Odd issue with a cell phone and WiFi


Recommended Posts

The issue is very straightforward, but I can not figure out why it is not working. The cell phone is a Samsung j5 and it can connect just fine to the home networks WiFi, but when I go out with it to work (Amazon) it can not detect that there is an open WiFi network there, whereas my Motorola can see and connect to the WiFi with no issues. The WiFi network requires you to 'connect' i.e. press the button that you agree to the agreement, now on the Motorola, I only have to this once, and afterwords it reconnects with no issues. I have even tried opening the web browser (Samsung's and Firefox) and it does not trigger the connection to the WiFi. According the IT department Google changed some security protocols about 2 months ago and that has been causing issues with the way the cell phones automatically connect to the WiFi network and they (IT) stated that the method for fixing this was to open Firefox and go to the address 1.1.1.1 and it should make the cell phone see the wireless connection, however in this case it does not, it simply goes to the DNS site at 1.1.1.1 via the 4G mobile connection, ignoring anything WiFi. Is this an issue with the cell phone, Google, or the WiFi network?

  On 02/09/2018 at 18:58, jnelsoninjax said:

The issue is very straightforward, but I can not figure out why it is not working. The cell phone is a Samsung j5 and it can connect just fine to the home networks WiFi, but when I go out with it to work (Amazon) it can not detect that there is an open WiFi network there, whereas my Motorola can see and connect to the WiFi with no issues. The WiFi network requires you to 'connect' i.e. press the button that you agree to the agreement, now on the Motorola, I only have to this once, and afterwords it reconnects with no issues. I have even tried opening the web browser (Samsung's and Firefox) and it does not trigger the connection to the WiFi. According the IT department Google changed some security protocols about 2 months ago and that has been causing issues with the way the cell phones automatically connect to the WiFi network and they (IT) stated that the method for fixing this was to open Firefox and go to the address 1.1.1.1 and it should make the cell phone see the wireless connection, however in this case it does not, it simply goes to the DNS site at 1.1.1.1 via the 4G mobile connection, ignoring anything WiFi. Is this an issue with the cell phone, Google, or the WiFi network?

Expand  

As the J5 can't see the wifi, it's possible that your work place has upgraded it's wifi to 5 ghz and stopped using 2.4 ghz. As the J5 isn't compatible with 5 ghz wifi then you won't be able to use their wifi if that's the case.

  On 02/09/2018 at 19:04, Ready2018 said:

As the J5 can't see the wifi, it's possible that your work place has upgraded it's wifi to 5 ghz and stopped using 2.4 ghz. As the J5 isn't compatible with 5 ghz wifi then you won't be able to use their wifi if that's the case.

Expand  

You are correct! I did not realize that the J5 did not see 5 ghz, that would be the issue. Don't most WiFi networks support both 2.4 and 5?

  On 02/09/2018 at 20:11, jnelsoninjax said:

You are correct! I did not realize that the J5 did not see 5 ghz, that would be the issue. Don't most WiFi networks support both 2.4 and 5?

Expand  

I think you meant wifi chipsets?

 

I've found with Android handsets in the past, only certain channels can be seen. It seems reasonable that if its a budget handset, it might not see 5ghz at all because they cheaped out on the wifi.

  On 02/09/2018 at 20:11, jnelsoninjax said:

You are correct! I did not realize that the J5 did not see 5 ghz, that would be the issue. Don't most WiFi networks support both 2.4 and 5?

Expand  

Most networks support both,  but it's possible to disable one.   You get much less interference and have more channels available on 5Ghz, and it's possible they just disabled the 2.4Ghz for that reason.  5Ghz has been around forever, so they could just be supporting it.  That being said, not sure how going to specific IP would make it see the network.   It could see it being a splash page to accept user agreement and have access to internet, though.

  On 02/09/2018 at 18:58, jnelsoninjax said:

open Firefox and go to the address 1.1.1.1

Expand  

Yeah your IT dept should fix that - cloudflare took over the 1.1.1 awhile ago

 

inetnum:        1.1.1.0 - 1.1.1.255
netname:        APNIC-LABS
descr:          APNIC and Cloudflare DNS Resolver project

https://blog.cloudflare.com/fixing-reachability-to-1-1-1-1-globally/

 

It use to be unassigned so yeah it was used where it should of never been used - cisco being one of the worst in the bunch..

 

I would suggest you get with your IT to fix that for sure. Use of 1.1.1.1 is no longer viable solution for cisco and their WLC and portal pages, etc.

 

While your at it you could ask them to re-enable 2.4 support.. But yeah your going to find more or and more locations dropping support for that.. If I didn't have ###### IOT devices that only use 2.4 I would not have it on my home wifi..   Might be time to update your hardware ;)

 

 

  On 05/09/2018 at 16:18, BudMan said:

Yeah your IT dept should fix that - cloudflare took over the 1.1.1 awhile ago

 

inetnum:        1.1.1.0 - 1.1.1.255
netname:        APNIC-LABS
descr:          APNIC and Cloudflare DNS Resolver project

https://blog.cloudflare.com/fixing-reachability-to-1-1-1-1-globally/

 

It use to be unassigned so yeah it was used where it should of never been used - cisco being one of the worst in the bunch..

 

I would suggest you get with your IT to fix that for sure. Use of 1.1.1.1 is no longer viable solution for cisco and their WLC and portal pages, etc.

 

While your at it you could ask them to re-enable 2.4 support.. But yeah your going to find more or and more locations dropping support for that.. If I didn't have ###### IOT devices that only use 2.4 I would not have it on my home wifi..   Might be time to update your hardware ;)

 

 

Expand  

Well the employer is Amazon, so who knows if they will even listen to me! I will ask them about 2.4

So I ran into one of the IT guys at work this morning and asked him about the 2,4 GHZ network, and was told that is enabled, you just have to add it manually, when I asked him if that simply meant that the SSID was not broadcasting, he said no, it was, but it has to be manually added. Does this make any sense? The biggest issue is that I can not take the cell phone past the break room, so I would have to get the IT guys to come to me and show me how to do it.

To me it just sounds like they have the SSID hidden (when they said to add it manually).  Maybe when you previously connected your Motorola they didn't and it has just remembered the network?

 

You just need to find the name of it ... in Android under Wi-Fi hit "Add Network" and enter the SSID under "Network Name"

 

Have you tried to manually add it?

 

...or just work while at work and internet when at home. ? 

  On 08/09/2018 at 00:19, Jim K said:

To me it just sounds like they have the SSID hidden (when they said to add it manually).  Maybe when you previously connected your Motorola they didn't and it has just remembered the network?

 

You just need to find the name of it ... in Android under Wi-Fi hit "Add Network" and enter the SSID under "Network Name"

 

Have you tried to manually add it?

 

...or just work while at work and internet when at home. ? 

Expand  

@Jim K The Motorola sees and connects just fine, it's the Samsung J5 that apparently only supports 2.4 GHZ networks, that is the problem. As far as manually adding it, I would need to know the name on the network, correct? On the Motorola I have two networks, a Amzn-Guest and Amzn-internet. I'm guessing that it if I add one of these to the Samsung it might detect it? As for work at work and internet at home, you are correct, but there are a few things that might need to be checked on that requires the internet, otherwise, like I stated before, no cell phone can go on to the floor, unless it is a registered one belonging to managers or approved others.

That "Amazon" IT is using 1.1.1.1 and now not broadcasting SSID is very disheartening to the level of competence for Amazon.. Is this some local location that is not following corp standards and just cowboy it?  Both of these scenarios do not reflect understanding..

 

Use of 1.1.1.1 by cisco wlc has always been borked..  And when you see it - instantly tells you, ok the IT here is lacking! ;)  And since the address space is now no longer bogon its even more of a indication.  They really don't care all that much about doing something correctly.  And if they are not broadcasting some SSID, they are saying hey we don't really get how this wifi stuff works.  But this will keep grandma from connecting to out super secret wifi network ;)

  On 08/09/2018 at 09:56, BudMan said:

That "Amazon" IT is using 1.1.1.1 and now not broadcasting SSID is very disheartening to the level of competence for Amazon.. Is this some local location that is not following corp standards and just cowboy it?  Both of these scenarios do not reflect understanding..

 

Use of 1.1.1.1 by cisco wlc has always been borked..  And when you see it - instantly tells you, ok the IT here is lacking! ;)  And since the address space is now no longer bogon its even more of a indication.  They really don't care all that much about doing something correctly.  And if they are not broadcasting some SSID, they are saying hey we don't really get how this wifi stuff works.  But this will keep grandma from connecting to out super secret wifi network ;)

Expand  

Yeah, apparently only the 2.4 GHZ network is not broadcasting it's SSID, the 5 GHZ works just fine. I asked the IT guys why the 2.4 is not enabled and he said it is enabled but only older devices use it, so they don't have it on, but now it is simply not broadcasting the SSID...

