NetStumbler doesn't work with my Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter

May 15, 2008

I've seen other posts by people who use the Netgear WG111V2 USB

adapter with Netstumbler under Windows 98 SE, but I just can't get it

to work for me. I currently connect to the internet with another USB

adapter, (made in China, with no FCC ID or brand name), combined with

a wok, (aka: WokTenna), tethered to the end of a 15' active USB cable,

which has enough range to reach the house from our trailer about 300'

away.

I don't know what signal strength I get from this arrangement, but its

slow. About comparable to 150% of what I used to get with dialup. Now,

I'd like to be able to use an old laptop that also has Windows 98 SE

together with the Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter to reach from the shop

to the house where the cable connection and router are located, but it

doesn't have quite as much range as my cheapo made in china adapter

and the shop is just as far away from the house. Which basically means

I'll be looking at building a better antenna using the WG111, but it

sure would be nice to be able to use Netstumbler to help me with

evaluating my results.

The Netgear WG111V2 I have, has the FCC ID PY305400026 and I haven't

been able to find pictures of the innards of this device to see where

I might be able to connect an external antenna. (If anyone knows where

I can find some, please feel free to post a reply.) Also, when I try

to use Netstumbler, with either of the USB adapters I have, (I also

tried some other WG111's that I have that use the same FCC IDD number,

with the same results), Netstumber shows the adapters I have

installed, (they are grayed out), but doesn't show any of them as

being a "suitable device". I currently have drivers for the 1 made in

china adapter and 3 of the WG111's installed and can unplug one and

plug in another without any problems at all, (apart from the WG111's

poorer range). I think Windows treats each of the WG111's as a

separate entity because they use different MAC addresses, but I'm just

guessing on that.

Anyway, if anyone knows how to get Netstumbler to work on my computers

with Win98SE, or has some info on pics of the internal antenna

connections and maybe setting these up with a double biquad and maybe

a 36" round satellite dish, (I just happen to have one kicking

around), for some serious range, I'd appreciate the help.

Thanks!

K.

May 15, 2008

Re: NetStumbler doesn't work with my Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter

We could attempt to help here, but I think you would have more luck on

forums/groups which deal specifically with Netstumbler and cards/adapters.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=netstumbler&btnG=Google+Search

As for the antenna extension/change, perhaps one of the electrically adept

or old short band/ham radio operators in this group MIGHT be able to help

[they have been "pumping up" signals for years].

Questions might be [i'll leave the Netgear out of the equation for now as

that might bring its own issues with it]:

What was the supposed speed/rating/connection for the Chinese adapter [b, G;

what?].

Are there any identifying chip numbers available on the Chinese Adapter?

Did you attempt to relocate OR otherwise change: the BASE

transceiver/router; its antenna? {Is it well away from plumbing, duct work,

etc.]

Is there a marked difference between sent and received speeds?

What is the base/transceiver [make and model]?

--

MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com

--

_________

"MaxAttacks" <kickofthecat@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:a1cf5838-1ac5-4163-8d78-680d099970a2@u12g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

| I've seen other posts by people who use the Netgear WG111V2 USB

| adapter with Netstumbler under Windows 98 SE, but I just can't get it

| to work for me. I currently connect to the internet with another USB

| adapter, (made in China, with no FCC ID or brand name), combined with

| a wok, (aka: WokTenna), tethered to the end of a 15' active USB cable,

| which has enough range to reach the house from our trailer about 300'

| away.

|

| I don't know what signal strength I get from this arrangement, but its

| slow. About comparable to 150% of what I used to get with dialup. Now,

| I'd like to be able to use an old laptop that also has Windows 98 SE

| together with the Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter to reach from the shop

| to the house where the cable connection and router are located, but it

| doesn't have quite as much range as my cheapo made in china adapter

| and the shop is just as far away from the house. Which basically means

| I'll be looking at building a better antenna using the WG111, but it

| sure would be nice to be able to use Netstumbler to help me with

| evaluating my results.

|

| The Netgear WG111V2 I have, has the FCC ID PY305400026 and I haven't

| been able to find pictures of the innards of this device to see where

| I might be able to connect an external antenna. (If anyone knows where

| I can find some, please feel free to post a reply.) Also, when I try

| to use Netstumbler, with either of the USB adapters I have, (I also

| tried some other WG111's that I have that use the same FCC IDD number,

| with the same results), Netstumber shows the adapters I have

| installed, (they are grayed out), but doesn't show any of them as

| being a "suitable device". I currently have drivers for the 1 made in

| china adapter and 3 of the WG111's installed and can unplug one and

| plug in another without any problems at all, (apart from the WG111's

| poorer range). I think Windows treats each of the WG111's as a

| separate entity because they use different MAC addresses, but I'm just

| guessing on that.

|

| Anyway, if anyone knows how to get Netstumbler to work on my computers

| with Win98SE, or has some info on pics of the internal antenna

| connections and maybe setting these up with a double biquad and maybe

| a 36" round satellite dish, (I just happen to have one kicking

| around), for some serious range, I'd appreciate the help.

|

| Thanks!

|

| K.

May 15, 2008

Re: NetStumbler doesn't work with my Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter

After several days of searching the web and newsgroups, I have found a

partial answer to my own problem, that might relate to what I read

somewhere about Netstumbler 0.4.0 only working with the Hermes

chipset, but then I read elsewhere of someone using the same adapter

as I have, (I even opened one of my WG111v2's up to see the chip and

to me it looks like it might be a RealTek with the numbers RTL8187 on

the chip). The other info I found based on this info, is located here:

http://forum1.netgear.com/showthread.php?t=13033&highlight=wg111+chipset

So, maybe I'll be able to get the WG111v2's working under Win98SE

after all, assuming I can find the driver file that has the same info

and do a good cleaning of the registry? I'm still going to have to do

something about the range situation of these adapters, but thats going

to have to wait until I research more sources and options for

antenna's. Any help with that would be appreciated.

K.

MaxAttacks wrote:

> I've seen other posts by people who use the Netgear WG111V2 USB

> adapter with Netstumbler under Windows 98 SE, but I just can't get it

> to work for me. I currently connect to the internet with another USB

> adapter, (made in China, with no FCC ID or brand name), combined with

> a wok, (aka: WokTenna), tethered to the end of a 15' active USB cable,

> which has enough range to reach the house from our trailer about 300'

> away.

>

> I don't know what signal strength I get from this arrangement, but its

> slow. About comparable to 150% of what I used to get with dialup. Now,

> I'd like to be able to use an old laptop that also has Windows 98 SE

> together with the Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter to reach from the shop

> to the house where the cable connection and router are located, but it

> doesn't have quite as much range as my cheapo made in china adapter

> and the shop is just as far away from the house. Which basically means

> I'll be looking at building a better antenna using the WG111, but it

> sure would be nice to be able to use Netstumbler to help me with

> evaluating my results.

>

> The Netgear WG111V2 I have, has the FCC ID PY305400026 and I haven't

> been able to find pictures of the innards of this device to see where

> I might be able to connect an external antenna. (If anyone knows where

> I can find some, please feel free to post a reply.) Also, when I try

> to use Netstumbler, with either of the USB adapters I have, (I also

> tried some other WG111's that I have that use the same FCC IDD number,

> with the same results), Netstumber shows the adapters I have

> installed, (they are grayed out), but doesn't show any of them as

> being a "suitable device". I currently have drivers for the 1 made in

> china adapter and 3 of the WG111's installed and can unplug one and

> plug in another without any problems at all, (apart from the WG111's

> poorer range). I think Windows treats each of the WG111's as a

> separate entity because they use different MAC addresses, but I'm just

> guessing on that.

>

> Anyway, if anyone knows how to get Netstumbler to work on my computers

> with Win98SE, or has some info on pics of the internal antenna

> connections and maybe setting these up with a double biquad and maybe

> a 36" round satellite dish, (I just happen to have one kicking

> around), for some serious range, I'd appreciate the help.

>

> Thanks!

>

> K.

May 16, 2008

Re: NetStumbler doesn't work with my Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter

On May 15, 11:46 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> We could attempt to help here, but I think you would have more luck on

> forums/groups which deal specifically with Netstumbler and cards/adapters.

>

> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=netstumbler&btnG=Google+Search

I actually had planned on posting directly to the Netstumbler furom on

their website, but after I registered I found that there was a message

to new members, saying that we couldn't post for the first week after

registration.

> As for the antenna extension/change, perhaps one of the electrically adept

> or old short band/ham radio operators in this group MIGHT be able to help

> [they have been "pumping up" signals for years].

>

> Questions might be [i'll leave the Netgear out of the equation for now as

> that might bring its own issues with it]:

>

> What was the supposed speed/rating/connection for the Chinese adapter [b, G;

> what?].

It's "ISSC Wireless Utility" says that my link quality is 50%, Signal

Strength is -77dbm and noise is -95dbm. It is supposed to be a "g" and

included a CD with a really painful to install utility labeled "Wwu

".

> Are there any identifying chip numbers available on the Chinese Adapter?

I haven't tried opening it up yet and don't know if I have any

software, like maybe Sisoft Sandra, that might tell me the chipset

used. It sure seems to make a difference in range compared to the

WG111. With the WG111 I usually only get the main house from the

trailer and sometimes I can reach my neighbor about 350' away, but I

can't connect unless I go outside with the laptop and walk about 25'

closer. With the made in china adapter, I can pick up another 4 to 8

connections, but can only connect to my the main house, the shop,

(when I have the laptop in there), and to my closest neighbor.

> Did you attempt to relocate OR otherwise change: the BASE

> transceiver/router; its antenna? {Is it well away from plumbing, duct work,

> etc.]

The router belongs to the cable company and I don't want to mess with

it, if I can avoid it. Maybe once I get a better, tested setup, I'll

look into options for the router, but I'm still interested in having

something more portable that I can use with the old desktop in my

trailer and with my old laptop that I use with wireless hotspots when

in town.

> Is there a marked difference between sent and received speeds?

Not that I've noticed. Assuming that the software utility that comes

with the WG111's is accurate, it normally shows about 35% signal

strength, which is why I'd like to use one program like Netstumbler

that would report the correct values consistently, based on the same

information, no matter which computer I use it on, (at least in

theory).

> What is the base/transceiver [make and model]?

Not sure of the model off hand, but I can check later when I get into

the house. (I do most of my online stuff from the office in the

trailer, where its quieter.) I do know its a linksys router though.

> --

> MEBhttp://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com

> --

> _________

May 16, 2008

Re: NetStumbler doesn't work with my Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter

"MaxAttacks" <kickofthecat@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:b2bc9102-4f23-401c-8e8a-fa44ee09e43b@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

| On May 15, 11:46 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:

| > We could attempt to help here, but I think you would have more luck on

| > forums/groups which deal specifically with Netstumbler and

cards/adapters.

| >

| > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=netstumbler&btnG=Google+Search

|

| I actually had planned on posting directly to the Netstumbler furom on

| their website, but after I registered I found that there was a message

| to new members, saying that we couldn't post for the first week after

| registration.

Okay, as you have found out, the program is extremely limited, though

useful *IF* you can find chip specific adaptations.

There are other programs [perhaps not exactly what your looking for] like

CommView, Wireless Sniffer, other [general listed and searched for as

wireless sniffers]

|

| > As for the antenna extension/change, perhaps one of the electrically

adept

| > or old short band/ham radio operators in this group MIGHT be able to

help

| > [they have been "pumping up" signals for years].

| >

| > Questions might be [i'll leave the Netgear out of the equation for now

as

| > that might bring its own issues with it]:

| >

| > What was the supposed speed/rating/connection for the Chinese adapter

[b, G;

| > what?].

|

| It's "ISSC Wireless Utility" says that my link quality is 50%, Signal

| Strength is -77dbm and noise is -95dbm. It is supposed to be a "g" and

| included a CD with a really painful to install utility labeled "Wwu

| ".

If its a G then you may not do much better with the Netgear... the link

quality will be the limiting issue,, likely too many re-sends slowing the

connections.

