Posted on October 14th, 2011 by Steve Cassidy

Why you shouldn’t let builders anywhere near your Wi-Fi

I’ve just had a proper argument. My circle of friends and even a few colleagues at Dennis will tell you, this isn’t unusual of itself, so I won’t do the down the pub routine that relies heavily on the phrase “So then I said…”. I’ll give you the helicopter view.

It was an argument about Wi-Fi. I went to a meeting to go through re-wiring a retail shop to accommodate a CCTV system, the sales PCs, the PDQ card-payment setup, and the email workstation. There was also a couple of new ventures, in the shape of kiosks for customers to look through the website and ask about styles, sizes and colours not visible in the shop.

At this meeting were the proprietors, me, and a jobbing interior decorator. The list of snags, water leaks and bits of paint and the like was long and diverse: then we came to the wiring. Just a small shop, but very quickly we arrived at a total of 15 locations. It’s also an old building, which means that it won’t be falling down any time soon; but conversely, drilling holes is going to be a proper rufty-tufty builder’s job, one I am very glad I won’t be undertaking. Looking at the job in hand, the jobbing builder decided to propose a different approach: Why not just put in wireless?

Once the idea occurred to him, it snowballed. With Wi-Fi, customers could just be given an iPad, and wander freely around the whole space, paging through the website. How cool would that be? Wires aren’t needed then. I suggested this might not work out very well, given the background level of theft in that specific shop and the surrounding area too: and that it might not be terribly secure, in an area so full of other shops, offices, homes and restaurants. This is when the conversation kicked up a gear.

We are one of the last great self-taught professions, and from that many difficulties follow

The jobbing builder clearly believed that there is no such thing as a Wi-Fi security problem. To the point where anyone who suggested otherwise was to be cross-examined in an incredulous tone. There is no such thing as a passive Wi-Fi traffic listener Trojan, or those websites that crack WPA2 keys, or people whose credit card numbers or bank details are stolen via Wi-Fi or traffic spoofing. As far as he was concerned, Wi-Fi was the future; the idea that it could be much more expensive and complicated to segregate the network so that the CCTV in the changing cubicles didn’t get re-broadcast across the rest of the planet was, apparently, a stupid thing to suggest. All those videos on YouTube like this are clearly fakes.

I confess: I lost my cool with this tirade of ignorance. At the same time, I was thinking about Part P.

For those who have not come across it, here is the IET’s summary of Part P: it’s the regulations that attempt to control who is allowed to do electrical wiring work. When introduced, I must say I agreed with the antis, because it seemed to me completely absurd that there could exist anyone who didn’t know how to wire up a wall socket correctly. It only takes a small tickle with 240v AC to entirely convince anyone of the need for proper safety in wiring. I can’t have been the only small boy to have successfully hidden the burns from an incautious poke about in the guts of a radio, surely…

This conviction faded slightly after I saw my first few 13A sockets with bare wires wedged into contact by the earth-pin shutter, and other similar sins, until these days I am pretty much entirely in favour of the concept of Part P. If someone wants to do that kind of work, then go and get the qualification, is now my attitude.

This is a very unusual conclusion to reach if you are a “computer person”. We are one of the last great self-taught professions, and from that many difficulties follow. Assuming that everyone is equally able to teach themselves, and equally able to draw the right conclusions from an individual view of a wider body of evidence, is (I believe) our greatest sin. This hasn’t been that much of a problem while IT and networks in particular has been the province of a priesthood, a charmed circle of übernerds: the problem comes when network technology starts to permeate into the skill levels that gave rise to Part P.

I’m trying to be polite and it might not work in my current mood, so I’ll settle for blunt: thick people think differently from nerds. It’s not a matter of less of something, like an IQ score, instead it has many aspects and parts. There’s emotion, there’s ego, there’s ownership of the topic, there’s animal cunning versus lofty and mistaken intellect: it’s a rich minefield of disasters, at least if your tempter works like mine.

