Griff, I've seen it done. Someone piggybacked the wireless connection of a capable hacker. The result was a load of bestial porn poured onto the offending computer.

What do you mean, "you've seen it done" ? Were you watching as the "someone" transferred the porn files across onto the disk of the "capable hacker", who presumably sat there while this was happening without intervening ?

(Exits discussion as it is now getting silly.)

Griff, yes, Windows does allow the whole hard-drive to be visible, well, according to Wireless Networking for Dummies (yes, sad, but I'm that desperate) and the Which? Guide to Wireless Networking (even sadder). After all, if you were a network administrator you might really need and want that kind of access.

And I have to say I think there is no limit to the un-savviness of users, witness the 7 unsecured networks my ex-boyfriend could have got onto from inside one flat - if he hadn't been there, the friend installing it would have made an eighth. The more you make it all look (and genuinely be) easy, the more un-savvy types will do it. Who would have believed in 1902, for example, that millions of people would swan around in motor cars without a clue how to do more than put the petrol in?

Emma

All very true. And interesting/scary about Windows allowing you to share your whole disk.

You're right about the savviness thing. For example when I studied computing 'A' level at school 20 years ago none of us had the slightest clue about spreadsheets or word processors and so on (and yes they were invented then!) - it was all about electronics and assembler programming, the real internal stuff. Someone I know has just done an 'A' level in "ICT" or somesuch, and no programming or electronics was covered at all, it was all about using spreadsheets and designing web pages. Now this isn't the old argument about "exams are getting easier", but just that the emphasis has completely changed. It's now all about how to use the software, with the expectation that you just don't need to know anything that goes on "under the hood". Which seems reasonable enough from a practicality point of view, if slightly dodgy from an "educational rigour" perspective. (Which might be why ICT was recently identified as one of the "soft subject" A levels that Oxbridge etc won't recognise.)

What do you mean, "you've seen it done" ?

Well, it's a reliable source, which I won't share, for obvious reasons. I'm quite prepared to agree to disagree here.

The main point I was trying to make is that an open network isn't as dangerous as you might think, provided that the usual precautions are taken (hardware and software firewalls, spyware scans and virus protection), though there is no harm having at least WEP encryption enabled.

So, telling a story about how someone supposedly had bestial porn downloaded onto their computer against their permission was a way of telling us that open networks are safe ? You'll excuse me for being a little confused, I hope.

The point being that it was a result of piggybacking, which is now quite rare. I can't imagine someone running around with a wireless enabled laptop looking for houses with open networks to download porn onto.

Unless your neighbours are a bit odd, you're pretty safe. But as I said, there's no harm in using WEP to avoid just that possibility.

Emma, can you lend IB your Dummies and Which guides to networking ?

IB, in terms of Wi-Fi, Piggybacking just means clandestinely sharing a network connection. This does not give you access to other people's machines. If that were true, anyone would be able to waltz into Starbucks and log onto the machines of all the Wi-Fi users sitting there happily sipping their lattes. Suggesting otherwise is silly scaremongering along the lines of "don't pick up hitchhikers right, cos I seen this one right, where he murdered them and then he had a hook for a hand but he disappeared right and then he was a ghost IT'S TRUE, I SEEN IT".

As Emma points out, there are dangers if you explicitly make some of your data accessible to the network. But that is far from the same thing. (Most network administrators who need access to entire disks will go about enabling this using a password-secured system such as Remote Desktop or PCAnywhere.)

...to get back on topic. Yes, hacking is bad, and if you know some dark technical stuff, you can do some awfully cool/dark stuff. Speaking as a PC journalist (day job), I've seen a lot happen And as for PCs vs Macs. Jeepers, do we have to have this argument here? I've got both at home, and whaddya know, there are pros and cons to both! Whod've thought?

So, on topic. BT HomeHub is a good idea, especially if you use BT Internet. It's very simple and BT tech support (from what I've seen) is reasonable.

But basically, you need to buy a Router and wireless cards for your PCs.

What type of router you get depends on what type of internet connection you have. If you have an ADSL broadband connection, you need to get a router with an ADSL modem built into it. If you have a cable broadband connection (Telewest/NTL), you don't need a built in modem.

For the PCs, you can buy wireless PCI cards or wireless USB sticks. Wireless PCI cards offer better performance but installing them requires opening up the PCs. This is pretty easy, but can be pretty daunting. USB sticks just go in the USB ports, and performance (i.e. speed) is OK.

I would advise buying cards and router from the same network manufacturer, as it makes meshing it all together easier.