The Netgear has some issues, if you have looked on the NET.

|

| > Are there any identifying chip numbers available on the Chinese

Adapter?

|

| I haven't tried opening it up yet and don't know if I have any

| software, like maybe Sisoft Sandra, that might tell me the chipset

| used. It sure seems to make a difference in range compared to the

| WG111. With the WG111 I usually only get the main house from the

| trailer and sometimes I can reach my neighbor about 350' away, but I

| can't connect unless I go outside with the laptop and walk about 25'

| closer. With the made in china adapter, I can pick up another 4 to 8

| connections, but can only connect to my the main house, the shop,

| (when I have the laptop in there), and to my closest neighbor.

Sandra Pro might have helped, but I don't have it installed in this

configuration.

http://kbserver.netgear.com/products/WG111.asp

Let's see if someone else wants to post some tools to use, you don't mind

if we wait a few more hours do you?

|

| > Did you attempt to relocate OR otherwise change: the BASE

| > transceiver/router; its antenna? {Is it well away from plumbing, duct

work,

| > etc.]

|

| The router belongs to the cable company and I don't want to mess with

| it, if I can avoid it. Maybe once I get a better, tested setup, I'll

| look into options for the router, but I'm still interested in having

| something more portable that I can use with the old desktop in my

| trailer and with my old laptop that I use with wireless hotspots when

| in town.

Okay, maybe one of the MVPs that hangout here will offer some help.

|

| > Is there a marked difference between sent and received speeds?

|

| Not that I've noticed. Assuming that the software utility that comes

| with the WG111's is accurate, it normally shows about 35% signal

| strength, which is why I'd like to use one program like Netstumbler

| that would report the correct values consistently, based on the same

| information, no matter which computer I use it on, (at least in

| theory).

Wow, striking difference in strength. I haven't been working with much

wireless recently as its EXTREMELY vulnerable to attack, so I no longer

recommend it either. But I understand the need to be "connected". Just

another gizmo that was highly touted and now found to be a major security

risk.

WG111 - 54Mbps

http://review.zdnet.com/adapters-nics/netgear-wg111-usb-adapter/4505-3380_16-30791890.html

"the WG111 earned a less remarkable 6.2Mbps score at 200 feet"

|

| > What is the base/transceiver [make and model]?

|

| Not sure of the model off hand, but I can check later when I get into

| the house. (I do most of my online stuff from the office in the

| trailer, where its quieter.) I do know its a linksys router though.

|

Let the group know, the more information the better...

--

MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com

--

_________

May 23, 2008

Re: NetStumbler doesn't work with my Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter

On May 15, 11:30 pm, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> "MaxAttacks" <kickofthe...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> news:b2bc9102-4f23-401c-8e8a-fa44ee09e43b@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

> | On May 15, 11:46 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> | > We could attempt to help here, but I think you would have more luck on

> | > forums/groups which deal specifically with Netstumbler and

> cards/adapters.

> | >

> | > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=netstumbler&btnG=Google+Search

> |

> | I actually had planned on posting directly to the Netstumbler furom on

> | their website, but after I registered I found that there was a message

> | to new members, saying that we couldn't post for the first week after

> | registration.

>

> Okay, as you have found out, the program is extremely limited, though

> useful *IF* you can find chip specific adaptations.

>

> There are other programs [perhaps not exactly what your looking for] like

> CommView, Wireless Sniffer, other [general listed and searched for as

> wireless sniffers]

I'm a little late getting back to this, but appreciate the help and

mention of other similar products. I tried to reply a couple of days

ago but Google News seemed to think I should wait and try again

another time.

I did find out through reading way too many postings about Netstumbler

that, it only works under Windows 98 SE "if" your using an adapter

with a Hermes chipset. As they added support for newer operating

systems, they didn't bother to add support for Win98SE, to allow for

the new chipsets in the newer devices supported. Which means I'm out

of luck when it comes to using Netstumbler unless I update my OS

first.

> |

> | > As for the antenna extension/change, perhaps one of the electrically

> adept

> | > or old short band/ham radio operators in this group MIGHT be able to

> help

> | > [they have been "pumping up" signals for years].

> | >

> | > Questions might be [i'll leave the Netgear out of the equation for now

> as

> | > that might bring its own issues with it]:

> | >

> | > What was the supposed speed/rating/connection for the Chinese adapter

> [b, G;

> | > what?].

> |

> | It's "ISSC Wireless Utility" says that my link quality is 50%, Signal

> | Strength is -77dbm and noise is -95dbm. It is supposed to be a "g" and

> | included a CD with a really painful to install utility labeled "Wwu

> | ".

>

> If its a G then you may not do much better with the Netgear... the link

> quality will be the limiting issue,, likely too many re-sends slowing the

> connections.

>

> The Netgear has some issues, if you have looked on the NET.

The only reason I bought the Netgear, is that they seem to be reliable

when modified with an external antenna, (which seems to remove most of

the heat source, aka: antenna, from the adapter), as in the case of

the biquad designs I've seen. (That and they were cheap to experiment

with.) Turns out that I missed a label on the side of the Netgear unit

that says in small print "Made in China".

> | > Are there any identifying chip numbers available on the Chinese

> Adapter?

I couldn't find any meaningful markings on the ISSC unit apart from

the "ISSC IS89C35 802.11bg WLAN USB Adapter" on the outside and the

name of the company "Integrated System Solution Corp." in the .inf

file that was part of the driver on the CD. I opened the unit and it

has Winbond chips, but I'll have to shoot some pictures and enlarge

them to see what numbers are on them. For now, its my most reliable

method for accessing the router. Based on the name of the company, I

found what I believe is their website here: http://www.issc.com.tw/

So its not Made in China. I guess Made in Taiwan isn't a bad thing.

> Let's see if someone else wants to post some tools to use, you don't mind

> if we wait a few more hours do you?

No big rush, but life will be simpler once I get this all straightened

out and can focus on the variety of other things I'm doing. By the

time I catch up on all the other projects here, MS may put out another

OS and Vista might become a stable operating system.

>

> Wow, striking difference in strength. I haven't been working with much

> wireless recently as its EXTREMELY vulnerable to attack, so I no longer

> recommend it either. But I understand the need to be "connected". Just

> another gizmo that was highly touted and now found to be a major security

> risk.

