Marriott wifi blocking

Fri Oct 3 20:28:14 UTC 2014

I would think this would not sit very well with the providers.  They've
likely installed equip nearby to the hotel & conv.ctr in order to
adequately handle the concentration of devices at that location.  True?

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Michael O Holstein <
michael.holstein at csuohio.edu> wrote:

> legality is questionable insofar as "this device must not cause harmful
> interference" of PartB
> but how it works is by sending DEAUTH packets with spoofed MAC addresses
> "rouge AP" response on Cisco/Aruba works like this.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael Holstein
> Cleveland State University
> ________________________________________
> From: NANOG <nanog-bounces at nanog.org> on behalf of David Hubbard <
> dhubbard at dino.hostasaurus.com>
> Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 4:06 PM
> To: NANOG
> Subject: Marriott wifi blocking
>
> Saw this article:
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/03/travel/marriott-fcc-wi-fi-fine/
>
> The interesting part:
>
> 'A federal investigation of the Gaylord Opryland Resort and
> Convention Center in Nashville found that Marriott employees
> had used "containment features of a Wi-Fi monitoring system"
> at the hotel to prevent people from accessing their own
> personal Wi-Fi networks.'
>
> I'm aware of how the illegal wifi blocking devices work, but
> any idea what legal hardware they were using to effectively
> keep their own wifi available but render everyone else's
> inaccessible?
>
> David
>

-- 
Greg Moberg, Director, NerveCenter Engineering
LogMatrix, Inc |  http://www.logmatrix.com/ | CommunityForum
<http://community.logmatrix.com/LogMatrix/> | Blog
<http://www.logmatrix.com/Blog>
Telephone: +1 (800)892-3646
<http://www.logmatrix.com> <http://www.twitter.com/NerveCenter>
<http://www.linkedin.com/company/logmatrix?trk=ppro_cprof>
<https://www.facebook.com/Logmatrix?sk=page_insights>
<http://www.youtube.com/user/logmatrixchannel>