Forgot your password?

Among APs I detect, the secured:unsecured ratio is:

Displaying poll results.
Closest to 1:10
  1111 votes / 5%
Closest to 1:4
  731 votes / 3%
Closest to 1:2
  370 votes / 1%
Closest to 1:1
  706 votes / 3%
Closest to 2:1
  738 votes / 3%
Closest to 4:1
  3075 votes / 16%
Closest to 10:1
  8719 votes / 46%
I don't detect any APs.
  3159 votes / 16%
18609 total votes.
[ Voting Booth | Other Polls | Back Home ]
  • Don't complain about lack of options. You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
  • Feel free to suggest poll ideas if you're feeling creative. I'd strongly suggest reading the past polls first.
  • This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Among APs I detect, the secured:unsecured ratio is:

Comments Filter:
  • 15+:0 (Score:5, Informative)

    by Dynedain (141758) <slashdot2NO@SPAManthonymclin.com> on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @12:28PM (#40143907) Homepage

    How about all of them are secured?

    Now that everyone's wifi router is provided free with their DSL/Cable/UVerse connection in my neighborhood, they're all secured by default.

    And I don't think Netgear/DLink/Linksys have sold routers in default unsecured states for a while now.

    • Even the one "unsecured" AP I see stills requires a password to hit anything other than the default "Sign in" homepage. How are we supposed to count those?
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by techprophet (1281752)
        Secured, in my opinion. Unless, of course, you can view networked computers. Certainly it's less secure to have a 'Sign in' homepage than to just block network access with WPA2, but it is still secured somehow.
      • Nope. Anyone can sit and listen to that persons traffic or sniff their password. That's not security, it's just annoying to their customers.

        • Re:15+:0 (Score:5, Informative)

          by CastrTroy (595695) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @04:39PM (#40147907) Homepage
          Depends on the router. My router has an optional guest mode. When using the guest connection, they are put on an entirely different subnet so they can access the internet, but not access my personal network. Works great. You can have a secured normal access point that you use for the computers in your house, and then when people come over and want to use the internet, give them the password to the guest internet, and you don't have to worry about giving out your secure password.
    • Re:15+:0 (Score:5, Interesting)

      by hobarrera (2008506) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @02:11PM (#40145531) Homepage

      Plenty of ISPs set the password to your customer number.
      This is, of course, printed in the envelope containing the bill every month.
      Hence, it's secure as long as noone pays atention to the envelope.

      • Re:15+:0 (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Finallyjoined!!! (1158431) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @06:53PM (#40149665)
        Hmmm, haven't had a printed bill from my ISP since 2004.

        Oh, and the first thing I do when they send me a new router (which they do periodically) is change the SSID from ISPname-randomletters&numbers to something sensible & set a new key
        • Hmmm, haven't had a printed bill from my ISP since 2004.

          In some countries, it still hasn't come to that, regrettably.

          Oh, and the first thing I do when they send me a new router (which they do periodically) is change the SSID from ISPname-randomletters&numbers to something sensible & set a new key

          Average Joe won't know how to do this, won't do this, and will leave it as it is.

      • The ones I see most is a sticker with an insanely difficult password (generated) on the router itself... Basically all ISPs do that here. Unless someone breaks into your house, accessing such a network is next to impossible.
      • by T-Bone-T (1048702)

        My AT&T DSL modem used a number printed on the modem as the password.

      • by AmiMoJo (196126)

        All the major UK ISPs have been using random keys printed on a sticker on the base for years now. For a while Sky was using keys generated from the MAC address, but it didn't take long for them to stop doing that.

        Still, I see unsecure APs. People have wifi problems and end up turning it off, or they want to use an older device like a Nintendo DS that only supports WEP (which is as good as unsecure).

    • by BobNET (119675)

      Whoops. I voted 1:1 thinking it was the secured:total ratio. The 2:1, 4:1, and 10:1 choices make a lot more sense now.

    • by mcavic (2007672)
      It has improved in the last few years. I haven't seen an unsecured AP in my apartment building for quite a while. Some stores that don't advertise Wi-Fi have secured AP's, too.
    • by melonman (608440)

      Both unsecured connections I can see here in France are from ISP-provided routers - one of them is mine. This is how French ISPs provide roaming wifi for their clients - leach a bit of bandwidth of domestic connections and make it available via a locked-down open wifi connection.