I'm sure there are some people wardriving around here, looking for

vulnerable systems, but not very often. At least, I know enough to not

broadcast my SSID, have my network set up for peer-to-peer and use WPA-

PSK TKIP. Unlike some of my neighbors, (one who insists that his

business and personal info is safe because he is hard wired, but still

doesn't have a firewall), I wouldn't even use a computer without a

firewall and scheduled scanning for viruses, etc. And I'm thinking

using a program called FakeID, if I can find another old computer to

run it on. I might have the wrong name there, but the program I'm

thinking of lets you hide in plain sight by broadcasting thousands of

SSID's.

> WG111 - 54Mbpshttp://review.zdnet.com/adapters-nics/netgear-wg111-usb-adapter/4505-...

> "the WG111 earned a less remarkable 6.2Mbps score at 200 feet"

That score would be an improvement over what I've been getting at 300

feet, but I'm hoping the addition of an external antenna will made a

significant difference. When I'm sitting idle watching the Wwu utility

for this Taiwanese adapter, it shows a speed of 54 mbps, but as soon

as I click on another webpage link it drops down to 1 mbps. If I

recall correctly, when I download files, a 10 Mb file takes about 20

minutes, unless I take the laptop into the house where it can take as

little as 3 minutes. I know I would do way better to upgrade to WinXP,

but until I upgrade my computers, thats something that can wait. For

now, I just need to be able to browse the web and email. The few files

I upload are small and don't contain personal, or business

information, but it would still be nice to have things happening at a

pace that didn't leave me wondering if I should take another coffee

break while I wait.

K.

May 23, 2008

Re: NetStumbler doesn't work with my Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter

"MaxAttacks" <kickofthecat@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:b2455119-1f40-493d-9961-83f53720de96@t12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

| On May 15, 11:30 pm, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:

| > "MaxAttacks" <kickofthe...@gmail.com> wrote in message

| >

news:b2bc9102-4f23-401c-8e8a-fa44ee09e43b@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

| > | On May 15, 11:46 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:

| > | > We could attempt to help here, but I think you would have more luck

on

| > | > forums/groups which deal specifically with Netstumbler and

| > cards/adapters.

| > | >

| > | > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=netstumbler&btnG=Google+Search

| > |

| > | I actually had planned on posting directly to the Netstumbler furom on

| > | their website, but after I registered I found that there was a message

| > | to new members, saying that we couldn't post for the first week after

| > | registration.

| >

| > Okay, as you have found out, the program is extremely limited, though

| > useful *IF* you can find chip specific adaptations.

| >

| > There are other programs [perhaps not exactly what your looking for]

like

| > CommView, Wireless Sniffer, other [general listed and searched for as

| > wireless sniffers]

|

| I'm a little late getting back to this, but appreciate the help and

| mention of other similar products. I tried to reply a couple of days

| ago but Google News seemed to think I should wait and try again

| another time.

|

| I did find out through reading way too many postings about Netstumbler

| that, it only works under Windows 98 SE "if" your using an adapter

| with a Hermes chipset. As they added support for newer operating

| systems, they didn't bother to add support for Win98SE, to allow for

| the new chipsets in the newer devices supported. Which means I'm out

| of luck when it comes to using Netstumbler unless I update my OS

| first.

Well I didn't want to burst your bubble, I have Netstumbler here... and it

is only useful as you indicate.

|

| > |

| > | > As for the antenna extension/change, perhaps one of the

electrically

| > adept

| > | > or old short band/ham radio operators in this group MIGHT be able to

| > help

| > | > [they have been "pumping up" signals for years].

| > | >

| > | > Questions might be [i'll leave the Netgear out of the equation for

now

| > as

| > | > that might bring its own issues with it]:

| > | >

| > | > What was the supposed speed/rating/connection for the Chinese

adapter

| > [b, G;

| > | > what?].

| > |

| > | It's "ISSC Wireless Utility" says that my link quality is 50%, Signal

| > | Strength is -77dbm and noise is -95dbm. It is supposed to be a "g" and

| > | included a CD with a really painful to install utility labeled "Wwu

| > | ".

| >

| > If its a G then you may not do much better with the Netgear... the link

| > quality will be the limiting issue,, likely too many re-sends slowing

the

| > connections.

| >

| > The Netgear has some issues, if you have looked on the NET.

|

| The only reason I bought the Netgear, is that they seem to be reliable

| when modified with an external antenna, (which seems to remove most of

| the heat source, aka: antenna, from the adapter), as in the case of

| the biquad designs I've seen. (That and they were cheap to experiment

| with.) Turns out that I missed a label on the side of the Netgear unit

| that says in small print "Made in China".

HEHEHE, oh well, CHINA makes what manufacturers dictate...

So let me get this straight, you mentioned a laptop, that ISN"T the one in

the shop is it?

If its a desktop, an internal adapter can provide MUCH more ability to

modify than a plugin USB. Think of modifications that the old CB users used

to make....

|

| > | > Are there any identifying chip numbers available on the Chinese

| > Adapter?

|

| I couldn't find any meaningful markings on the ISSC unit apart from

| the "ISSC IS89C35 802.11bg WLAN USB Adapter" on the outside and the

| name of the company "Integrated System Solution Corp." in the .inf

| file that was part of the driver on the CD. I opened the unit and it

| has Winbond chips, but I'll have to shoot some pictures and enlarge

| them to see what numbers are on them. For now, its my most reliable

| method for accessing the router. Based on the name of the company, I

| found what I believe is their website here: http://www.issc.com.tw/

|

| So its not Made in China. I guess Made in Taiwan isn't a bad thing.

Contrary to popular opinion, China does ship some good products.. and

Taiwan has been providing the world with a large part of its technologies

and hardware for decades.

Actually, looking at the site, ISSC amalgamated with Alinks Communications,

Inc. in Silicon Valley in 2000 so what do you actually have, or does it

really matter.. they seem to be making their own designs, so though not

POPULAR and WELL ADVERTISED, they may make better products and chips.

|

| > Let's see if someone else wants to post some tools to use, you don't

mind

| > if we wait a few more hours do you?

|

| No big rush, but life will be simpler once I get this all straightened

| out and can focus on the variety of other things I'm doing. By the

| time I catch up on all the other projects here, MS may put out another

| OS and Vista might become a stable operating system.