The clever thing to do with this type of problem is to avoid getting dragged into Meldrew-like expressions of exasperation, but I will say that the inception and history of Part P makes me worry about the take-up of IP networking in the wider population of trades. Part P protects against a simple phenomenon – a pretty immediate and intensely memorable electric shock; good small network design protects against a rather more subtle, long-term and generally less physically painful series of mishaps.

But the underlying point to Part P remains that incidents arising from electrical wiring put in blithely by workers and DIYers, quite convinced they were doing it right, were prominent enough that Health and Safety decided to get involved. There is no equivalent body for network data security – unless, that is, you count the loss adjusters who now turn up when your bank account is emptied by an online data theft incident, and seek to prove that you were negligent in your use of the bank’s website to get them out of reinstating the contents of your bank account.

Happily for me, this particular client had been dealing with that type of mishap already, and were also better diplomats: they pointed out to the builder that he couldn’t very well remark on the superior strength and thickness of the Victorian buttresses and brickwork, and then recommend Wi-Fi. This contradiction provided a way out of the contretemps without too much loss of face all round – something that, as a classic nerd, I never have been very good at ensuring.

Tags: networking, regulations, Wi-Fi

Posted in: Real World Computing

Permalink

Follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

32 Responses to “ Why you shouldn’t let builders anywhere near your Wi-Fi ”

John Says:
October 14th, 2011 at 10:58 am
Hi, no issues with your blog, just a note Part P is for domestic dwellings. Regards John
Steve Cassidy Says:
October 14th, 2011 at 11:22 am
Aha! I detect a Horse’s Mouth incident! Thanks John; do you find (I am guessing here that you are in and around the electrical trade) that the rationale for Part P is justified?
Andy Says:
October 14th, 2011 at 12:46 pm
Hi Steve, fully agree with your point fully but as for part p….
I am a fully qualified electricial who spent 5 years at college, however as I don’t work in the industry and more (I work in IT), I am not legally allowed to work on my own or family’s home electrics without getting part p certified, but some amateur can go on a quick course and ’safely’ work on my home electrics, I wouldn’t let the guy who came to fit my shower near anything sharp nevermind my house again.
Healty and Safety Sledgehammer to crack a nut comes to mind, I hope the IT industry doesn’t go the same way though as a man with 20 years experience will be trumped by some jobber who has been on a course but has no real world experience.
Andy
zaax Says:
October 14th, 2011 at 12:50 pm
Just because some MP daughter got killed because a qualified sparky did a crap job.
Niall Says:
October 14th, 2011 at 2:10 pm
The longer I’m in I.T., the more right-wing I seem to become regarding people doing a proper job of installing infrastructure cabling; ok, so you can’t hurt yourself on it, but the amount of time (money) I’ve (my business) wasted on tracking and fixing shoddy installation is mind-boggling (especially for something which even those with minimal aptitude can do well). So it’s almost a shame that there isn’t a reasonable (in all senses of the word) equivalent as Part-P.

