RAZR unable to find network printer on new router

[CasualBlonde]

My Cisco Linksys WRT160N died and I am running a Buffalo WZR-600DHP on a W7 64-bit system. My printer is an HP K8600 on an ethernet cable to the router.

I used to be able to see the printer on my DROID RAZR. It isn't discoverable now. The router is PPPoE bridged to Earthlink.

I reinstalled the printer driver from HP's website.

Any help would really be appreciated.

 

[palmtree5]

First off, welcome! Second, does the computer see the printer? Is the printer on?

 

[CasualBlonde]

Hi!
Yep, both the desktop and the wireless laptop see the printer, and it communicates just fine. The trick is to get the RAZR and an ASUS TF201 to see it on the router - that's my stumbling point.

Um, yes - the printer is on. (That made me laugh and remember my days as a field service tech with TRW - the old Credifier systems. "Is it on?" used to be my first question back then, too.)

 

[CasualBlonde]

I did remember the trouble over UPnP being default activated as a means for worms to get into a system, and sure enough, it was disabled on the Buffalo - but that wasn't the obstacle.

Anybody with more knowledge?

 

[Speed Daemon]

Yep, both the desktop and the wireless laptop see the printer, and it communicates just fine. The trick is to get the RAZR and an ASUS TF201 to see it on the router - that's my stumbling point.

Could you be a bit more detailed about what you mean by "see it on the router"? Does the router in question act as a print server? Have you tried connecting directly to the printer?

 

[alostpacket]

^ +1

What app are you using to print and/or 'see' the network/router?

Also...

UPnP being default activated as a means for worms to get into a system

Not entirely true, some models have a security bug but UPnP is not any more insecure than any other software running on your router. Additionally it allows for software (from your local computer) to more easily connect to the net and other computers on your network. Some people consider UPnP a security risk but I personally think it's a matter of implementation.

And you may try enabling it as long as you don't have the recent bug. UPnP/SSDP is exactly the kind of thing that could help devices see each other over a LAN.


As for the recent security threat regarding uPnP:

Here's a list of affected devices:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApUaRDtAei07dFdOWXdKRUVaUTdRYndnbW5zajRyTmc#gid=0

Source: Comments from Ars Technica article: To prevent hacking, disable Universal Plug and Play now | Ars Technica

(Story is a bit sensationalist, take with a grain of salt).

 

[Speed Daemon]

Not entirely true, some models have a security bug but UPnP is not any more insecure than any other software running on your router. Additionally it allows for software (from your local computer) to more easily connect to the net and other computers on your network. Some people consider UPnP a security risk but I personally think it's a matter of implementation.

I'd say that anyone who is running a "router" that runs applications is setting themself up for headaches. My Internet gateway / firewall appliance does PAT and SPI, and nothing else.

Microsoft's UPnP was an epic fail because it defeated a lot of the protections that a we buy firewalls for, and came out of the box riddled with exploits that allowed crackers to break into Windows computers with ease. Over the years we've disabled UPnP and replaced it with more secure service discovery protocols...like the service discovery protocol and Zeroconf that don't rush to tell the whole world that you're there, ready to be exploited.

On the firewall side, newer firewalls typically look for, and close down UPnP messages that try to get out, while allowing them inside the network if you want them to. If you're sure that your firewall can handle UPnP safely (that's a big "if") and need UPnP to connect your old flip-phone to a network printer in 2013, you're probably safe.

 

[alostpacket]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree I believe that while UPnP is not perfect, it's far from the serious threat it is made out to be and is quite helpful. But I agree SDP and zerconf would be welcome, though a lot of software doesnt use it (AFAIK).

I guess I cringe when I read on gaming websites self-styled experts* telling people to turn off UPnP and open a permanent port forward... :hmmmm:

*not, you, I think you're an actual expert

 

[Speed Daemon]

Just to be clear, I don't think that UPnP is a serious threat any more, after the exploits got patched. As long as you're protected by a SPI firewall, that is. The thing is that the time it took for Microsoft to rehabilitate UPnP has lost it significant market share. A lot of products don't use it any more.

When I see people online giving "expert" advice without any concern for the abilities of the other guy, I call that "show-off advice". I do a lot of simple port forwarding on my home network, and I feel relatively secure in doing it because I designed the "whole package" to be reasonably secure. I wouldn't advise everyone to do the same because IMO that would be irresponsible. OTOH I suppose it's caveat emptor when you're on a forum that's all about playing games with people!

One handy firewall feature that I rarely use, but that might be really handy for gamers is triggered port forwarding. (Note: this Wikipedia entry has some erroneous information.) It's a good compromise for now.