ROFLMAO,,,, right, like that will happen in my lifetime, VISTA stable,,,

sshhshshhs, they just found another batch of new vulnerabilities, and in

Vista's UAC....

|

| >

| > Wow, striking difference in strength. I haven't been working with much

| > wireless recently as its EXTREMELY vulnerable to attack, so I no longer

| > recommend it either. But I understand the need to be "connected". Just

| > another gizmo that was highly touted and now found to be a major

security

| > risk.

|

| I'm sure there are some people wardriving around here, looking for

| vulnerable systems, but not very often. At least, I know enough to not

| broadcast my SSID, have my network set up for peer-to-peer and use WPA-

| PSK TKIP. Unlike some of my neighbors, (one who insists that his

| business and personal info is safe because he is hard wired, but still

| doesn't have a firewall), I wouldn't even use a computer without a

| firewall and scheduled scanning for viruses, etc. And I'm thinking

| using a program called FakeID, if I can find another old computer to

| run it on. I might have the wrong name there, but the program I'm

| thinking of lets you hide in plain sight by broadcasting thousands of

| SSID's.

Ah, heard of those [have to say that]. Guess you haven't done that sniffer

search I suggested.

You might just use a dedicated firewall server if you can find that extra

machine... much more to them than just the normal "software firewall".

Several free Linux stand-alone versions out there...

As for your neighbor without the firewall, likely bought into the "routers

are the only firewall I need" sales hype, or maybe "mine has a hardware

firewall built in", yep, and so did the CISCO and others that were recently

wacked....

And of course:

Over 1.5 million pages were affected by the recent SQL injection attacks.

SQL Injection attacks lead to wide-spread compromise of IIS servers[hmm,

another Microsoft product] and giess what, they were behind firewalls and

routers...

|

| > WG111 -

54Mbpshttp://review.zdnet.com/adapters-nics/netgear-wg111-usb-adapter/4505-.

...

| > "the WG111 earned a less remarkable 6.2Mbps score at 200 feet"

|

| That score would be an improvement over what I've been getting at 300

| feet, but I'm hoping the addition of an external antenna will made a

| significant difference. When I'm sitting idle watching the Wwu utility

| for this Taiwanese adapter, it shows a speed of 54 mbps, but as soon

| as I click on another webpage link it drops down to 1 mbps. If I

| recall correctly, when I download files, a 10 Mb file takes about 20

| minutes, unless I take the laptop into the house where it can take as

| little as 3 minutes. I know I would do way better to upgrade to WinXP,

| but until I upgrade my computers, thats something that can wait. For

| now, I just need to be able to browse the web and email. The few files

| I upload are small and don't contain personal, or business

| information, but it would still be nice to have things happening at a

| pace that didn't leave me wondering if I should take another coffee

| break while I wait.

|

| K.

Ouch, I'm still using phoneline for this identity... but you already know

that isn't going to happen with the Netgear, it won't even connect at 300

now...

Okay, so it IS the laptop then. Well, if you get the time, play around with

the antenna conversion, and maybe research some boosters.

But if you're going that route, might as well make it the one that

presently works to boost. At least that already has a signal indicating a

better potential outcome.

--

MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com

--

_________

May 23, 2008

Re: NetStumbler doesn't work with my Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter

On May 23, 12:06 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> "MaxAttacks" <kickofthe...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> news:b2455119-1f40-493d-9961-83f53720de96@t12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

> | On May 15, 11:30 pm, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> | > "MaxAttacks" <kickofthe...@gmail.com> wrote in message

> | >

> | >news:b2bc9102-4f23-401c-8e8a-fa44ee09e43b@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

> | > | On May 15, 11:46 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> | > | > We could attempt to help here, but I think you would have more luck

> on

> | > | > forums/groups which deal specifically with Netstumbler and

> | > cards/adapters.

> | > | >

> | > | > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=netstumbler&btnG=Google+Search

> | > Okay, as you have found out, the program is extremely limited, though

> | > useful *IF* you can find chip specific adaptations.

> | >

> | > There are other programs [perhaps not exactly what your looking for]

> like

> | > CommView, Wireless Sniffer, other [general listed and searched for as

> | > wireless sniffers]

> |

> | I'm a little late getting back to this, but appreciate the help and

> | mention of other similar products. I tried to reply a couple of days

> | ago but Google News seemed to think I should wait and try again

> | another time.

> |

> | I did find out through reading way too many postings about Netstumbler

> | that, it only works under Windows 98 SE "if" your using an adapter

> | with a Hermes chipset. As they added support for newer operating

> | systems, they didn't bother to add support for Win98SE, to allow for

> | the new chipsets in the newer devices supported. Which means I'm out

> | of luck when it comes to using Netstumbler unless I update my OS

> | first.

>

> Well I didn't want to burst your bubble, I have Netstumbler here... and it

> is only useful as you indicate.

I managed to locate a used 500 mhz cpu for the desktop in the house,

but my old montherboard doesn't support it very well so, when I find

time I'll be updating and going with XP on that computer. At least

I'll have one system that I can use to check signal strength for

connections to the laptop and my other desktop in the trailer. I've

mainly been using the laptop in the yard and when in town at hotspots,

but with only Win98SE on it and being too old to upgrade, I think it

will soon be time for something newer.

> So let me get this straight, you mentioned a laptop, that ISN"T the one in

> the shop is it?

>

> If its a desktop, an internal adapter can provide MUCH more ability to

> modify than a plugin USB. Think of modifications that the old CB users used

> to make....

> |

> | > | > Are there any identifying chip numbers available on the Chinese

> | > Adapter?

> |

> | I couldn't find any meaningful markings on the ISSC unit apart from

> | the "ISSC IS89C35 802.11bg WLAN USB Adapter" on the outside and the

> | name of the company "Integrated System Solution Corp." in the .inf

> | file that was part of the driver on the CD. I opened the unit and it

> | has Winbond chips, but I'll have to shoot some pictures and enlarge

> | them to see what numbers are on them. For now, its my most reliable

> | method for accessing the router. Based on the name of the company, I

> | found what I believe is their website here:http://www.issc.com.tw/

> |

> | So its not Made in China. I guess Made in Taiwan isn't a bad thing.

>

> Contrary to popular opinion, China does ship some good products.. and

> Taiwan has been providing the world with a large part of its technologies

> and hardware for decades.