  • Which is far better than 10:1...

    • Re:9:0 here (Score:5, Funny)

      by Infiniti2000 (1720222) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @12:43PM (#40144133)

      Which is far better than 10:1...

      Infinitely better.

      • Re:9:0 here (Score:5, Funny)

        by Dice (109560) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @02:20PM (#40145693)

        Undefinidely better.

        • Asymptotically approaching infinitely better.
      • by Xtifr (1323)

        NaNly better. ;)

        But it's not "closest" to any option. NaN is equadistant from all numbers. So really, I could choose any of the ratios, and be technically correct, <voice style="Prof. Farnsworth">which is the best kind of correct</voice>. ;).

        I know I'm not supposed to complain about a lack of options, but when I end up having to choose what number is closest to NaN, I can't help thinking the poll needs some debugging! :)

    • But they are all the same APs. :)

      Our campus network has two different SSIDs on each on AP, one unsecured for public use that has some limits, one secured with WPA2 Enterprise for student and employee use that is unrestricted. So in our building, I see about 200 of each.

      • My university is similar but 2:1

        • RMIT-University: Secured WPA1/2 Enterprise that needs student ID and password
        • Eduroam: Secured WPA1/2 Enterprise that needs student ID@yourunihere.edu(.x) and password
        • RMIT-Support: Open but isolated, every page redirects to a page with instructions on how to get on the WPA2 network
  • Detecting APs seems like something my phone would do.

  • 10:1 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by YrWrstNtmr (564987) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @12:47PM (#40144189)
    However, 1/2 of those are WEP, and most of those appear to be the default FiOS settings. My FiOS install guy did not know that the default algorithm was badly broken [whatsmyip.org].
    • Re:10:1 (Score:5, Informative)

      by zarmanto (884704) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @01:18PM (#40144699) Journal
      Add to this, that some (possibly all?) of the routers provided by Verizon only support WEP encryption... and suddenly, turning off wireless on that router and setting up a secondary wireless router (one which supports WPA2, of course) on your network in "bridged" mode, starts to sound like a really-really-good idea.
      • Not 'all'. Mine supports WPA2
        • by zarmanto (884704)

          Good to know.

          When I received a replacement router from Verizon earlier this month*, they told me that they had two models, but I was only eligible to receive one of those two models, and not the other. (Presumably, you have the other model.) After I received it and started tinkering, I quickly discovered that WEP was all it had on board; so if I hadn't already implemented a solution exactly as I've described in my previous post above, upon reading your comment I might well have considered harassing them o

          • I believe mine is the MI424WR (Actiontec). (Not at home, so just going by the image online at verizon)
    • Re:10:1 (Score:5, Informative)

      by hobarrera (2008506) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @02:12PM (#40145559) Homepage

      I wouldn't count WEP as secured. A false sense of security is worse than no security.
      MAC filtering is even worse.

      • by arbulus (1095967)
        I've heard this one a lot, but I don't understand. Why is MAC filtering bad? I get that MACs can be spoofed. But if someone can't get into the router to see which MACs are allowed, how would spoofing work anyway?
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward
          Monitor the network long enough to collect a bunch of the allowed MACs, then use one that doesn't seem to be on at the moment.
        • The origian and destination MAC is transmited in every single packet that's trasmitted over the air.
          That's plenty of times per second. :)

  • Otherwise the ratio would be far worse/better.

  • The only non-WPA/WEP router on the list has MAC filtering, so I'd still count that firmly in the secured column

    • Re:0 unsecured (Score:5, Interesting)

      by hobarrera (2008506) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @02:16PM (#40145625) Homepage

      MAC filtering provides no security. It's like a security guard asking "are you on the list", and letting you in if you say you are.

      • by Altanar (56809)
        Perhaps not. But anyone willing to go so far as sniff and spoof a MAC address won't be stopped by any other security measure.
        • Sniffing a MAC can take a few seconds.
          Spoofing the MAC is generally as easy as copy-paste.

          Way easier than WPA2 or 802.1X, which, AFAIK, cannot be broken.

      • That is security, in as much as you have to know the names on the list to get in.

