• Our team is working to address issues posting quotes or media to the forums. Please bear with us as we get this sorted out.

Separate Modem and Router devices (Best companies?)

dor_13

Distinguished
Oct 26, 2011
151
0
18,680
0
I'm looking to buy a separate Modem and Router devices.

Please advise on model of such devices which are considered a high quality, each up to 100 $ USD.

What are the brands/companies which are known to have a high quality Modems/Routers ?
I'll list some examples (please mark the high-quality ones):

  • ■ Edimax
    ■ TP-Link
    ■ Kasda
    ■ HP
    ■ Cisco
In addition:

* The modem should support ADSL up to 40 Mbps.
* The router should support WiFi 2.4 GHz & 5Ghz , a/b/g/n. Supporting AC is optional (if not costly).
* Please also suggest a Router which supports Router's traffic sniffing and WiFi sniffing.


 


Problem is with any testing site is it only compares in their test environment there is no way to really say if it will perform the same. If you read the link realbeast had that site has changed their testing methods over time and you can not even compare older ones to the newer ones.

How your house is built and the neighbor around your using wifi will have a much greater affect on your performance than differences between routers.

Mimo of course is not directly a security function. It just makes it so much more technically complex to intercept the signals. Mostly this is because of how the capture function is done by the wireless chipset. The chipset must now receive multiple overlapping signals and rebuild the data. Unlike the actual end points it does not have the option to request a retransmission of data it can not reconstruct. The signal path to the capture device likely is different than the end points so data may good enough for the end points but not the capture device,

Mostly the problem is how the capture function is done by the wifi chips. It will not give you any data that is damaged or not valid. It does not even tell you how much data it receives and can not decode. There is nothing you can do about this either because it is all in a driver that is loaded into the chip that nobody has access too.

The only way to capture data that is damaged or get partial data streams is not to depend on the wifi chips. You would need a software defined radio that you could actually get the raw data and decode it yourself. This is how the bad guys actually do it they do not use some stupid wifi router to hack wireless.
 

RealBeast

Titan
Moderator
For the DSL modem I would check with the ISP for recommended (or at least acceptable) models.

For a router under $100 USD I would look at ASUS, Netgear, and TP-Link. If you have a particular online vendor in mind, post it so we can see what models are available to you in each brand.
 

dor_13

Distinguished
Oct 26, 2011
151
0
18,680
0

I don't trust the ISP.
You guys on the other hand... :)


Thanks!

Always thought that TP-Link was a low-class brand.

I can handle the search for the model, I only needed to know which companies have a good products.

Though it's weird that Tom Hardware doesn't have a comparison chart, similar to graphic cards.

Do you know of Routers which supports Router's traffic sniffing and WiFi sniffing ?
 
The main problem with comparing routers is what do you compare. Some people only care about wifi speed, other care about vpn, and still others want NAS support. You want traffic capture.

You likely will not find any form of traffic capture on any router, it is more a function of a switch. You could load third party firmware like dd-wrt on a router you can then do port mirroring. Other than capturing the WiFi going from your router to your clients you will not be able capture data. The days of wifi hacking are long gone. Mimo by itself makes it almost impossible. The wifi chip would have to get the same overlapping radio signals as the end devices. It is highly unlikely a device someplace in the middle would be able to rebuild the data stream. Then it would be rare to find any signal that is not encrypted and you will not break wpa2.

Traffic capture has very little value other than troubleshooting some problems. Almost all web traffic has moved to HTTPS after snowden reported that the government was capture data. This also prevent you from seeing much from captured data.
 

RealBeast

Titan
Moderator
Yup, agreed checking with your ISP is important for insuring compatibility.

I use a lot of TP-Link routers as access points and all my clients have been very happy with them.

Personally, I like the ASUS RT-N56U which I have gotten on sale as cheap as $30 if you don't need AC, for AC I prefer the Netgear R7000 or ASUS RT-AC68 (both of which go on sale fairly often so don't pay retail).

None of those routers do any sniffing, although they have reasonable use controls. We don't discuss things like wireless sniffing on TH.

IMO the best site on the Internet to compare wireless routers and the like is HERE, look around there are lots of other tools and loads of information on networking. They look at a lot of the factors that bill mentions, as features vary widely.
 

dor_13

Distinguished
Oct 26, 2011
151
0
18,680
0

I think that comparison of WiFi speed and stability is a fairly good criterion. Don't you think? :)

As far as I understand, MIMO helps to increase channel's capacity by applying a technique that overcomes the channel's noises.
It is not designed for security..
 

dor_13

Distinguished
Oct 26, 2011
151
0
18,680
0



Ok I'll check with my ISP.

I thought that xDSL is a standard, so every xDSL-capable modem should be sufficient.
 


Problem is with any testing site is it only compares in their test environment there is no way to really say if it will perform the same. If you read the link realbeast had that site has changed their testing methods over time and you can not even compare older ones to the newer ones.

How your house is built and the neighbor around your using wifi will have a much greater affect on your performance than differences between routers.

Mimo of course is not directly a security function. It just makes it so much more technically complex to intercept the signals. Mostly this is because of how the capture function is done by the wireless chipset. The chipset must now receive multiple overlapping signals and rebuild the data. Unlike the actual end points it does not have the option to request a retransmission of data it can not reconstruct. The signal path to the capture device likely is different than the end points so data may good enough for the end points but not the capture device,

Mostly the problem is how the capture function is done by the wifi chips. It will not give you any data that is damaged or not valid. It does not even tell you how much data it receives and can not decode. There is nothing you can do about this either because it is all in a driver that is loaded into the chip that nobody has access too.

The only way to capture data that is damaged or get partial data streams is not to depend on the wifi chips. You would need a software defined radio that you could actually get the raw data and decode it yourself. This is how the bad guys actually do it they do not use some stupid wifi router to hack wireless.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY