Forgot your password?

Home wireless security level?

Displaying poll results.
Open network: Internet should be free for all!
  1751 votes / 5%
WEP encryption: Waiting to be compromised
  967 votes / 2%
WPA/WPA2 encryption: Should be secure
  18874 votes / 53%
WPA/WPA2 w/ hidden SSID: A bit more secure
  3840 votes / 10%
Ditto, but w/ MAC whitelist: A tough tighter
  3300 votes / 9%
Ditto, but DHCP disabled: Wireless fortress
  1021 votes / 2%
Wired connection or powerline Ethernet only
  1908 votes / 5%
Whatever my neighbors are using
  3301 votes / 9%
34962 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This discussion has been archived.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.

Home wireless security level?

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 02, 2013 @11:06AM (#44456507)

    A clear field of view and a targeting range in excess of the WAP's range should be sufficient security.

  • by radish (98371) on Friday August 02, 2013 @11:13AM (#44456597) Homepage

    Hiding the SSID and/or MAC whitelisting will make it a bit tougher for a casual attacker. BUT, a casual attacker will be totally defeated by WPA2. If whoever is attacking you is able to break WPA2, then the hidden SSID and MAC whitelist will offer you zero protection against them.

    Thus, they're pointless and an inconvenience to legitimate users. My dad is obsessed with MAC whitelists which is a pain as every time I take my laptop over there I have to wait while he reconfigures the fricking router (yes, he deletes the entry when I leave).

  • by coldsalmon (946941) on Friday August 02, 2013 @11:35AM (#44456845)

    Disabling DHCP is the most ludicrous option. The only way this could make your home network more secure is if it is an open network and you want to prevent devices from automatically connecting. Do you really think someone is going to crack your WPA2 encryption, spoof your MAC address, and then give up because they don't feel like configuring a static IP address? Or is there actually some valid security reason for disabling DHCP?

  • by simplypeachy (706253) on Friday August 02, 2013 @12:22PM (#44457423)

    Care to restart it again with a correct list of "least to most secure" options?

  • by coldsalmon (946941) on Friday August 02, 2013 @12:29PM (#44457543)

    But what if someone cracked your WPA and instead of using DHCP they assigned themselves a static IP outside of the DHCP pool?

  • by Luthair (847766) on Friday August 02, 2013 @04:20PM (#44460613)

    Firstly, a hidden SSID is pointless and trivial to snoop (and if you've turned on the option to connect if it is not broadcasting your devices call out the SSID constantly). Secondly your MAC address is broadcast in the clear regardless of your network encryption, anyone can easily find these by watching wireless traffic.

    A relatively unique SSID (as in, unlikely to be in an existing rainbow table) paired with a reasonable password is all that is required to secure a personal wifi network.

  • by 93 Escort Wagon (326346) on Friday August 02, 2013 @09:19PM (#44462889)

    How the hell is exposing an SSID "insecure" in any way anyway? What will happen? Why do people still fall for security through obscurity? What do they think your WIFI password is for?

    Some people have a need to feel special, like they know some trick that gives them the upper hand over the teeming masses. Relying on a strong protocol and a good password... well that's no good - even non-techies can do that!

  • Re:WEP WEP WEP (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 03, 2013 @12:59AM (#44463575)

    Between eeeeeeevil NSA agent driving up to my home and surfing porn with my Google-acquired credentials and neighbour's kid discovering Backtrack pwning my WEP network or a passing by wardriver doing same, one is about as likely as winning jackpot in a lottery by finding a ticket on the street, and another like getting 2:1 payment back on one ticket from a thousand you bought.

    It's like saying "Well, a nicely placed C4 charge would blow this safe open anyways, so I might as well just hide my money in my old sock"

    PS: Most eeeeeevil NSA agents are not even on the same continent with me, you USA-centric prick.

  • by wolrahnaes (632574) <sean&seanharlow,info> on Saturday August 03, 2013 @03:25PM (#44466435) Homepage Journal

    How about restarting it again to get rid of the absolutely idiotic choices. Please stop promoting the misconception that MAC filtering, SSID hiding, or DHCP disabling are worth anything at all for network security. All any of those three do is make legitimate use harder while not hindering an attacker in the slightest. Does anyone think there are people who can crack WPA2 but can't run Wireshark for 15 seconds to see both legitimate MACs and the IP scheme?

  • by lord_rob the only on (859100) <> on Saturday August 03, 2013 @05:39PM (#44467119)

    And you think everyone can crack WPA2 ?
    MAC filtering is usually good enough when you live in a small village.
    Not everybody is an IT specialist there you know, barely anyone knows what "kismet" mean.
    I'm not saying you should MAC address filtering anyway as it's very unsafe and it's a pity to setup, I'm just stating the facts.

  • by Lumpy (12016) on Monday August 05, 2013 @12:47PM (#44478367) Homepage

    Problem is Slashdot no longer has anyone working here that knows anything about technology.

    You wanted the Slashdot from 10 years ago, it's gone.

I have yet to see any problem, however complicated, which, when you looked at it in the right way, did not become still more complicated. -- Poul Anderson


Forgot your password?