Installing wireless is fairly easy. You install all the wireless cards, then plug the router into a PC's network port (via a wire for setup). You run a wizard/piece of software, where you give your network a name, sort out its internet settings (e.g. give it the password), then password protect the whole thing. It's crucial that you use passwords for the wireless network or anyone can use it and it's a pain in the neck/asking for trouble (choose your own cliche really!). Ideally, use WPA rather than WEP as WEP is old and easily broken. Any modern router you buy now will support WPA.

For the printers, it's easier, by far and away, to simply connect them to the PCs and share them that way, rather than try and get them working on a network independently (esp as if you have cheapish inkjets, they're probably don't support networking anyway).

As for kit, Netgear's stuff has always been good, but if you want to get into it, PC Pro (a mag I've freelanced for) regularly does round ups of new routers (hereand here).

Good luck with it! Drop me a line if you need help.

Alex, thank you so much, that's really, really helpful. I'd got my eye on Netgear, and I take the point about all-the-same kit. I think I'm going to go the USB way for now, and if the speed's annoying - I doubt it, online gaming not being my Thing - I'll start opening up cases very, very gingerly. Dummies says you can get routers that also act as print servers but most un-coolly, I'm a John Lewis fan when it comes to computers, so it depends what they've got. I'll see how annoying having the printers hitched to individual computers actually turns out to be.

If you see an e-howl of rage and bafflement and skinned knuckles rising from the pages of WW, you'll know it's me...

Emma

If you see an e-howl of rage and bafflement and skinned knuckles rising from the pages of WW, you'll know it's me...

Now then Emma we all know you are far too ladylike for howls of rage. And anyway if your Wi-Fi has all gone pyriform then surely we will be able to tell by your unnaturally long absence from cyberspace. (Gosh that words sounds so old-fashioned now, doesn't it.)

Griff

I also heard that myth, but in the version I heard, the hook-handed wi-fi hacker downloaded a vestigal faun, not bestial porn, and yes, somebody was present and watching the whole time. Scary, eh?

I have also heard that it is impossible for people to gain access to your hard drive over a wireless network connection. I have never read any official reports of such, in the news or whatever, which I'm sure there certainly would be if people were doing it, so I'm inclined to believe you.

JB

Now then Emma we all know you are far too ladylike for howls of rage.

Ladylike? Moi? You haven't read Chapters 8 and 10 of TMOL then?

Computers are one of the things that used to reduce me regularly to obscenties, but the Evesham I've had for about three years now is so well-behaved that I very rarely get worse than a 'darn it'. That could, however, change...

Emma

<Added>

I have also heard that it is impossible for people to gain access to your hard drive over a wireless network connection. I have never read any official reports of such, in the news or whatever, which I'm sure there certainly would be if people were doing it, so I'm inclined to believe you.

Well, if sober, boring old Which? tells me not to make my hard-drive visible to my wireless network for this exact reason, I'm inclined to believe that it's possible.

Well, if sober, boring old Which? tells me not to make my hard-drive visible to my wireless network for this exact reason, I'm inclined to believe that it's possible.

I think you and JB (and I) are all in agreement here - I'm sure JB meant "people can't get onto someone else's hard disks over a wireless network unless the owners of those disks have taken steps to enable this" such as network sharing.

Emma, I must confess I haven't read TMOL. Here's a question every published author must presumably dread - would I enjoy it ? What other books would a TMOL enthusiast be likely to have read and enjoyed, do you think ?

My tastes are fairly broad - I'm just finishing a Terry Pratchett book but am about to start Michel Faber's The Crimson Petal And The White.

Griff, I never expect anyone (except my editor and publicist) to have read TMOL - one of my best friends says it makes a very good table-leg-height adjuster. I'm just thrilled when anyone says they have read it, and thrilled that when I go round to see said friend, my coffee no longer slides off into my lap

The usual if you like this-then-you'll-like-that name-checks are Atonement, Possession, Birdsong, Captain Corelli, so if you like any of those you've a reasonable chance of enjoying TMOL. Though I've only read the first two, so I'm offering no guarantees! I love Pratchett, but can't claim he's a major influence.

Emma

OK I'm convinced, next time I'm in Waterstones (and there's three near my workplace now, so it won't be long) I'll pick up a copy. Can't promise how soon I'll read it though - I bought the Michel Faber book when it came out in 2002 and I'm only just starting it now! Although considering it apparently took him 21 years to write, maybe taking four years to start reading it is not doing so badly.