  On 08/09/2018 at 22:20, jnelsoninjax said:

Yeah, apparently only the 2.4 GHZ network is not broadcasting it's SSID, the 5 GHZ works just fine. I asked the IT guys why the 2.4 is not enabled and he said it is enabled but only older devices use it, so they don't have it on, but now it is simply not broadcasting the SSID...

Expand  

What, if it's not broadcasting an SSID, then it's not "enabled"...

While you can disable broadcasting of an SSID it is completely utterly borked.. And has been listed as one of the "dumbest" ways to attempt to secure a wifi network for YEARS and YEARS..  Nobody that manages the wifi and actually understands what they are doing would ever do such a thing!!

 

That dead horse has been beaten to death what 10 years ago ;)

 

To be honest that wifi router makers still have it as an option is pathetic..   It doesn't actually hide anything

socalledhidden.thumb.png.7bc86cd74232ef0d1e47e8bfc6dd039e.png

 

Anyone with the ability to google, and some basic skills can find the ssid even when they are not broadcasted..

 

Above the ones my different AP can see..  Example

https://www.acrylicwifi.com/en/blog/hidden-ssid-wifi-how-to-know-name-of-network-without-ssid/

 

This was posted in 2005.. 13 years ago

https://www.zdnet.com/article/the-six-dumbest-ways-to-secure-a-wireless-lan/

 

Not broadcasting your SSID listed right under mac filtering ;)

 

SSID hiding: There is no such thing as "SSID hiding". You're only hiding SSID beaconing on the Access Point. There are 4 other mechanisms that also broadcast the SSID over the 2.4 or 5 GHz spectrum. The 4 mechanisms are; probe requests, probe responses, association requests, and re-association requests. Essentially, youre talking about hiding 1 of 5 SSID broadcast mechanisms. Nothing is hidden and all youve achieved is cause problems for Wi-Fi roaming when a client jumps from AP to AP. Hidden SSIDs also makes wireless LANs less user friendly. You dont need to take my word for it. Just ask Robert Moskowitz who is the Senior Technical Director of ICSA Labs in his white paper .

 

