Talk:Captive portal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

About re-inserting the link to Amazingports[edit]

The article contains links to several captive portal solutions, that use RADIUS as the main authentication protocol. To extend the informative value of the article a different kind of captive portal solution should also be included. Amazingports has such a different solution. Probably from an encyclopaedia's point of view, the similar solutions can exemplified by one of links and than the other links can be made pointing out different ways of achieving the same thing.

About having a list of software products at all[edit]

Captive portals, both as standalone software products and integrated components of larger systems, are so commonplace and prolific that maintanence of a list of such products is probably more trouble than it is worth. Such lists become nesting sites for cometitive link farming. It should probably just be removed entirely. ( (talk) 02:24, 7 March 2014 (UTC))

Section about usability[edit]

In my opinion this article, or maybe a related article, needs a section about usability. Specifically it would be useful with a comparison between captive portals and password-protected networks (WEP/WPA). My experience is that the latter has much better usability, since once you have submitted the password, the device will always connect as long as the systems are operating normally. Should I just add this section here, or should we discuss contents and whether this section belongs elsewhere?

My rationale for adding such a section is for hotspot owners to understand the usability impact of using either implementation. Bjornte (talk) 18:43, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Issues and critics missing[edit]

The process of displaying the captive portal builds on ugly hacks: Either IP spoofing or DNS spoofing or/and sending fraudulent content (I consider response headers part of entire XHR and thus as content). Information on what could happen to users with custom DNS servers set in their preferences, whether and how DNSSEC will affect this hack and so on are ... not present. -- Rillke (talk) 16:32, 19 December 2014 (UTC)