Steve – Part-P is a must these days; our growing youth can barely make edible beans on toast, let alone wire a socket. Of course, it does mean that Mr.I’veBeenDoingThisForALivingForYears does need to “waste” his time on Part-P. Small price to pay? I say yes. It’s just a shame that Part-P comes in the form it comes on…
Andy Says:
October 14th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
Niall
Whilst I agree with the sentement, take a look at this website:
http://www.ableskills.co.uk/electrical-course.htm,
and see if you think this is the answer.
They quote:
“Whether you have a non electrical background or have limited electrical knowledge, we can provide the required training to bring you up to speed by way of a 5 day training course”.
5 DAYS, then you are unleashed on the general public.
I’ve been on longer stag weekends.
There is nothing wrong with standards and qualifications when they produce the right results.
But if people think a 5 day course is sufficient then I fear you may be spending more time tracking and fixing shoddy installations.
As with IT, electricians have to keep their qualifications up to date as new regulations are released.I also fear you may have a tabloid press opinion of the growing youth.
I work with many that are bright, articulate and want to do the best job they can, they are not all at the standard you seem to think.
Qualifications are not, and never will be a substitute for training and experience, they mearly reinforce them.
A multi million pound training industry has built up around Part P and as much as i’ve looked, I can find no comparison between safety before and after it’s introduction, so we truly have no idea if it’s improved things or not.
Julian Says:
October 14th, 2011 at 3:57 pm
Part P is indeed a sledgehammer to crack a nut – all household circuits should have low latency RCD protection so it really should not matter if I stick my fingers in a socket or drop the toaster in the bath. All Part P should require is that RCD protection is checked as fitted and tested regularly – a 1 minute job for any dim fitter.
Niall Says:
October 14th, 2011 at 4:32 pm
@Andy – I agree whole heartedly with most of your response, and you very eloquently expanded on what I was getting at with “It’s just a shame part-p comes in the form it comes in” (there was a typo in the original ).
As for tabloid and youth; I, too, am very fortunate to work with some very bright individuals who do their best and give it their all(and do a grand job). I’ve also worked with plenty who are at the opposite end of the spectrum. As with many an opinion, I have more than likely based mine on “The minority spoiling it for the majority”.
Adam Says:
October 15th, 2011 at 5:42 pm
Personally I have a suspicion that Part P has nothing to do with safety but rather more to do with taxation and the “black economy”. Essentially, to have electrical work done legally at home you have to use a “competent person” who is Part P qualified and more importantly issues an invoice with the certificate. This means that they must have accounts and pay taxes. No more slipping a tenner to the electrician you know down the street (if anyone ever did of course ).

Maybe I am just the suspicious type….
Mark Says:
October 15th, 2011 at 10:41 pm
Adam, spot on, that’s the exact reason why it was introduced.
David Wright Says:
October 16th, 2011 at 10:53 am
Here, in Germany, you need a Meister (Master’s Certificate – not to be confused with a degree). To get that, you need to do a 3 year apprenticeship, another 2 years practical work in the profession and then a further 2 years of schooling and working, before you are allowed to run a business in that profession (IT is still a quasi exception, although you can get an apprenticeship in programming, administration, networking etc.

But, for electricians, they learn how to wire networks, as well as electricity during their 3 years of apprenticeship, before they are allowed to work on their own, for their employer. They need a Meister to work for themselves or start their own company.

To build a PC, you (theoretically) need a Meister to certify that you have connected the PSU correctly to the motherboard!

That said, here, nearly nobody knows how to wire a plug! They are not taught it at school and everything comes with a plug afixed. They were astounded, that I had taken all my UK electrical equipment and put German / Euro plugs on them! On the other hand, when you rent a new flat, the first thing you generally need to do is put up lights – the previous tenant / owner only needs to leave a single, naked bulb in then entrance hall, the other rooms generally have lustre terminals on the end of the cables sticking out of the wall and ceiling! :-S
Alan staines Says:
October 17th, 2011 at 12:38 am
Julian’s comments are the reason unqualified people should stay away from electrics (an rcd has no overload protection). However part P doesn’t solve the problem of bad electricians, and i don’t beleive it will solve poor network installation, IT professional may understand the security issues but they tend to make poor network installers. There are many problems that can affect the performance of a network installation, not just security.
Steve Cassidy Says:
October 17th, 2011 at 10:55 am
Alan, you are 100% right and 100% wrong all at the same time. Observing that complex systems are hard to get right doesn’t help in the slightest when dealing with widespread takeup in a population which cannot be trusted to follow complicated requirements perfectly. Part P is a blunt instrument, right enough; but IMHO at least half the blame lies with the electrical priesthood and their chosen approach to communication.
stokegabriel Says:
October 17th, 2011 at 8:53 pm
Well I’ve wired houses, cars, large boats. etc etc for most of my life without a single relevant qualification and without any problems. However I have seen horrendous things carried out by certified professionals.
I recently had a row with a local Tyre fitting centre who refitted the front wheel of my motorcycle doing up the front spindle hand tight and relying on the spindle clamp to hold the wheel in place, the torque setting for the front wheel spindle is 45 ft/lbs!! the wall at the tyre depot was plastered in certificates (mainly Not Very Qualified).
Don’t ever believe in certificates, they prove very little. There is no substitute for common sense and experience. IMHO
Madmuso Says:
October 18th, 2011 at 12:40 am
Interestingly Steve – there is a kind of PartP for your scenario. The lever was your PDQ terminal – which could perhaps have allowed you to bring the entire network under the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (usually referred to as PCI). This requires amongst other things that any wireless network carrying cardholder data must be encrypted and the devices physically protected etc. And any Merchant that takes cards has to comply. Enforcement in the type of establishment you describe however, is rare!
Steve Cassidy Says:
October 19th, 2011 at 7:41 am
That is useful, thanks Muso (or can I call you mad?)

