Talk:BT Smart Hub

I have one of these devices, and I can safely say that not all of the software included is Open/Free in any way (the nmon.ko kernel module, and the userland application that controls the functionality in the router). It would be misleading to say that everyting in the router is GPL'd, as currently implied. It also happens to use GPL/LGPL'd librtp, although no source is made available by BT. VMlemon 12:49, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I have one of these devices, and I strongly reccomend that a criticism section is needed here, because it's extremely unreliable and flawed...

Well I have one of these devices and it works fine. True it needs the occasional reset, but so did my previous ADSL router. They do give it you for free so you can't really complain that much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.134.215 (talk) 14:15, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Half this article reads like an ad or a user manual. I'll bet any money BT have been tweaking it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.211.89 (talk) 10:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)



More likely someone with insufficient background knowledge has been at this. I will try to make some changes. BT HH is not free, it is only obtainable if you have a BT Broadband subscription (notably more expensive than broadband from some UK competitors). It does not perform particularly well, and not only is it locked to BT as your broadband provider, but also some of the functions have been locked off. Also, the unreliability and vulnerabilities of the Home Hub have been well documented, and my personal experience is that it (Version 1 HH) needs a surprising number of reboots due to dropping the wireless connection. See also www.ciao.co.uk/BT_Home_Hub__Review_5709871 Overall, I agree, there is a neutral POV problem here, and lots of work to do on this page. Centrepull (talk) 14:55, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

A lot of the above appears to based on received wisdom. I have installed dozens of the old HH 1.0/1.5 with only one problem - one was DOA. I have not found any unreliability with the HH 1.0/1.5 but have found a great deal of uninformed comment about the box. The person who claims that the box is "extremely unreliable and flawed" should define what he/she means and provide references. I do not work for BT. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.75.80 (talk) 22:46, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I have had a Home Hub 1 for years and have had no problems at all. I think I once or twice had to reboot it after being away for a few days. I can't see that as a problem. When I switched to a Mac I had to ring up support for help but they were exemplary. I had more trouble with other providers and routers. But I suppose it's just the luck of the draw. Zawia (talk) 19:29, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Can anyone explain how to tell which version (A or B) Home Hub 2.0 one has. This would be very useful information. Cheers Ashimema (talk) 21:01, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

To find out what version you have go to 192.168.1.254. The version is at the bottom of that page. BTW, I have not come across alleged fault with type A.s As to unreliability I agree with a previous poster - they aren't! 86.134.79.13 (talk) 16:32, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

I disagree with the assertion that the device is "Locked". Currently I am using two Homehub 1.0 units on non-BT accounts, Firmware version 6.2.6.E, no unlocking is needed beyond looking in the "advanced" configuration tab, so I would state that current firmware is NOT LOCKED, though it appears to favor BT connections. Unfortunately I do not know of a citation to support this. 212.159.121.228 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:47, 12 October 2010 (UTC).

ALL BT Home Hubs ARE "locked" to BT's ADSL service. They will NOT work with other non-BT ISPs. The person that suggested that they are not locked should try to actually connect one to another ISP - it will not work. HH 1.0/1.5 can be reflashed with plain vanilla Thomson software which can be used with non-BT ISPs. However, the BT HH 2.0 cannot be reflashed. Citation: I have installed dozens of them - all types. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.49.100 (talk) 10:00, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Home Hub 1800HG
I had what is described in BT's delivery confirmation email (dated 19 June 2005) as a 'BT Wireless Home Hub 1800', which I understand is a modified 2Wire 1800HG. This seems to pre-date all the models mentioned in the article. Can anyone add a useful description? I think the unit has long gone (the broadband end was blown by a nearby lightning strike), though it may still be in the loft somewhere. Pterre (talk) 17:40, 8 January 2012 (UTC) What I can remember is that it had four ethernet ports, so the replacement by a Home Hub 1.0 (which only had 2) was not popular. Pterre (talk) 17:48, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Found in loft and added. Pterre (talk) 13:10, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

IPv6 Support?
Does anyone know definitively what the status of IPv6 support is on these routers? Would highly appreciate if someone knowledgeable on the subject could add a brief mention of it to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.145.165.125 (talk) 12:04, 18 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't have an RS for this, but as far as I know,  BT Homehub does not support IPv6,  nor are there any plans to do so.  For that matter,  BT Internet do not offer IPv6 for retail (i.e. domestic customers),  and have no plans to do so. --31.52.200.89 (talk) 12:24, 18 January 2013 (UTC)


 * It was added in home hub 5 but bt have disabled it and will enable it soon 176.250.150.202 (talk) 12:25, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Backdoor 'btagent'
My criticism edits keep being reverted, what is it going to take to convince you there is a backdoor, known as btagent, present on this device, I have cited many times, many websites report this and the respective technical details and I know myself that this backdoor exists. 86.151.35.233 (talk) 07:49, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately citing technical details that, in your opinion, demonstrates there is a backdoor is original research. Wikipedia cannot contain original research.     You need a reliable source to do this first.  Discussions by various anonymous people on forums are not reliable sources.  You need a reliable source that has stated that the backdoor exists and criticises the Hub because of it.  Citing that there is something called "btagent" doesn't demonstrate it is a backdoor and doesn't necessarily make it criticism. -- Escape Orbit  (Talk) 20:21, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/05/24/bt_snooping/ - the backdoor does exist for bt to perform maintenance 86.136.66.29 (talk) 00:33, 18 March 2014 (UTC) The "backdoor" comment also falls down on the phrase "this device". In other words - which device? As can be seen from the article the BT Home Hub is FAR from being one device. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.113.76 (talk) 08:02, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on BT Home Hub. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130609060314/http://www.btplc.com:80/News/Articles/Showarticle.cfm?ArticleID=4E2E1EF5-FCBA-4CE4-B769-E48E0F68ACED to http://www.btplc.com/News/Articles/Showarticle.cfm?ArticleID=4E2E1EF5-FCBA-4CE4-B769-E48E0F68ACED
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130609060314/http://www.btplc.com:80/News/Articles/Showarticle.cfm?ArticleID=4E2E1EF5-FCBA-4CE4-B769-E48E0F68ACED to http://www.btplc.com/News/Articles/Showarticle.cfm?ArticleID=4E2E1EF5-FCBA-4CE4-B769-E48E0F68ACED

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:23, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Readability/Poor Writing
"Since v 5 Home/Smart Hubs support the faster Wi-Fi 802.11ac standard, in addition to the 802.11b/g/n standards." is not a sentence. Is it supposed to be connected to something before or after it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.216.224.41 (talk) 12:41, 20 May 2022 (UTC)