>

> Actually, looking at the site, ISSC amalgamated with Alinks Communications,

> Inc. in Silicon Valley in 2000 so what do you actually have, or does it

> really matter.. they seem to be making their own designs, so though not

> POPULAR and WELL ADVERTISED, they may make better products and chips.

They sell these on eBay for about $0.99 each but the shipping is

inflated to around $12.00.

> |

> | > Let's see if someone else wants to post some tools to use, you don't

> mind

> | > if we wait a few more hours do you?

> |

> | No big rush, but life will be simpler once I get this all straightened

> | out and can focus on the variety of other things I'm doing. By the

> | time I catch up on all the other projects here, MS may put out another

> | OS and Vista might become a stable operating system.

>

> ROFLMAO,,,, right, like that will happen in my lifetime, VISTA stable,,,

> sshhshshhs, they just found another batch of new vulnerabilities, and in

> Vista's UAC....

Ok, so I was getting a flashback to a MAC/PC commercial. If they

didn't make other OS's like Linux and Ubutu sound like old Unix, I'd

consider going that route, but then I'd have to hunt up new equipment

and drivers to make it all work.

> |

> | I'm sure there are some people wardriving around here, looking for

> | vulnerable systems, but not very often. At least, I know enough to not

> | broadcast my SSID, have my network set up for peer-to-peer and use WPA-

> | PSK TKIP. Unlike some of my neighbors, (one who insists that his

> | business and personal info is safe because he is hard wired, but still

> | doesn't have a firewall), I wouldn't even use a computer without a

> | firewall and scheduled scanning for viruses, etc. And I'm thinking

> | using a program called FakeID, if I can find another old computer to

> | run it on. I might have the wrong name there, but the program I'm

> | thinking of lets you hide in plain sight by broadcasting thousands of

> | SSID's.

>

> Ah, heard of those [have to say that]. Guess you haven't done that sniffer

> search I suggested.

> You might just use a dedicated firewall server if you can find that extra

> machine... much more to them than just the normal "software firewall".

> Several free Linux stand-alone versions out there...

I poked around abit, but so far most sniffers are aimed at Linux, or

WinXP. Maybe its me and I've got some sort of obsessive compulsive

thing going on with USB adapters, but I've actually been looking at a

USB firewall adapter. Its hardware based, but as easy to get up and

running as plugging it in to a USB port.

> As for your neighbor without the firewall, likely bought into the "routers

> are the only firewall I need" sales hype, or maybe "mine has a hardware

> firewall built in", yep, and so did the CISCO and others that were recently

> wacked....

>

> And of course:

> Over 1.5 million pages were affected by the recent SQL injection attacks.

> SQL Injection attacks lead to wide-spread compromise of IIS servers[hmm,

> another Microsoft product] and giess what, they were behind firewalls and

> routers...

The neighbor in question thinks that the ISP's firewall is enough and

they actually run a business taking and using credit cards for most

transactions. I shake my head every time I see another poor sap going

there to do business with them, but I've tried to report this to the

parent company they contract with and to the media, but they're all

paranoid about making accusations and potential liability. Oh well.

> |

> | > WG111 -

> 54Mbpshttp://review.zdnet.com/adapters-nics/netgear-wg111-usb-adapter/4505-.

> ..

> | > "the WG111 earned a less remarkable 6.2Mbps score at 200 feet"

> |

> | That score would be an improvement over what I've been getting at 300

> | feet, but I'm hoping the addition of an external antenna will made a

> | significant difference. When I'm sitting idle watching the Wwu utility

> | for this Taiwanese adapter, it shows a speed of 54 mbps, but as soon

> | as I click on another webpage link it drops down to 1 mbps. If I

> | recall correctly, when I download files, a 10 Mb file takes about 20

> | minutes, unless I take the laptop into the house where it can take as

> | little as 3 minutes. I know I would do way better to upgrade to WinXP,

> | but until I upgrade my computers, thats something that can wait. For

> | now, I just need to be able to browse the web and email. The few files

> | I upload are small and don't contain personal, or business

> | information, but it would still be nice to have things happening at a

> | pace that didn't leave me wondering if I should take another coffee

> | break while I wait.

> |

> | K.

>

> Ouch, I'm still using phoneline for this identity... but you already know

> that isn't going to happen with the Netgear, it won't even connect at 300

> now...

Until a few months ago, I was using dialup and paying more than if I

had cable internet. I finally made the break and hope I'll never have

to go back.

> Okay, so it IS the laptop then. Well, if you get the time, play around with

> the antenna conversion, and maybe research some boosters.

> But if you're going that route, might as well make it the one that

> presently works to boost. At least that already has a signal indicating a

> better potential outcome.

When I was deciding on which USB WiFi adapter to use, I couldn't find

any side by side comparisons showing dBi of gain for each. So, I went

with a brand name and moderate model of adapter. I had seen some

complaints about the WG111v2, but not many compared to some other

models. I had also seen someone on eBay who was selling preassembled

biquad antenna's using a Netgear USB adapter and when I spotted

someone else selling several of them at a good price and cheap

shipping, I bit the bullet and bought a few.

So, the designs on these pages are what I'm looking at, apart from the

fact that I'm "thinking" of going with the "double" biquad design in

the last link. I haven't decided on just how fancy I want to get yet.

The single biquad design seems easier and I do have an unused

satellite dish I could use with it, (using the biquad as the feed

horn), if I decide to do that at a later date.

http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~redwood4/

http://www.trevormarshall.com/biquad.htm

http://martybugs.net/wireless/biquad/

http://martybugs.net/wireless/biquad/double.cgi

I was just browsing that last website and came up with a link to an

eBay store that sells kits for the antenna's, so I might go that

route since the shipping seems pretty reasonable. If anyone is

interested, here's the link:

http://stores.ebay.com/War-Driving-World

As you suggested, I mainly want the external antenna for the laptop,

but it wouldn't hurt to have a stronger antenna and signal for my

other computers. I've found that most laptops have very weak signals

from internal antenna's and both my desktop and laptop do far better

when I use an active USB cable, (3 meters long), and put the adapter

as far away as possible from the computer. One other use I have for

the laptop, is when I go camping with my travel trailer and want to

use a "hotspot" at the local Walmart, or Staples, etc, but can't park

close enough to get a good signal. Or when I'm in a campground that

has internet access and I end up at the far end where the signal can

be very weak.