And for those who think that it’s not possible to make s truly appalling cockup out of a simple bit of wiring:

http://thereifixedit.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/white-trash-repairs-the-keys-to-power.jpg
Stephen Says:
October 19th, 2011 at 10:23 am
It does seem amazing that someone actually thought that a shop where everyone coming in gets to hold an iPad and wander around by themselves was a workable proposition. Even the Apple store is a little more careful than that.
Steve Cassidy Says:
October 19th, 2011 at 12:50 pm
It was a classic bit of mouth too fast for brain. Here’s a guy working in a line of business where they have 110v transformers specifically so people don’t nick the site tools and take them home, and he’s firmly convinced that theft doesn’t exist…
wittgenfrog Says:
October 19th, 2011 at 3:34 pm
Agree 100% with the general principle of your blog Mr Cassidy, but now you know how frustrating it can be to work in jobs like teaching!

If we were switch the topic from WiFi to (say) learning to read I’ll bet Mr Motormouth (the builder) and everyone else in the room would have had a ‘valid’ opinion too….

Just as we’ve (nearly) all got Wifi at home, and are thus ‘experts’ so we all went to School and are similarly expert in the field of educating our youth….

@David Wright – Indeed. Surely thta’s why they still have a viable home-owned Industrial base whilst we in UK are owned by a bunch of Hooray Henry bankers….
justposted Says:
October 20th, 2011 at 7:34 am
I would agree with lots of the comments here. The key is that a qualification that is not sufficiently challenging to obtain is not worth much. Mind you, I know plenty of chartered engineers who I wouldn’t want to design my house, either, and that’s after 5-10 years’ training. In the end there is no substitute for references.

Oh, and don’t forget the importance of paying a proper price for the job, rather than taking your cheapest quote and assuming that the job will be as good as it would have been from the guy who gave a realistic figure.
Julian Hall Says:
October 20th, 2011 at 9:22 am
Any qualification simply means ‘I remembered enough to qualify long enough to get tested’. It does not (unless retested regularly) mean the certificate holder remembers anything past receiving the award, or keeps up to date with changes in the industry they are in. As for the builder ‘Look mate, I don’t tell you about the load bearing capacity of an RSJ, you don’t tell me about networking, OK?’ Oops…. ‘Tact.exe has stopped responding’
Anteaus Says:
October 20th, 2011 at 11:08 am
Part P is in any case nothing to do with safety. It’s everything to do with the creation of a electricians’ cartel, in which only the big contractors get the work.

It is actually counterproductive to safety, since it places the cash-in-hand cowboy (no paperwork) at an advantage over the small trader(mountain of paperwork)

At that, the IEE 17th edition must rank as one of the most obsessive-compulsive regulatory documents ever produced. It wouldn’t be so bad if they didn’t keep changing their minds about items like earthing with every new release.

A straightforward competency test for DIY’ers -as required in some countries- would have been more productive of safety. After all it ain’t rocket science, although professionals will, in their own interests, try to convince you it is.
Julian T Says:
October 20th, 2011 at 2:59 pm
Part P – This was a Precott ‘jobs for the boys’ act and was nothing to do with the HSE. In fact the present gov has said Part P will be ditched because it has had no effect on safety figures!
keefish Says:
October 20th, 2011 at 4:13 pm
We have goverments that lives for today.
We have people that live for today
This breeds a culture of people that believes anyone can do it with a minimum of training.
I would cite customer service as being a very good example of that coupled with the use of set questions and answers to whatever the caller is relating
You will find toneless responses that lack any conviction and rarely convince you they know what they are talking about.alWays very polite .this is my experience of virgin media when relating an issue wth my broadband connection.

