Wireless security, Wep or WPA-PSK

[kevin63]

Just wondered which you guys and gals would recommend for wireless router protection, as above, Wep or WPA-PSK.

[stemll]

WPA-PSK if all your kit supports it.

WEP is too fragile to even consider unless you have to.

[Tycho]

What ^^^^^ said. Also try and implement MAC address filtering if poss. Not uncrackable but it will possibly make someone look at the next network rather than try and get into yours.

[MiniMac]

Don't even bother with WEP. WPA-PSK and a good strong key. You should notice someone trying to crack it, they will be there for ages (generally).

Anyone know whether the DS supports WPA now?

[tfm]

Turn off broadcasting your SSID to stop people seeing your router in the first place. You'll have to manually configure your wireless settings when you do this though.
WPA-PSK is most secure when used with a long random key.

[FunkyNige]

WEP is pointless, most people who want to crack it can crack it by just spending 5 mins on Google.
MAC address filtering plus hiding the SSID is the way to go.

[bga]

FunkyNige said:

WEP is pointless, most people who want to crack it can crack it by just spending 5 mins on Google.
MAC address filtering plus hiding the SSID is the way to go.

finding hidden SSID is piece of cake, IMO the risk/PITA balance isn't worth hiding it if you have WPA-PSK & MAC address filtering. Can also restrict the IP range on the router if appropriate

[stemll]

bga said:

finding hidden SSID is piece of cake, IMO the risk/PITA balance isn't worth hiding it if you have WPA-PSK & MAC address filtering. Can also restrict the IP range on the router if appropriate

Maybe so spoofing a MAC and/or IP address is easy too so why do that?

It's all a matter of making your network less attractive than the one next door. Same priciple as with useless steering-wheel locks; might be easy to break but if the car parked next to it doesn't have one then that's even easier. I also accept that the more security there is the more attractive it can become because of the "what have they got that's worth protecting?" mentality.

If you're going to filter MAC addresses, use PSK and restrict the IP range (presumably allocating static IPs to MAC addresses too) then why not hide the SSID? It's one more tick box on the router setup.

[kevin63]

All changed to WPA-PSK thanks.

[bga]

stemll said:

If you're going to filter MAC addresses, use PSK and restrict the IP range (presumably allocating static IPs to MAC addresses too) then why not hide the SSID? It's one more tick box on the router setup.

I wouldn't do it because it's a pain to have to manually configure the SSID on some of the devices I have on my network. For me the impracticality of having to do that negates any perceived increase in security that obscuring the SSID would achieve.

WPA is enough to deter casual browsing, anyone that will have a crack at WPA will find spoofing a MAC or finding the SSID simple enough anyway IMO.

[stemll]

bga said:

WPA is enough to deter casual browsing, anyone that will have a crack at WPA will find spoofing a MAC or finding the SSID simple enough anyway IMO.

Indeed.