| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/22/2003 02:03:59 PM · #1 |
I am seriously considering getting a DSL connection in my house. I see I can get SBC-Yahoo DSL for 29.95 a month for a year.
Questions: Is DSL really worth the money?
Anyone have horror stories/ things I can learn from?
Are there other better ISP's for DSL out there, for cheaper, maybe?
Help!
|
|
|
|
08/22/2003 02:15:19 PM · #2 |
| I've had Verizon DSL for a few years now. I like it quite a bit, although it seems like cable tends to be faster. |
|
|
|
08/22/2003 02:15:48 PM · #3 |
|
|
|
08/22/2003 02:18:13 PM · #4 |
i used to have dsl. never really got into it. It was a hassle to coordinate the set up with the phone company from the start - and the speed was half that of my friends cable modem. After a couple of months of connecting at sub 300kb/sec, i traded in my dsl for a cable modem and am now surfing at 1121kb/sec (over a meg a second) according to cnet's test //webservices.cnet.com/bandwidth/
IMO cable is definately faster and comes w/ less headaches in set up.
|
|
|
|
08/22/2003 02:22:07 PM · #5 |
Steve,
I have SBC Yahoo DSL here in Wisconsin., had it for a year now. The uptime has been phenomenal, I can go for a month or more without losing a connection. When I have had questions, SBC has worked diligiently to resolve them. they are really trying on the customer service end, something rare these days.
I went with the upgraded service (1500/256 as opposed to 768/128). My actual throughput(Per DSLReports) is 1305 Mbps down, 245 up, and is stable.
In short, yes, it is worth it, and yes, there are things to watch for. A few suggestions:
1.) Install a router with stateful packet inspection, and use that to connect. You do not need to install ANY software on your computer this way, and you get some hardware firewall protection. Buy a router/hub and get a home network in the bargain!
2.) Consider firewall software in addtion. There are both pros & cons to this.
3.) Avoid at all cost installng the SBC PPPoe software on your machine! This alone is adequate reason to use a router, in additon to the other bennies.
4.) Go for it!
edit:
5.) O and avoid Dlink routers, get Linksys.
Message edited by author 2003-08-22 14:23:30.
|
|
|
|
08/22/2003 02:26:59 PM · #6 |
good point on the firewall kirbic. whatever you use make sure you have at least a software firewall, if not hardware.
With cable you definately need it, as some kid on the same network (who knows what he's doing) could open your data packets with notepad...not that i've ever tried, but i digress...
I think that data moving over phone lines is already encrypted, so theoretically it would make sense that dsl is safer, but regardless i would get a firewall. good point kirbic.
|
|
|
|
08/22/2003 03:00:33 PM · #7 |
| dsl could be faster than cable depending on the area your in. With cable you have a set amount of bandwidth for an area (if everyone on your block is on it, it'll be slower). With dsl you have a set bandwidth just for you. |
|
|
|
08/22/2003 03:01:42 PM · #8 |
I went from cable to DSl reecently. I know that cable CAN have faster connection, but from my cable company, there was a $10/month premium to go from 256kbs to 512kbs and another $10 premium to go to the ~1100 kbs speed. All this on top of the $45/month for the basic internet service on top of the regular cable charges. The DSL costs $30/month and is faster than the 256kbs cable. Those are my high speed internet options around here. I could always go back to dial-up. (Yeah Right!) So far, I like the SBC Yahoo DSL service. Oh yeah, I also get a LOT more online storage.
I have to ditto the comments about firewalls. If you don't install a router with a hardware firewall, at least use a software firewall. |
|
|
|
08/22/2003 03:05:58 PM · #9 |
Some clarification on "some kid on the same network (who knows what he's doing) could open your data packets with notepad..."
With cable internet access, there are several users on the same cable segment sharing the bandwidth. While it is true that the modems are "capped" so one user cannot hoard all the bandwidth, it is still possible that on a particularly crowded segment you will not get full speed.
With DSL, it is essentially the same situation, except that the bandwidth you are sharing is from the switching center to the public internet, which the phone company can upgrade when extra capacity is needed. Bandwidth on a cable segment is fixed, however.
Another serious consideration with the shared cable segment is that "some kid who knows what he is doing" can easily sniff all traffic on a cable segment with a hacked cable modem. Since this is traffic you are exchanging with the public internet anyway, a firewall can't prevent it. Just make sure that you are using secure connections when sending any sensitive data. For example, don't put your credit card number into a web form unless it is a secured HTTPS connection, which is common these days.
