now as the OP has clearly got his question answered and is taking your time away from more deserving people that need help and arent just fishing.


Not much to see here... others need assistance.... :shadedshu


Lock maybe??


----------



## Frick (Nov 16, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> Don't be like the people who accept whatever they hear instead of using their own mind to make logical deductions about the state of reality.



Like you are doing now? You don't know enough about the reality of networks to make logical decuctions about it. Also, wtf are you talking about?



XL-R8R said:


> At this point, this guy is obviously trolling.
> 
> 
> Why he continues to gain attention and trolololololololololol you guys is shocking..... the thread title has got its answer (within the first 5 posts) and this is massive derailment meant to boost his ego/epeen while he argues with you for THE LULS....
> ...



I love when people makes sense.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 16, 2012)

vawrvawerawe said:


> THE MATH I PROMISED:
> 
> 
> THE MATH:
> ...



Were are you getting that number?



vawrvawerawe said:


> snip



The rest of this "math" is null and void until you answer the above.

60.5 GiB of memory
35 EC2 Compute Units (16 virtual cores*)
2 SSD-based volumes each with 1024 GB of instance storage
64-bit platform
I/O Performance: Very High (10 Gigabit Ethernet)
Storage I/O Performance: Very High**
EBS-Optimized Available: No***
API name: hi1.4xlarge

Is only capable of 400,000 passwords a second using a very well written code base. That being said you can add multiple clients to the master node. At 28 cents per minute per node...As you can see you 64 character password on its own would be quite secure. Working out to 4 786 862 537 825 394 916 592 534 983 496 028 527 291 883 841 218 214 647 864 290 081 488 615 122 262 999 558 708 938 007 582 012 642 746 662 068 785 849 625 697 324 435 096 302 375 231 559 404 174 825 844 years using 1000 nodes of Amazon's EC2 with perfect 100% scaling (impossible). That being said there is also a chance the first password it generates is the correct one  immensely improbable, but possible.

On the other side of the fence WPA2-PSK is not 100% secure and has vulnerabilities. Some have been mentioned to you, but you are acting a little over-encompassing when they are brought up to. One of them being a "hidden" SSID is and always will be broadcast within packets between connected computers and the network. Playing the man in the middle game your SSID is not hidden. If you are not paying attention when you get the reconnect you would probably just enter the password thinking the network bumped you. Giving your password to said hacker. Honestly if I didn't like you I wouldn't bother getting on your network a simple Network Injection would bring your "secure" WAP2-PSK network down next to instantly.


----------



## vawrvawerawe (Nov 16, 2012)

cdawall said:


> Were are you getting that number?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Doesn't matter how fast your computer is. It matters the limitations of the software unless your computer is not powerful enough to access the full features of the software, in which case it would be even slower.


----------



## erocker (Nov 16, 2012)

Do motherboards have wireless? Yes. 

A simple google of "Motherboard wifi/wireless" would of given an answer.

Answer given, thread closed.


----------

