| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 77606 | 2007-03-15 11:30:00 | WPA vs WEP - Which should you go for? | Chilling_Silence (9) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 533292 | 2009-01-10 10:04:00 | Mac Pro, Dual Intel Xeon Quad-core 2.8ghz (8-cores baby!!), 10gb DDR2 667 RAM, 2.5TB storage (all SATAII), ATI Radeon HD 2600 + Nvidia 8800GTS 512MB, Dual Samsung syncmaster 20" , built to order. Take that pcuserwinvista!! Are you stupid? How much did that cost you? WPA2 here. |
beeswax34 (63) | ||
| 533293 | 2009-01-10 10:11:00 | I run WPA2 enterprise where I can - using an active directory domain (or other directory service) to authenticate users (RADIUS through IAS, or freeradius). It works really well if you have your PCs in the domain too, and distribute the (in the case of Windows 2000 and above) wireless connection profiles with group policies. I even go as far to set up a certificate authority for extra kickass protection. Encryption is always AES - which is 1UP on 3DES - over TKIP. In the past I've found that the security is often limited by the capabilities of the devices you want to connect - for example, Pocket PC 2003 couldn't handle WPA2 or AES, and more recently the Wii has issues with such heavy security (i.e. it can't do it). Invariably it has been the limitations of such annoying hosts that has forced me to downgrade my (overzealous) security measures... but I digress. WPA > WEP any day too... |
Growly (6) | ||
| 533294 | 2009-01-10 12:56:00 | I have never mey anyone who could get past WEP, sure it can be done in minutes if you know how. I'm sure 99.9% of computer users would not know how to break in, even if they had instructions. I would use WEP for every home network, only changing to WPA if it was suspected someone had jumped aboard. WPA with VPN over wifi if your data is confidential. WEP is faster, better coverage and much more stable IMO. I have set up multiple(at least 50) home wifi networks for various clients. |
Rob99 (151) | ||
| 533295 | 2009-01-10 20:00:00 | IIRC different network cards perform different / better with different encryptions. I dont have any articles, but Im sure Ive read that in the past when I was looking up speed differences vs N-networks and WPA2 encrypted networks ... Besides, WiFi (with / without encryption) is fast enough for over 9/10 people I deal with who do browsing / desktop publishing :) All but heavy file-transfers! There's no real advantage of Cabled LAN speeds |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 533296 | 2009-01-10 20:09:00 | If I'm doing big file transfers, it's only oner the 'net or between local drives - so WPA's "slowing down" is't an issue. | pcuser42 (130) | ||
| 533297 | 2009-01-10 21:51:00 | I have never mey anyone who could get past WEP, sure it can be done in minutes if you know how . I'm sure 99 . 9% of computer users would not know how to break in, even if they had instructions . I would use WEP for every home network, only changing to WPA if it was suspected someone had jumped aboard . WPA with VPN over wifi if your data is confidential . WEP is faster, better coverage and much more stable IMO . I have set up multiple(at least 50) home wifi networks for various clients . Never had any trouble with speed, coverage or stability on WPA . WEP is certainly better than nothing by a long way, may well even keep 99 . 9% at bay but that still leaves a lot of people who would know what to do . However from people I've heard who have been ripped off through their computers, they've always done something really stupid so I guess there are just easier ways for criminals to make a buck than bothering to crack wireless security . |
Twelvevolts (5457) | ||
| 533298 | 2009-01-12 00:11:00 | WPA2, if your system doesnt support it upgrade drivers/check service packs & firmware versions. Have look at how poor the signal is from your neighbors wifi. So even if the 14year old next door hacked into your wifi, he'll probably be getting lots of drop-outs & eventually give up , the shadowy figure on your driveway with laptop is always a sure sign:cool::cool: So turn off the wifi access point when not in use & change the pass regularly I think there are more REAL security issues for most users. If your company is serious about wifi security then secure wifi access points/firewall are available.(eg sonicwall etc) But all this wont help when you take the laptop home & let the kids/husband play with it. Must be the no.1 way Corporate laptops get infected. Of course, security in free wifi hot spots is another topic again. |
sroby (11519) | ||
| 533299 | 2009-01-12 02:10:00 | Actually, thats a common misconception: Just because your signal strength is low at the end of your driveway does not mean that your neighbor cant get onto your Wireless. They can use a directional antenna and access it from much further back in many cases! Security for most users means preventing other people from using their home 'net access, rather than encrypting all data using the likes of a VPN to prevent traffic snooping. Most home users dont care if somebody snoops their YouTube surfing ... That said, if they were concerned about that, they would again be better with WPA / WPA2 over WEP... :) |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 533300 | 2009-01-14 04:32:00 | I'm using WPA2, not sure which "variant". It seems to get the job done :) | Nermal (7077) | ||
| 533301 | 2009-01-31 21:56:00 | Wireless is here to stay. That being said, most corporations that use WEP are migrating to WPA. The holes in WPA are far fewer and at the moment it is the best there is. I use an Unix based older PC as a firewall and it seems rock solid. Most forget they security is layered based and all area's of vulnerability need to be addressed. | mevande (12008) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 | |||||