We no longer have the concept if what experience is or what it can bring

The idea behind first education and its longevity is so that the things that we learn become second nature.

Doing a short term course is for information it assumes that you take away the knowledge and make it second nature. We all know what assumptions make of us don’t we
There is no replacement for proper certified education and experience carried out by properly managed and monitored licenced authorities
Get rid of the qwangoes and flybe nights.
Apologies if a bit off track but a little knowledge can be dangerous especially in our dog eat dog world
Rabies Says:
October 20th, 2011 at 10:39 pm
@Steve

110V tools for site use has everything to do with safety regs NOT tool theft.
dave Says:
October 21st, 2011 at 2:46 pm
“All Part P should require is that RCD protection is checked as fitted and tested regularly – a 1 minute job for any dim fitter”

A finger in the electric socket should do it nicely!

Read more: Why you shouldn’t let builders anywhere near your Wi-Fi | PC Pro blog http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2011/10/14/why-you-shouldnt-let-builders-anywhere-near-your-wi-fi/#ixzz1bQKflicl
dave Says:
October 21st, 2011 at 2:47 pm
“All Part P should require is that RCD protection is checked as fitted and tested regularly – a 1 minute job for any dim fitter”

A finger in the electric socket should do it nicely!
Keith Says:
October 21st, 2011 at 8:31 pm
To practise as a Part P electrician , the person has to be assessed by an electrical trade body, like elecsa, all notifable work has to be checked with a calibrated tester that checks various parameters, like impedance, and a certificate issued. , during assessment the understanding and interpretation of these readings are checked, this testing can take a few hours and in the end, the electrician then is responisble for that installation. Yes there are cowboys out there, part p/assessed means the job is certified and they are not cowboys. So definitely not a 1 minute job!
Keith Says:
October 21st, 2011 at 8:31 pm
To practise as a Part P electrician , the person has to be assessed by an electrical trade body, like elecsa, all notifable work has to be checked with a calibrated tester that checks various parameters, like impedance, and a certificate issued. , during assessment the understanding and interpretation of these readings are checked, this testing can take a few hours and in the end, the electrician then is responisble for that installation. Yes there are cowboys out there, part p/assessed means the job is certified and they are not cowboys. So definitely not a 1 minute job!
Martin Says:
October 24th, 2011 at 9:19 am
As someone who has been on IEC committees dealing with electrical safety, I would agree that part P was badly implemented, but there is certainly a need for it. An RCD reduces the chance of death from electric shock but does not eliminate it by a long way – under the wrong circumstances 2.5mA can kill. However, I have had the same job done by two qualified electricians in different houses; the first one was incompetent and the second one was excellent. The reason is that the contractor is responsible, not the individual electrician who may only have been employed for a few days to fill a gap. (I listened in recently on a conversation between two contractors who had seen the same man and thought his credentials were forged.)
For me, the main point of this story is that in Germany nobody would have listened for one moment to what a builder thought about IT. Not his job.
Steve Cassidy Says:
October 24th, 2011 at 10:22 am
There’s the basic problem, Martin: I could whip up a convincing-looking certificate in about 20 minutes with a DTP product and my cranky-but-authoritative looking Tektronix Phaser wax printer. I don’t see any clear signs that the bodies who hand out qualifications are taking steps to help with verification – and it’s the unverified worker who represents the biggest threat.

And I too have worked in Germany. While national stereotypes are of course awfully non-PC, that doesn’t mean they are necessarily wrong!
Greg Says:
September 7th, 2012 at 4:52 pm
Perhaps I am not as subtle as others here. Builder is told to pull cables for the network – get on with it or we will find someone else to do it!