Anyway, I think I've covered everything and I feel better informed. I

will be continuing to hunt for a sniffer that works with my adapters

and Win98SE as I have time, but if anyone knows of one similar to

NetStumbler, feel free to post it here.

Have a good day!

K.

May 24, 2008

Re: NetStumbler doesn't work with my Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter

--

MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com

--

_________

"MaxAttacks" <kickofthecat@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:ef40c3fd-6ef5-4645-b283-f43396c25ad2@u6g2000prc.googlegroups.com...

| On May 23, 12:06 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:

| > "MaxAttacks" <kickofthe...@gmail.com> wrote in message

| >

news:b2455119-1f40-493d-9961-83f53720de96@t12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

| > | On May 15, 11:30 pm, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:

| > | > "MaxAttacks" <kickofthe...@gmail.com> wrote in message

| > | >

| > |

>news:b2bc9102-4f23-401c-8e8a-fa44ee09e43b@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

| > | > | On May 15, 11:46 am, "MEB" <meb@not h...@hotmail.com> wrote:

| > | > | > We could attempt to help here, but I think you would have more

luck

| > on

| > | > | > forums/groups which deal specifically with Netstumbler and

| > | > cards/adapters.

| > | > | >

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=netstumbler&btnG=Google+Search

|

| > | > Okay, as you have found out, the program is extremely limited,

though

| > | > useful *IF* you can find chip specific adaptations.

| > | >

| > | > There are other programs [perhaps not exactly what your looking

for]

| > like

| > | > CommView, Wireless Sniffer, other [general listed and searched for

as

| > | > wireless sniffers]

| > |

| > | I'm a little late getting back to this, but appreciate the help and

| > | mention of other similar products. I tried to reply a couple of days

| > | ago but Google News seemed to think I should wait and try again

| > | another time.

| > |

| > | I did find out through reading way too many postings about Netstumbler

| > | that, it only works under Windows 98 SE "if" your using an adapter

| > | with a Hermes chipset. As they added support for newer operating

| > | systems, they didn't bother to add support for Win98SE, to allow for

| > | the new chipsets in the newer devices supported. Which means I'm out

| > | of luck when it comes to using Netstumbler unless I update my OS

| > | first.

| >

| > Well I didn't want to burst your bubble, I have Netstumbler here... and

it

| > is only useful as you indicate.

|

| I managed to locate a used 500 mhz cpu for the desktop in the house,

| but my old montherboard doesn't support it very well so, when I find

| time I'll be updating and going with XP on that computer. At least

| I'll have one system that I can use to check signal strength for

| connections to the laptop and my other desktop in the trailer. I've

| mainly been using the laptop in the yard and when in town at hotspots,

| but with only Win98SE on it and being too old to upgrade, I think it

| will soon be time for something newer.

Don't expect much from that 500Mhz with XP, its a hog for CPU needs and

memory, if that's your intent.

|

| > So let me get this straight, you mentioned a laptop, that ISN"T the one

in

| > the shop is it?

| >

| > If its a desktop, an internal adapter can provide MUCH more ability to

| > modify than a plugin USB. Think of modifications that the old CB users

used

| > to make....

| > |

| > | > | > Are there any identifying chip numbers available on the Chinese

| > | > Adapter?

| > |

| > | I couldn't find any meaningful markings on the ISSC unit apart from

| > | the "ISSC IS89C35 802.11bg WLAN USB Adapter" on the outside and the

| > | name of the company "Integrated System Solution Corp." in the .inf

| > | file that was part of the driver on the CD. I opened the unit and it

| > | has Winbond chips, but I'll have to shoot some pictures and enlarge

| > | them to see what numbers are on them. For now, its my most reliable

| > | method for accessing the router. Based on the name of the company, I

| > | found what I believe is their website here:http://www.issc.com.tw/

| > |

| > | So its not Made in China. I guess Made in Taiwan isn't a bad thing.

| >

| > Contrary to popular opinion, China does ship some good products.. and

| > Taiwan has been providing the world with a large part of its

technologies

| > and hardware for decades.

| >

| > Actually, looking at the site, ISSC amalgamated with Alinks

Communications,

| > Inc. in Silicon Valley in 2000 so what do you actually have, or does it

| > really matter.. they seem to be making their own designs, so though not

| > POPULAR and WELL ADVERTISED, they may make better products and chips.

|

| They sell these on eBay for about $0.99 each but the shipping is

| inflated to around $12.00.

Right, seems everyone follows what the purported *hot* item is, even if its

not all that good.

|

| > |

| > | > Let's see if someone else wants to post some tools to use, you

don't

| > mind

| > | > if we wait a few more hours do you?

| > |

| > | No big rush, but life will be simpler once I get this all straightened

| > | out and can focus on the variety of other things I'm doing. By the

| > | time I catch up on all the other projects here, MS may put out another

| > | OS and Vista might become a stable operating system.

| >

| > ROFLMAO,,,, right, like that will happen in my lifetime, VISTA

stable,,,

| > sshhshshhs, they just found another batch of new vulnerabilities, and in

| > Vista's UAC....

|

| Ok, so I was getting a flashback to a MAC/PC commercial. If they

| didn't make other OS's like Linux and Ubutu sound like old Unix, I'd

| consider going that route, but then I'd have to hunt up new equipment

| and drivers to make it all work.

Most of those "old" issue have been resolved. The newer Linuxes are rather

nice and get some pretty good ratings.

Seems there are a lot more people headed that way.

|

| > |

| > | I'm sure there are some people wardriving around here, looking for

| > | vulnerable systems, but not very often. At least, I know enough to not

| > | broadcast my SSID, have my network set up for peer-to-peer and use

WPA-

| > | PSK TKIP. Unlike some of my neighbors, (one who insists that his

| > | business and personal info is safe because he is hard wired, but still

| > | doesn't have a firewall), I wouldn't even use a computer without a

| > | firewall and scheduled scanning for viruses, etc. And I'm thinking

| > | using a program called FakeID, if I can find another old computer to

| > | run it on. I might have the wrong name there, but the program I'm

| > | thinking of lets you hide in plain sight by broadcasting thousands of

| > | SSID's.

| >

| > Ah, heard of those [have to say that]. Guess you haven't done that

sniffer

| > search I suggested.

| > You might just use a dedicated firewall server if you can find that

extra

| > machine... much more to them than just the normal "software firewall".

| > Several free Linux stand-alone versions out there...

|

| I poked around abit, but so far most sniffers are aimed at Linux, or

| WinXP. Maybe its me and I've got some sort of obsessive compulsive

| thing going on with USB adapters, but I've actually been looking at a

| USB firewall adapter. Its hardware based, but as easy to get up and

| running as plugging it in to a USB port.