The best reasons I can think of to get a hardware broadband router/firewall box:
1) It would have prevented an unpatched computer from being infected with the MSBlast worm, since the vulnerable port is usually blocked in default configurations.
2) Current theories about the SoBig email virus that's going around are that it was written by a spammer or individuals paid by a spammer. It can turn your computer into a proxy server to send spam or redirect web requests, shielding the spammer from discovery. A firewall would close off the proxy ports.
3) Microsoft is somewhat irresponsible in leaving services turned on in the default configurations of its operating systems. Most home users don't use these services, and they don't even know that they are turned on. This is another reason MSBlast spread so easily. A firewall's default configuration usually starts with all ports closed, and you open them as needed, protecting you from future vulnerabilities not yet discovered. |
|
|
|
08/22/2003 03:28:30 PM · #10 |
i take it you didn't like my "some kid..." analogy too much...
my point was that w/ cable the data is much more succeptable than sending data via phone lines. The opportunity to grab even https information is there. I know that in my experience with 802.11a/b networks (all you need to do is capture a piece of the encrypted signal, preferably w/ an ipaq a pringles can, and some stuff from radio shack, then replicate it on a crack program and then you're in ) that if someone can get your information, encrypted or not - it's not as safe. I don't know too much about grabbing info from phone lines, but I'll just bet it's safer.
Just trying to give the guy a heads up. Oh and by the way - hardware is the only way to go, despite what you know/heard software firewalls are infinately easier to crack. I've had a lot of experience on both sides of the fence on that one...
|
|
|
|
08/22/2003 05:05:29 PM · #11 |
I have to have a phone line but don't want Cable TV, so I'm willing to sacrifice a little speed. I already had an AOL account, so I upgraded that (through their deal with PacBell/SBC). Since I can see into the windows of the phone company switching office from my porch, I get pretty decent performance most of the time.
It's also an "instant-on" connection rather than an "always-on" one, so it might be a bit safer that way as well. |
|
|
|
08/22/2003 05:08:24 PM · #12 |
Both cable and DSL rock. I can't see you going wrong with either, though in all honesty, my DSL experience wasn't as good as either time I've had cable.
|
|
|
|
08/22/2003 05:38:50 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by xhoss:
i take it you didn't like my "some kid..." analogy too much...
my point was that w/ cable the data is much more succeptable than sending data via phone lines. The opportunity to grab even https information is there. I know that in my experience with 802.11a/b networks (all you need to do is capture a piece of the encrypted signal, preferably w/ an ipaq a pringles can, and some stuff from radio shack, then replicate it on a crack program and then you're in ) that if someone can get your information, encrypted or not - it's not as safe. I don't know too much about grabbing info from phone lines, but I'll just bet it's safer.
Just trying to give the guy a heads up. Oh and by the way - hardware is the only way to go, despite what you know/heard software firewalls are infinately easier to crack. I've had a lot of experience on both sides of the fence on that one... |
You are describing a known vulnerability with the Wireless Encryption Protocol used in the current IEEE 802.11 standards. This doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with the encryption used within the ethernet transmission protocol (which is IEEE 802.3). The two standards are mutually exclusive so security issues with one have nothing to do with security issues with the other.
DSL can be variably better or worse than cable, mainly depending on how far you are physically located from your local phone exchange and the quality of the wire running between you and that location. If you are close with good wire, it'll be potentially better than you can get with cable, if you are far away it will probably be a lot worse.
Message edited by author 2003-08-22 17:40:06. |
|
|
|
08/22/2003 05:38:52 PM · #14 |
Hey steve, Im in Germany and pay $40 a month for my DSL. I say get it! You would not belive how fast it is! I download stuff at 750kb per second for things that would take 5 minutes will download in 45 seconds.
|
|
|
|
08/22/2003 05:50:54 PM · #15 |
Well, I ordered it. I'll get all the stuff (modem, etc) in about a week.
Up until now, I've had free dial-up, but with a 10 hour limit per month. So, I do most of my surfing at work, and only go online at home to upload challenge photos, and that's about it. I want to be able to upload photos to this site from home for printing sometimes, something that would take like an hour on my home dial-up (free service means veeerrryyy slow connection - about a 14.4 connection, I think).
I hope it all works out! My wife is already a little wary about spending the money, but since she works only part time, and soon, when the baby is born, will be home all the time, I bet she's gonna like being able to check out newsgroups easily and look at what time movies start and all that good stuff. Not to mention chatting live with her mom online (with video if she wants - we have a little webcam). It's gonna be great!