        MAC filtering is at least as effective as WEP

        • That is security, in as much as you have to know the names on the list to get in.

          MAC filtering is at least as effective as WEP

          Nope. In order to beat MAC filtering you have to capture 1 packet, in order to beat WEP you have to capture and analyze ~200k packets

          On low usage AP the time difference to beat the security can be in days

        • No, MAC filtering can be bypased in seconds, WEP can take hours, even a day or two.

          • Agreed, "at least as effective" is not actually accurate.

            What I was trying to say was if WEP counts, MAC filtering counts. They're both fundamentally insecure.

        • by AmiMoJo (196126)

          Except that everyone already inside has a handy name badge you can just read, and the bouncer is so thick he can't tell the difference between you and the person whose name you are spoofing.

          As you say though it is still about as good as WEP, which is more a statement about how badly broken WEP is.

      • by wvmarle (1070040)

        It's the guard asking "what's your name?" and then letting you in if the name is on the list.

        The trick is that you have to know a name that is on the list. For that you have to monitor the network for a certain period - so it'll work fine against casual visitors but maybe not so good for a determined attacker. Unless there are unsecured networks around which obviously are even easier to connect to.

        • Actually, my analogy was wrong.
          "It's like a guard that asks for your name, and writing on a chalkboard next to him, which anyone can see, the name of the people inside."

          • But after he asks your name and your quest, then he asks for your favorite colour to pick what chalk to write it with. Is your answer consistent?

  • My WiFi signal strength T-shirt does not distinguish between secured / unsecured.
  • Not including networks that allow guest access. Yes its alot of APs, however i have 3 huge residential towers around me.

    I assume the poll is asking about misconfigured open routers, not routers which they have a explicit guest access with captive portal or whatever. There are 3 or 4 of those guest networks, with varying levels of access and or injected penis pictures.

  • WarDrive Statistics (Score:5, Interesting)

    by nevermore94 (789194) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @01:52PM (#40145223)

    I run WarDrive regularly on my Android phone and I have traveled around quite a bit with it. Of the around 34,000 APs in my database, the Statistics currently stand at about 26,000 Secured to 8,000 Unsecured.

    • by treeves (963993)

      Battery life must be pretty bad on your phone, eh?

      • i don't think he runs his phone off battery, he must be using a portable fuel cell he carries around, or maybe keeps it connected to his car. you just can't do that kinda shit with android.

  • by rossdee (243626) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @02:18PM (#40145669)

    Associated Press is the first that comes to mind. Armor Piercing bullets are unwelcome if you are in a Humvrr in Afghanistan.
    Speaking of Animal Planet, did anyone see that 'Documentary' about Mermaids?

    At the momont the Atmospheric Pressure here is 29.91 inches of mercury
    If you have studied Applied Physics you could convert that into proper pressure units.

    On the Wikipedia page you have to scroll down quite a way to find (WiFi) Access Point
    And I can't pick up any other than our router here in the In-Laws basement.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by CanHasDIY (1672858)
      Among Associated Presses I detect, the secured:unsecured ratio is:

      Among Armor Pierces I detect, the secured:unsecured ratio is:

      Among Animal Planets I detect, the secured:unsecured ratio is:

      Among Atmospheric Pressures I detect, the secured:unsecured ratio is:

      Among Applied Physics I detect, the secured:unsecured ratio is:

      All those obviously wrong abbreviations... The poll is on Slashdot, AKA "News for Nerds..." and Access Point never came to mind?


      You're kidding me, right? Please tell me your
      • by azalin (67640)
        Locking away ammo is securing it. Loading AP rounds into your roof mounted machine gun is also a way of securing your vehicle. Feeding trolls (or rather nitpickers) is not. So is there an AP(p) for that?
      • by rvw (755107)

        Among Associated Presses I detect, the secured:unsecured ratio is:

        Among Armor Pierces I detect, the secured:unsecured ratio is:

        Among Animal Planets I detect, the secured:unsecured ratio is:

        Among Atmospheric Pressures I detect, the secured:unsecured ratio is:

        Among Applied Physics I detect, the secured:unsecured ratio is:

        All those obviously wrong abbreviations... The poll is on Slashdot, AKA "News for Nerds..." and Access Point never came to mind?