Okay I suppose, but remember that these extra USB devices are sharing

bandwidth on the channel. Its not like your adding a bunch of USB drives

that only use the channel when accessed. Throw a printer, camera, IPod, hard

drive, thumb drive, and other gizmos on USB and your running into sharing

issues.

|

| > As for your neighbor without the firewall, likely bought into the

"routers

| > are the only firewall I need" sales hype, or maybe "mine has a hardware

| > firewall built in", yep, and so did the CISCO and others that were

recently

| > wacked....

| >

| > And of course:

| > Over 1.5 million pages were affected by the recent SQL injection

attacks.

| > SQL Injection attacks lead to wide-spread compromise of IIS servers[hmm,

| > another Microsoft product] and guess what, they were behind firewalls

and

| > routers...

|

| The neighbor in question thinks that the ISP's firewall is enough and

| they actually run a business taking and using credit cards for most

| transactions. I shake my head every time I see another poor sap going

| there to do business with them, but I've tried to report this to the

| parent company they contract with and to the media, but they're all

| paranoid about making accusations and potential liability. Oh well.

Big company? Well you might remind them that the loss CAN be charged back

to someone when they are at fault for that loss and failed to ensure

protection, or may be held otherwise liable.

And if they were instrumental in ID theft, they could have a suit on their

hands.

|

| > |

| > | > WG111 -

| >

54Mbpshttp://review.zdnet.com/adapters-nics/netgear-wg111-usb-adapter/4505-.

| > ..

| > | > "the WG111 earned a less remarkable 6.2Mbps score at 200 feet"

| > |

| > | That score would be an improvement over what I've been getting at 300

| > | feet, but I'm hoping the addition of an external antenna will made a

| > | significant difference. When I'm sitting idle watching the Wwu utility

| > | for this Taiwanese adapter, it shows a speed of 54 mbps, but as soon

| > | as I click on another webpage link it drops down to 1 mbps. If I

| > | recall correctly, when I download files, a 10 Mb file takes about 20

| > | minutes, unless I take the laptop into the house where it can take as

| > | little as 3 minutes. I know I would do way better to upgrade to WinXP,

| > | but until I upgrade my computers, thats something that can wait. For

| > | now, I just need to be able to browse the web and email. The few files

| > | I upload are small and don't contain personal, or business

| > | information, but it would still be nice to have things happening at a

| > | pace that didn't leave me wondering if I should take another coffee

| > | break while I wait.

| > |

| > | K.

| >

| > Ouch, I'm still using phoneline for this identity... but you already

know

| > that isn't going to happen with the Netgear, it won't even connect at

300

| > now...

|

| Until a few months ago, I was using dialup and paying more than if I

| had cable internet. I finally made the break and hope I'll never have

| to go back.

Right, there is nothing presently that compares for the general consumer.

The DSL offerings get close but ... SAT could easily blow the doors off

Cable if they wished to do it, but the cells are likely to pick up that

area.

Personally, I'm not very happy being bombarded with all this massive amount

of microwave and other..

|

| > Okay, so it IS the laptop then. Well, if you get the time, play around

with

| > the antenna conversion, and maybe research some boosters.

| > But if you're going that route, might as well make it the one that

| > presently works to boost. At least that already has a signal indicating

a

| > better potential outcome.

|

| When I was deciding on which USB WiFi adapter to use, I couldn't find

| any side by side comparisons showing dBi of gain for each. So, I went

| with a brand name and moderate model of adapter. I had seen some

| complaints about the WG111v2, but not many compared to some other

| models. I had also seen someone on eBay who was selling preassembled

| biquad antenna's using a Netgear USB adapter and when I spotted

| someone else selling several of them at a good price and cheap

| shipping, I bit the bullet and bought a few.

So your adapter has already been modified?

|

| So, the designs on these pages are what I'm looking at, apart from the

| fact that I'm "thinking" of going with the "double" biquad design in

| the last link. I haven't decided on just how fancy I want to get yet.

| The single biquad design seems easier and I do have an unused

| satellite dish I could use with it, (using the biquad as the feed

| horn), if I decide to do that at a later date.

|

| http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~redwood4/

| http://www.trevormarshall.com/biquad.htm

| http://martybugs.net/wireless/biquad/

| http://martybugs.net/wireless/biquad/double.cgi

|

OKAY, there are some good materials to work from.. seems the antenna aspect

is being done, but did you find anything that works on the actual

output/signal strength? Wait a min, that's likely a violation of FCC Rules

and/or other controls.

| I was just browsing that last website and came up with a link to an

| eBay store that sells kits for the antenna's, so I might go that

| route since the shipping seems pretty reasonable. If anyone is

| interested, here's the link:

| http://stores.ebay.com/War-Driving-World

|

| As you suggested, I mainly want the external antenna for the laptop,

| but it wouldn't hurt to have a stronger antenna and signal for my

| other computers. I've found that most laptops have very weak signals

| from internal antenna's and both my desktop and laptop do far better

| when I use an active USB cable, (3 meters long), and put the adapter

| as far away as possible from the computer. One other use I have for

| the laptop, is when I go camping with my travel trailer and want to

| use a "hotspot" at the local Walmart, or Staples, etc, but can't park

| close enough to get a good signal. Or when I'm in a campground that

| has internet access and I end up at the far end where the signal can

| be very weak.

|

| Anyway, I think I've covered everything and I feel better informed. I

| will be continuing to hunt for a sniffer that works with my adapters

| and Win98SE as I have time, but if anyone knows of one similar to

| NetStumbler, feel free to post it here.

|

| Have a good day!

|

| K.

May 24, 2008

Re: NetStumbler doesn't work with my Netgear WG111V2 USB adapter

Let me put the sig where its supposed to be>>