What should I do about persistent unauthorized access attempts on my Wi-Fi?

Hi Community,


I'm using an old MacBook Air running macOS 10.6.8 as a dedicated monitoring node for my home network (yeah, still alive and kicking).


Recently, I've been getting repeated connection attempts from:

**IP: 22*******1** (possibly KDDI Japan)


Setup:

- AirPort Extreme (MAC filtered, timed access)

- macOS Firewall (block all, stealth mode)

- Terminal logs + AirPort Utility logs

- Devices are blocked, but logs pile up (a mountain of them!)


I've reported this to KDDI and JPNIC — no response.

I even considered contacting government agencies, but maybe someone here recognizes this pattern?


Attached logs include:

- DHCP attempts

- Deauth logs

- MAC spoofing suspicions


Would love any advice or if anyone else has had similar ghost IP hits.


Thanks from Japan,

Captain NoobDNA



[Edited by Moderator]

iPad Pro, iPadOS 18

Posted on May 19, 2025 06:58 PM

Reply
Question marked as Top-ranking reply

Posted on May 20, 2025 10:40 AM

Practically, there's almost nothing you can do to stop them.


Unless the user is exhibiting a pattern of abuse (and, let's be clear, you as a single user do not count), KDDI aren't going to do anything. With the terabits of traffic flying around the world, the occasional (even if repeated) pings to your system don't even count as noise. It's one grain of sand on a mile-long beach.


Maybe if the user was spewing gigabits of 'abuse' traffic scanning (and trying to infiltrate) multiple networks, their grain of sand would pile up to be a sandcastle, and KDDI might notice (and maybe even care), but it would have to be a big sandcastle.


For all you know at this point, it's not even a malicious user, but someone that typoed an address when setting up their system and they haven't noticed, but some software on their side is trying to connect.


Unless they're overwhelming your bandwidth, or you think this is truly a directed attack at you, I would just move on. Configure your router to silently block the address and sleep well at night.


Seriously, you're in for a long hard battle and years of high blood pressure medication if you try to trace every single bit of data that hits your network. Just let the software (router, firewall, etc.) do their thing.

Similar questions

10 replies
Question marked as Top-ranking reply

May 20, 2025 10:40 AM in response to noobDNA

Practically, there's almost nothing you can do to stop them.


Unless the user is exhibiting a pattern of abuse (and, let's be clear, you as a single user do not count), KDDI aren't going to do anything. With the terabits of traffic flying around the world, the occasional (even if repeated) pings to your system don't even count as noise. It's one grain of sand on a mile-long beach.


Maybe if the user was spewing gigabits of 'abuse' traffic scanning (and trying to infiltrate) multiple networks, their grain of sand would pile up to be a sandcastle, and KDDI might notice (and maybe even care), but it would have to be a big sandcastle.


For all you know at this point, it's not even a malicious user, but someone that typoed an address when setting up their system and they haven't noticed, but some software on their side is trying to connect.


Unless they're overwhelming your bandwidth, or you think this is truly a directed attack at you, I would just move on. Configure your router to silently block the address and sleep well at night.


Seriously, you're in for a long hard battle and years of high blood pressure medication if you try to trace every single bit of data that hits your network. Just let the software (router, firewall, etc.) do their thing.

May 20, 2025 04:09 PM in response to noobDNA

Note that

  • WEP encryption
  • MAC address filtering
  • Hiding your network's SSID

do very little to improve actual security.


I remember hearing some years back that it was possible for an attacker to break into a network that used static WEP keys in as little as 40 seconds. MAC addresses can be spoofed, so MAC address filtering might not offer as much protection as you like. Hiding SSIDs doesn't remove them from all packets; any attacker who has a network "sniffer" can still see what SSID your router is using so they can try to join your network.


With WPA, you want the highest version that all your equipment can support, and you want to be using AES keys. I don't know which AirPort Extreme you have, but it looks like

  • All of them support WPA1
  • All but the first support WPA2
  • None support WPA3

https://theapplewiki.com/wiki/List_of_AirPort_Routers


If your AirPort Express is the original one that does not support WPA2, it might be time to consider a newer, more modern router that supports WPA2 and WPA3.