Message edited by author 2003-08-22 17:54:11.
|
|
|
|
08/22/2003 05:51:37 PM · #16 |
right. but i wasn't talking about ethernet at all - just the basic concept of getting information - my point/question was that dsl i.e. phone transmissions are encrypted anyways (i.e. you don't need a secure connection for it to be), so dsl seemed to logically be safer.
of course the farther you are from a switching station the worse your dsl would be, but i wasn't even going there. I just assumed that he would know that/look into it.
|
|
|
|
08/22/2003 05:53:09 PM · #17 |
Thats $40 a month for unlimited time. Germany loves there 16% taxes
|
|
|
|
08/22/2003 05:57:15 PM · #18 |
| Steve at that rate ($29.95) for a year I'd definitely say go for it. Is that a promotion with that company? Keep in mind the regular price for Cable or DSL in most areas of the U.S. are anywhere between $40.00 and $50.00. that's a really good rate besides what do you pay for internet service now? Most people pay $20 for dial-up maybe a little less, whats an extra $10 or $15 for that much of a speed increase, plus you can still use your phone line when your online. |
|
|
|
08/22/2003 06:01:21 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by rob_:
Steve at that rate ($29.95) for a year I'd definitely say go for it. Is that a promotion with that company? Keep in mind the regular price for Cable or DSL in most areas of the U.S. are anywhere between $40.00 and $50.00. that's a really good rate besides what do you pay for internet service now? Most people pay $20 for dial-up maybe a little less, whats an extra $10 or $15 for that much of a speed increase, plus you can still use your phone line when your online. |
Yup. My wife went for it, so I got it! A week or so, and I'll be really moving...
|
|
|
|
08/22/2003 06:03:35 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by xhoss:
right. but i wasn't talking about ethernet at all - just the basic concept of getting information - my point/question was that dsl i.e. phone transmissions are encrypted anyways (i.e. you don't need a secure connection for it to be), so dsl seemed to logically be safer.
|
DSL has plenty of vunerabilities too.
Anything you don't want people to be able to read should be encrypted, either by secure connections, or at a lower level via VPN tunnels.
The fact that WEP chose to use limited width keys and doesn't cycle them very efficiently makes that particular encryption protocol vunerable, hence the reason that 802.11 isn't very secure even with encryption for the link. 802.11 is however perfectly adequately secure if you run a VPN session over the wireless link - at least there are no reasonable-time published vunerabilities to date. WEP is crackable in a few hours or a lot less if you can inject known traffic - this isn't true for application layer transport protocols over ethernet or DSL. That is going to be mostly fixed for wireless when the 802.11e stations are introduced.
Message edited by author 2003-08-22 18:05:31. |
|
|
|
08/22/2003 06:08:10 PM · #21 |
I have had DSL here in Germany and pay $40 a month witch is pretty high. but I use Norton internet Security and have have had no problems what so ever.
|
|
|
|
08/22/2003 06:27:07 PM · #22 |
thanks for the info on dsl...i haven't really read up on it, and i didn't know the similarities between that and the dedicated T lines we use here...
|
|
|
|
08/22/2003 06:44:19 PM · #23 |
xhoss, as far as I know there is no encryption done by either cable or DSL modems over the line. Anyone who has access to the wiring can intercept the data. If it is not already encrypted at the application layer (ssh, https, VPN tunnel, etc.), it is in the clear and easily read. Wireless is the only thing around where the data is encrypted lower than the application layer, and as Gordon points out, that encryption is a farce.
If I'm wrong about DSL not being encrypted, could you provide a web pointer to more info?
Also, I was quite surprised when I first realized how easy it is to tap into someone's phone line. In one case, phone wiring for several other houses on the block came right into our basement. |
|
|
|
08/22/2003 06:50:56 PM · #24 |
your right about wifi being a farce! you won't catch my information near that for a long time.
thanks jk and gordon for the info. i was under the wrong impression that dsl was encrypted. i'll have to slap around my co-worker for that one.
|
|
|
|
08/22/2003 09:18:05 PM · #25 |
wifi is perfectly secure, as long as you don't depend on the wifi network to provide the security. WEP is only supposed to give equivalent security to the wired versions (such as ethernet) which is next to nothing anyway.
Main problem is lots of people with no concept of network security expecting it to be really secure in the first place. There is a layered security model for a reason.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/09/2025 05:45:02 AM EDT.
