Wi-Fi Hotspot Blocking Persists Despite FCC Crackdown

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
It's hard to believe that hotels across the country are still pulling this crap on their customers. You'd think all those big ass fines the FCC is handing out for Wi-Fi hotspot blocking would be a deterrent, but I guess not. :(


Big name hospitality outfits, from Sheraton to Motel 6, were named, with one person describing a Motel 6 Wi-Fi network in Denver as acting “like a virus… [It] would not remain disconnected” and allow the patron to use his or her hotspot. A handful of Marriott locations were fingered by consumers well after the FCC levied its fine. One consumer argued that Marriott blocking personal Wi-Fi hotspots is an infringement on freedom of speech, as “forcing me to use their system allows them to block me from sites (say Hilton’s website) that they don’t like.”
 
This is going on at the company I work for. They offer no wi-fi for employees and once I brought in my laptop do some personal stuff during lunch and my hot spot would just refuse to stay connected.

It took me a while to realize that my hot spot only fails to connect when I'm inside the building.

...actually, it makes sense for companies to do this now that I'm thinking about it. Shouldn't be allowed on consumers through.
 
Last edited:
This is nothing new. It's called rogue access point detection, and for a business, it's supposed to help prevent someone from impersonating one of their access points. I can actually understand why the hotels are doing it though, and it's not because they don't want guests from using personal hotspots.

They're doing it so nobody tries to impersonate their wifi network and try to hack guests systems that don't know the difference between the hotels' wifi and the impostor. The problem is that they probably have it set too aggressive though. I'll have to double-check my own access points and see, but depending on the access point you may be able to tell it to just jam any rogue access points that are using the same SSID.
 
Well, in Hilton's case, unless you are in a hotel where they offer the uplifted premium wifi speeds, their own wifi doesn't work hardly at all about 50% of the time. And another 25% of the time it is so slow as to be virtually worthless.

I am actually torn on this issue. It seems there should be a commercial wifi space, that could be restricted, but with a non-commercial space that can't be. That way both needs can be met. If I'm a visitor, I don't want someone's non-public wifi hotspot interfering with access to the hotel/business public (not necessarily free) wifi. (And of course, don't want someone impersonating their network either, as mention above)
 
They're doing it so nobody tries to impersonate their wifi network and try to hack guests systems that don't know the difference between the hotels' wifi and the impostor. The problem is that they probably have it set too aggressive though. I'll have to double-check my own access points and see, but depending on the access point you may be able to tell it to just jam any rogue access points that are using the same SSID.

You're really drinking up the kool-aid if you think they have the safety of their guests in mind. They have every incentive to get guests on their network even if it's on the free service.

I'd love to think that companies pull these kinds of things for the good of the public but lets not kid ourselves here....to companies the following inequality holds true: $$ > *
 
There are too many ways around this.

No your honor. Absolutely not. we do not block WiFi signals.

We just use all 2.4Ghz Band and 5Ghz band channels documented in the 802.11 standards at the maximum transmit power the FCC allows for legitimate purposes!

:p
 
They're doing it so nobody tries to impersonate their wifi network and try to hack guests systems that don't know the difference between the hotels' wifi and the impostor. The problem is that they probably have it set too aggressive though. I'll have to double-check my own access points and see, but depending on the access point you may be able to tell it to just jam any rogue access points that are using the same SSID.

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

or you're serious

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHHAAHHa

yep "safety" uh huh.
 
They're doing it so nobody tries to impersonate their wifi network and try to hack guests systems that don't know the difference between the hotels' wifi and the impostor. The problem is that they probably have it set too aggressive though. I'll have to double-check my own access points and see, but depending on the access point you may be able to tell it to just jam any rogue access points that are using the same SSID.

I know I can set my AP to the SSID as McDonalds or Starbucks and have people autoconnect to it. People connect to those, and set it to autoconnect. All I have to do is set that and they are on my network. Of course, I don't do anything. I'm just testing and playing around.
 
I know I can set my AP to the SSID as McDonalds or Starbucks and have people autoconnect to it. People connect to those, and set it to autoconnect. All I have to do is set that and they are on my network. Of course, I don't do anything. I'm just testing and playing around.

This has never worked for me. I was under the impression that most Wi-Fi client software attempts to match the original MAC address before attempting to connect.
 
This has never worked for me. I was under the impression that most Wi-Fi client software attempts to match the original MAC address before attempting to connect.

Some probably does. But, like with multiple AP's and roaming (mesh style wifi network), a lot of it doesn't. It'll go from AP to AP as you're moving along. I found my phone connecting to any DD-WRT network for a bit...
 
Some probably does. But, like with multiple AP's and roaming (mesh style wifi network), a lot of it doesn't. It'll go from AP to AP as you're moving along. I found my phone connecting to any DD-WRT network for a bit...

Well thats scary
 
Back
Top