[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kismet-wireless
Subject:    APM/Laptop use
From:       Porkchop <porkchop () nic ! com>
Date:       2002-05-29 14:30:05
[Download RAW message or body]

As well -- wouldent writing out be counterproductive?
Keeping the drive spinning (of course) keeps the battery draining 
quicker...getting less data.
You could use the car to power the latop as well. I woulden't worry 
about draining the battery. With the screen off and the drive not 
spinning, even my old PowerBook 1400 drew less than 5 watts at 14 
volts.
Today's power inverters would cut off if the battery drained too far anyhow.
Pkcp

At 12:23 AM -0400 5/29/02, Mike Kershaw wrote:
>Yes and no -
>
>Dump and GPS files are written run time, always have been.
>
>All other files rely on the total information for the entire sniffing run,
>and, as such, can't be written until an orderly termination.
>
>Look at apmd, you should be able to put an emergency battery power entry to
>kill kismet cleanly and let it write its closing files.
>
>-m
>
>On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 11:16:43PM -0400, Rick Farina wrote:
>>  I just gotta say....that is awesome!!!
>>
>>  I also have a feature request.  I leave my laptop sniffing in the car while
>>  I'm at work (trying to break some WEP) and sometimes (suprise suprise) the
>>  battery dies.  Can you cause kismet to write the files more immediatly so
>>  that (as much) data is not lost when the files are not properly unlinked?
>>  Thanks.
>>
>>  -Rick Farina
>>
>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>  From: "Magnus Ullberg" <UllbergM@abcbank.com>
>>  To: "'Mike Kershaw'" <dragorn@nerv-un.net>; "Magnus Ullberg"
>>  <UllbergM@abcbank.com>
>>  Cc: <wireless@kismetwireless.net>
>>  Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 21:15
>>  Subject: RE: [KISMET] Feature suggestion - More advanced 'vulnerable' flag
>>
>>
>>  oh, should have known you'd be way ahead of me..  ;)
>>
>>  -----Original Message-----
>>  From: Mike Kershaw [mailto:dragorn@nerv-un.net]
>>  Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 8:10 PM
>>  To: Magnus Ullberg
>>  Cc: 'wireless@kismetwireless.net'
>>  Subject: Re: [KISMET] Feature suggestion - More advanced 'vulnerable'
>>  flag
>>
>>
>>  Does it already - that's how it determines default configs.
>>
>>  It's just not fully developed in the -devel yet.
>>
>>  -m
>>
>>  On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 08:08:47PM -0500, Magnus Ullberg wrote:
>>  > Mike,
>>  >
>>  > I thought of something today..
>>  >
>>  > You give each network a default score of 100.
>>  > If the network is set up with the default channel, etc. you subtract 50
>>  > points.
>>  > If the network ip segment it 169.?.?.? (whatever the Microsoft pseudo-dhcp
>>  > segment is) you subtract 10 points.   (Network admin doesnt know enough to
>>  > set up a dhcp server)
>>  > If they have WEP enabled add 50 points.
>>  > If Kismet sees CDP traffic, add 5 points (you can find out a *lot* of info
>>  > about the network)
>>  > etc.
>>  >
>>  > That way Kismet can give the network a vulnerability score, and if it's
>>  less
>>  > than 100 you flag it as vulnerable.
>>  > Obviously the ammounts above needs to be tweaked, i'm just trying to
>>  explain
>>  > my idea..
>>  >
>>  > What do you think?
>>  > Is this going outside the scope of Kismet?
>>  >
>>  > Magnus Ullberg
>>  > Network Coordinator
>>  >
>>  > Area Bancshares Corporation
>  > > Networking Department
>  > > 230 Frederica St.
>  > > Owensboro, KY 42301
>  > >
>  >
>  > --
>  > "I'll be using the claw end of yer basic crow bar, but ya could 
>use any kind
>  >
>  > of hammer or pry bar--just be sure ya get it blessed by a licensed exorcist
>>  BEFORE ya start the project."
>>         -- This Old Exorcism
>>
>>
>
>--
>Warranty - Void, if broken.

-- 
--------
    My mis-spelling ability knows no bounds, sorry. (umm, yaa, aie cn spel)
Creator: Techie Theatre Funnies OnStage! <http://www.nic.com/~porkchop/>

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]