Adding a wireless profile (batch file or registry entry)?


Recommended Posts

I work at a local K-12 school district and I was wondering if there is a easier way to add a lot of our laptops to a new wireless profile/SSID. With how we setting up our new SSID is with it being a non-broadcasted SSID so you have to go into the Windows Zero Wireless configurations on each computer and enter in the SSID, what network type it is and the password for the wirless network. I was wondering if there was any way to make a .bat file or a .reg file so that we can easily send and run the file on the computer without manually entering in all the information. If not I understand this will just save a lot of time in the long run and we can still make sure only the computers that are part of the district get the new information in the file. All of our systems are Windows XP SP3.

I completely understand what you are getting at here but can you see why I am looking for a way to add them a little faster. When this goes into effect there will be at least 200 laptops that I will need to change the SSID info. Anybody with some ideas?

  • 3 weeks later...
  Lowdown said:
I completely understand what you are getting at here but can you see why I am looking for a way to add them a little faster. When this goes into effect there will be at least 200 laptops that I will need to change the SSID info. Anybody with some ideas?

did you ever find a solution?? i have the same issue.

^ Exactly -- there is NO security reason to not broadcast your SSID.. What your wanting to hide it from the 97 year old senile grandma across the street?

It is uttterly pointless to not broadcast the SSID.. It does not increase your security one bit. And as you can see its clearly a going to cause you logistics issues. Plus other to be honest is more of a security issue then broadcasting it -- see MS article!

Here is some good info on it

http://blogs.technet.com/steriley/archive/...less-ssids.aspx

Myth vs. reality: Wireless SSIDs

Here is a MS Article on it.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb726942.aspx

Non-broadcast Wireless Networks with Microsoft Windows

I would HIGHLY suggest you read both of these. Tasty tidbits from the MS article.

"Unlike broadcast networks, wireless clients running Windows XP with Service Pack 2 or Windows Server? 2003 with Service Pack 1 that are configured to connect to non-broadcast networksare constantly disclosing the SSID of those networks, even when those networks are not in range.>"

Therefore,using non-broadcast networks compromises the privacy of the wireless network configuration of a Windows XP or Windows Server 2003-based wireless client> because it is periodically disclosing its set of preferred non-broadcast wireless networks.

This behavior is worse for enterprise wireless networks because of the number of wireless clients that are periodically advertising the non-broadcast network name. For example, an enterprise wireless network consists of 20 wireless APs and 500 wireless laptops. If the wireless APs are configured to broadcast, each wireless AP would periodically advertise the enterprise’s wireless network name, but only within the range of the wireless APs. If the wireless APs are configured as non-broadcast, each of the 500Windows XP or Windows Server 2003-based laptops would periodically advertise the enterprise’s wireless network name,regardless of their location (in the office, at a wireless hotspot, or at home)>.>

For these reasons,it is highly recommended that you do not use non-broadcast wireless networks>. Instead,configure your wireless networks as broadcast and use the authentication and encryption security features of your wireless network hardware and Windows to protect your wireless network, rather than relying on non-broadcast behavior.>

I am curious who actually suggested that you not broadcast it? Nobody that actually works in Wireless Security would suggest this!!

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Yeah define not catching up then to see the next part of this then
    • RoboForm 9.7.7 by Razvan Serea RoboForm is the top-rated Password Manager and Web Form Filler that completely automates password entering and form filling. RoboForm makes logging into Web sites and filling forms faster, easier, and more secure. RoboForm memorizes and securely stores each user name and password the first time you log into a site, then automatically supplies them when you return. RoboForm's powerful Logins feature eliminates the manual steps of logging into any online account. With just one click RoboForm will navigate to a Web site, enter your username and password and click the submit button for you. Completing long registration or checkout forms is also a breeze. Simply click on your RoboForm Identity and RoboForm fills-in the entire form for you. You no longer need to remember all your passwords. You remember one Master Password, and RoboForm remembers the rest. This allows you to use stronger passwords, making your online experience more secure. RoboForm uses strong AES encryption for complete data security. The all new RoboForm comes with Chrome and Safari browser support, iPhone/iPad and Android support, as well a brand new RoboForm Everywhere license for use on unlimited computers and mobile devices. RoboForm 9.7.7 changelog: Show RF Desktop unlock UI when user selects "Unlock" in RF Desktop UI. Fixed blank icon appeared in the Windows taskbar for RF Editor. Miscellaneous bug fixes. Download: RoboForm 9.7.7 | 42.2 MB (Free, paid upgrade available) View: RoboForm Website Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • LG G5 was the last memorable phone I had. The Samsung and Pixels and have had since have been disappointing and boring.
    • Isn't the CPU used to calculate the parity for the RAID? If so, the combination of SSDs and 10GBe might make the CPU more important
    • yeah GSMA began working to enable end to end encryption between android and iphone last year and apparently a new standard was developed. apple has said that they would implement this in "future software updates" but i haven't heard anything since march, the time this was all reported on. shortly after, i read on forbes that the FBI suggests not sending texts between iphone and android because they're unencrypted. i use signal to chat with my wife but i'd rather just use messages tbh (she has an iphone), i'm not really a 3rd party guy haha
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      SteveJaye earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      MadMung0 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      Uranus_enjoyer earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Philsl earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Jaclidio hoy earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      438
    2. 2
      ATLien_0
      157
    3. 3
      +FloatingFatMan
      149
    4. 4
      Nick H.
      64
    5. 5
      +thexfile
      62
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!