  • Like 2
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Nvidia announces RTX 5050 desktop graphics card for more affordable next-gen gaming by Taras Buria Today, Nvidia announced a new budget-friendly graphics card for those who cannot afford the RTX 5060 but still want to taste those sweet DLSS4 frames and other benefits of the Blackwell architecture. Meet the RTX 5050, the first 50-tier desktop graphics card since the days of the RTX 3050 from January 2022. The RTX 5050 is a $249 card ($50 cheaper than the RTX 5060), and it will be available in the second half of July, according to Nvidia. It has 8GB of video memory with a 128-bit bus, 2,560 CUDA cores (same as the 8GB RTX 3050), and the latest-generation RT cores (40 TFLOPS) and Tensor cores (421 AI TOPS). Interestingly, this is the only RTX 50-series graphics card with GDDR6 memory—the rest of the lineup utilizes a more modern GDDR7 standard. Despite a notable memory downgrade, the RTX 5050 still supports all the features found in more expensive Blackwell cards. Those include DLSS4 multi-frame generation, 9th-generation NVENC, 6th-generation NVDEC, PCIe Gen5, and more. As for power, TGP is rated for 130W via a single 8-pin power connector. Nvidia also recommends a minimum 550W PSU. RTX 5050 RTX 3050 RX 9060 XT Clocks 2.57GHz 1.77GHz 3.13GHz CUDA 2560 2560 - DLSS DLSS 4 DLSS 2 - Memory 8GB GDDR6 128-bit 8GB GDDR6 128-bit 8GB GDDR6 128-bit Display 3x DisplayPort, 1x HDMI 3x DisplayPort, 1x HDMI 2x DisplayPort, 1x HDMI TGP 130W, 550W PSU, 1x 8-pin connector 130W, 300W PSU, 1x 8-pin connector 150W, 450W PSU 1x 8-pin connector Price $249 $249 $299 Nvidia skipped a 50-tier graphics card in the Ada Lovelace generation (RTX 40 Series). While there is a mobile RTX 4050, the most affordable desktop GPU from the RTX 40 series lineup is the RTX 4060. Now, facing the growing pressure from AMD with its RTX 9000 series GPUs, Nvidia is offering more options at the lower end of the price spectrum. You can find more information about the RTX 5050 on the official Nvidia website.
    • You should probably read the original reddit post... Spoiler, it's just some bs from a low tier tech sub written by a "power user" who fked up thinking he would rather save money and waste time, instead of doing the logical thing... $150 for a disk seems like a good deal compared to wasting hours on troubleshooting...
    • Yeah, I mostly agree, but I am going to take a 50/50 split on this one. Normally I give zero credence to any company who blames an internal component for issues with their product. Even if the component is at fault...who chose to use that component in their product? At the end of the day, companies like Dell are responsible for the product they sell in it entirety, including all components. My reason for giving Dell a portal pass here is that a component as major as the CPU or GPU are not simple commodity. That component alone likely drove the consumer's product choice as much or possibly even more than the Dell brand. Users who might be upset with Dell for a limitation with the Qualcomm chipset should honestly ask themselves, had Dell not offered the product you bought due to limitations such as this, would you have bought an x86 Dell, or would you have bought an Arm laptop from another brand. I am pretty sure that 99% of people buying first edition Arm laptops, bought them for the CPU, not the brand. That means the culpability of CPU limitations is on the user just as much as it is on Dell. Having said all of that, this issue isn't the biggest deal breaker. Can't use Night Light on a 2nd screen. Yeah, I'd be annoyed if my main setup was laptop+screen and that was a feature I wanted to use, but I wouldn't be freaking out either.
    • Was sort of sceptical about the unload page feature , just tried it and it does actually drop memory usage. 22 tabs open(1.65gb Ram) and after unloading Facebook as a test it dropped to 1.2gb
    • Elon Musk doesn't want you to know Tesla's response to the NHTSA's Robotaxi questions by David Uzondu Recently, Tesla's Robotaxi service began operating in Austin, and almost immediately, the company decided it would prefer you didn't see its homework. Before the launch, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) sent Tesla a letter with a deadline of June 19th to answer some questions. Now that Tesla has replied, it has requested that the NHTSA withhold the entire response from the public, classifying it as confidential business information. This isn't too surprising, as the company is notoriously secretive about its performance data, especially in areas like Autopilot and Full Self-Driving. Here are a few paraphrased versions of the questions Tesla faced: How will the system handle bad weather or poor visibility? What happens if the system detects that it cannot drive safely? Does it pull over? Will a human be monitoring the cars remotely or in person? Does the system follow any existing industry standards for autonomous driving? When does Tesla plan to let other people operate their own cars as robotaxis? The feds have good reason to ask. On its first day, Tesla's Robotaxi service was caught on video making some questionable moves, including driving in the wrong lane against traffic, as seen below (full video here). The clip was also shared in our community forums, though you'll need a free membership to access the off-topic section. Here's another showing a Robotaxi dropping passengers in the middle of an intersection. For now, the service runs with a human safety driver (likely a Tesla employee) in the passenger seat. Billionaire Dan O'Dowd, a persistent critic of Tesla's software, felt the company's launch was lackluster, and the videos circulating online demonstrate that the technology is years behind competitors like Waymo, which has operated without in-car supervisors since 2019. For its part, NHTSA acknowledged being aware of the widely reported incidents and is in contact with Tesla to get more information. The agency's statement reminded the public that manufacturers self-certify their vehicles' safety, and NHTSA's role is to investigate and act on safety problems after they are on the road: This situation gets even more interesting when you look at the bigger picture. Musk has already been criticized for his role in the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which has led to job cuts at agencies that oversee his companies, including the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for SpaceX, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Neuralink, and, of course, NHTSA. This has led some to worry about regulatory capture. As one cynical comment on Electrek's article notes, the official who signed the letter to Tesla, Tanya Topka, Director of NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigation, may have put a target on her back just for trying to hold the company accountable.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      956400 earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      davidfegan earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • First Post
      Ainajohn earned a badge
      First Post
    • Conversation Starter
      sophiaisabella32 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      Brett76 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      592
    2. 2
      ATLien_0
      226
    3. 3
      Michael Scrip
      171
    4. 4
      +FloatingFatMan
      150
    5. 5
      Xenon
      133
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!