May 20, 2025 04:58 PM in response to Servant of Cats

Thank you so much for the detailed breakdown regarding WEP, MAC filtering, and SSID hiding — I truly appreciate your insight. You’re absolutely right: WPA2/WPA3 with AES is the way to go. I’ll likely phase out my old AirPort Express and consider more robust gear.




By the way, I’ve been thinking of introducing Starlink as a backup or main line. Have you had any experience with it or heard of security pros/cons in such a setup?

May 20, 2025 04:59 PM in response to Camelot

Thank you for the reality check. Your analogy of “a grain of sand on a mile-long beach” puts it all into perspective. I agree — unless it’s an abusive pattern, chasing ghosts is just a path to hypertension. I’ll keep silently blocking and sleeping well (I hope).




I’m now considering Starlink as part of my network configuration. Would love to hear if you think it’s viable or has its own security caveats?

May 20, 2025 05:00 PM in response to KiltedTim

Thank you for the honest take — sometimes the truth hits harder than firewalls. You’re right: the world is noisy, and most networks are just under siege 24/7. I’m doing my best to keep things locked down.




Out of curiosity, I’m considering deploying Starlink at home to shake things up. Any thoughts on whether it improves or complicates network security?

May 20, 2025 06:56 PM in response to KiltedTim

Thanks for your brutally honest take — that’s definitely one of the most passionate responses I’ve read lately!




I totally get where you’re coming from. The line between tech and politics seems to blur more and more every day, especially with who controls the satellites and the pipes. Your point about scraped data and central control is valid — and frankly, pretty alarming.




I’ll take your words into account while weighing the pros and cons. Maybe I’ll keep Starlink on standby, like a fire extinguisher: nice to have, but hope I never need it.




Appreciate the candid perspective!

May 20, 2025 07:06 PM in response to MrHoffman

Thanks so much, MrHoffman — that was an excellent, no-nonsense breakdown.




Your comment about “port stealth” messing with routing really opened my eyes. I had fallen into the trap of thinking stealth equaled security. And yes, I’ve already noticed how hidden SSIDs just make everything noisier for clients.




I’m currently evaluating RADIUS, though my AirPort setup doesn’t make that easy. Ubiquiti is sounding more and more like the future for my environment — thanks for the tip on their link failover models and remote capabilities.




Super grateful for your insights. These are the kind of grounded, field-tested perspectives I really value!

May 20, 2025 05:13 PM in response to noobDNA

Port stealth is a bad choice. Messes with network routing.


Same for hidden SSIDs. They only stick out more, to those that are interested enough care, and hide from those that are troubleshooting, and even better will cause all Wi-Fi clients to ping about the hidden SSIDs everybody everywhere.


If you want to restrict which clients can connect RADIUS is your path. MAC spoofing is a thing, too.


As for port scans and such, that’s the background hum of the Internet.


Remote folks poking at the firewall won’t also be poking at your Wi-Fi. Not unless you’re a very interesting target.


Whatever network links you’re using, they’re all going to get poked at.


Firewall gear with link failover capabilities is more expensive, and gear with simultaneous active links yet more so.


I’m often running Ubiquiti gear, which is quite capable. They have models with link failover capabilities, remote security features, and more.

May 20, 2025 05:20 PM in response to noobDNA

noobDNA wrote:
Out of curiosity, I’m considering deploying Starlink at home to shake things up. Any thoughts on whether it improves or complicates network security?

I suppose some will say it's a political reaction rather than a technical one, but it will be a cold day in Hades before I use any service controlled by Elon Musk. It's bad enough he's already scraped every last bit of usable information out of every US government database he could lay his hands on, I won't willingly give him access to my day to day data stream too...



This thread has been closed by the system or the community team. You may vote for any posts you find helpful, or search the Community for additional answers.

What should I do about persistent unauthorized access attempts on my Wi-Fi?

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple Account.