        You're kidding me, right? Please tell me your kidding...

        Yeah we're kidding you. This is an inverted Cowboy Neal poll, with a 5:1 ratio of non-nerd poll options.

  • At home, I have a secured wifi network and an unsecured internet-only network. Been this way since we moved in a year ago.

    Wasn't a big deal, and just described it to my tech-naive wife. She was quite upset, worried that people would (1) hack into our local network or (2)steal our internet.

    It took me a little convincing (and her agreeing to trust me in the matter) that it's a good thing to have an open wifi access point so we never have to tell visitors our password. Also, due to the several layers of sec

    • Alternative: I wired the house with CAT 6 network drops in most rooms. If a guest needs Intenet access, I tell them that there is a patch cable in the desk in the guest bedroom. They don't get the wireless password.

      Pretty much the same mix of clients (all Linux except an occaisional AIX or Solaris system for work) on our network unless my wife has to fire up her work laptop that runs Windoze so not too much worry about a "Typhoid Mary" guest.

      Cheers,
      Dave

    • by heypete (60671)

      At home, I have a secured wifi network and an unsecured internet-only network.

      Why not configure your router to have two secured networks, one that connects to the LAN+internet and is only available to members of your household and a second, internet-only network that has a "guest password"?

      Yes, I realize you're in what appears from your description to be a rural area but there's no harm in running a more protected network.

    • by T-Bone-T (1048702)

      I use WPA2 but I allow access to visitors by saying "It is a pretty complicated password, let me type it in for you." That works every time.

  • My networks are both secured with WPA2.

    My neighbor, who's not a tech guy, has his network set to use WPA2.

    Another neighbor used to have a wide-open AP, but they moved a couple months ago. So we're 100% WPA2 here!

  • I see two networks. 5 are encrypted with WPA2 ,and 5 are encrypted with WEP.

    So, I chose 1:1.
  • 7:1 is exactly in-between 4:1 and 10:1 and is what I see right now - 7 secured, 1 unsecured. I decided to be an optimist and voted 10:1, but the margin of error will be off a bit in the poll. I'm actually glad for the one unsecured - when my provider was having network problems I leeched off of them.

    • Don't worry about it too much - my 33:2 sample here at work drags our two sample average closer to the 10:1 you chose. And yes, I chose 10:1 (seriously, no higher options either way?). And the 2:0 sample at home is infinitely bigger than the 10:1 ratio anyway.
  • I think all consumer level routers should be secured by default and give big scary warnings if you try to turn it off (it shouldn't stop you, but it should make you well aware of the dangers). There should also be no WEP or WPA. WPA2+AES only. Consumer level routers don't need RADIUS or 802.1x. I know some ISPs who provide routers secure them by default, but a great many of them use WEP.

    The AP setup for the non-technical person on a consumer level router should ask:
    1) What do you want to call your wire
    • I pretty much agree with everything you said, other than this.

      Consumer level routers don't need RADIUS or 802.1x.

      So if you are a tech geek, and want to learn how to configure and manage certificate-based access, or centralised RADIUS, you need to spend 10x the average on a Cisco/Juniper type solution? Nah, leave it in. It hurts no-one to have other secure options there as long as the default state of the router (hold reset and power on) is WPA2+AES with a random password engraved or stamped on the bottom of the router.

  • Open WiFis seem to be really few and far between. Maybe 1 in 30 or less. And they are always terribly slow of course.

    But then there are still a few WEP APs (around 1 in 20), most of which are very quickly cracked if not too far away.

    Finally, there are the WPA APs which may have excellent passwords, but which support WPS without the need to press a button on the AP. Back in January, I could crack around 2 in 10 APs using reaver. In one neighborhood, it was even half the APs which were vulnerable. And not onl

  • by l_bratch (865693) <l_bratch@yahoo.co.uk> on Wednesday May 30, 2012 @07:18AM (#40153619) Homepage

    My wireless network is WPA2 protected but the key is in the SSID. That was anybody can use it, but wireless clients can't sniff each other's traffic. Is that secured or not?

  • So, where the heck is my option?

To the systems programmer, users and applications serve only to provide a test load.

 



Forgot your password?
Working...