New Poll: What Security Protection Do You Use On Your Wireless Router?
May 5th, 2008
13 Comments
Written by Ashley
The burning question of the week last week was 64-bit vs. 32-bit, which do you use? The results are in and here’s what we found:
- 39% of you are using 32-bit Windows XP
- 26% of you are using 32-bit Windows Vista
- 16% of you are using 64-bit Windows Vista
- 6% of you are using 64-bit Windows XP
- 6% of you are using 32-bit Linux
- 5% of you are using 64-bit Linux
In the end, the majority of you are still 32-bit Windows users whether it be that you’re running XP or Vista.
Next up, we’re wondering what kinds of security protection you use on your wireless router. We all know that not securing a wireless router exposes your computer to security risks, so it’s one of those important things that you should do.
What security protection methods do you use on your wireless router?
- WEP
- WPA
- WPA2
- I don’t use security
- I don’t know
- Other
You can either cast your vote below if you have Flash enabled, or you can vote in the sidebar.
Enjoyed the post? Subscribe to our feed to get a daily dose of CyberNet!
Related Posts:
- Default Router Passwords Expose Users to External Attacks, Duh!
- My Review: Linksys WRT54GX2 Wireless MIMO SRX200 Router
- LifeHacker Shows You How To Hack Your Linksys Router
- PC Manufacturers Embrace 64-Bit Vista
- Huge List Of Default Passwords For Routers
I use WEP but will soon be changing it to WPA. Unfortunately not all my devices support WPA2.
Well I use WEP with MAC filter for wireless devices, and you can only log on to my router (the web based configuration) via hardwire no wireless device is allowed.
Only reason to run WEP nowadays is if you have devices that don’t support anything better.
Otherwise, you should use at least WPA with a long and random passphrase.
You should not bother with hiding SSID’s and MAC filtering.
Need to use WEP…Nintendo, for whatever reason, decided the DS shouldn’t use WPA.
WPA2 personal!
Using WEP because of some hardware not supporting anything better. Besides this I’m hiding my SSID and using MAC filtering. I’m wondering why Dave said we should not bother with the latter, as it’s an added security measure. Anything can be hacked, but I figure the more security the better (and the least attractive to use my network compared to other networks).
I’d like to use WPA2, but I voted WPA. Not all the devices on my network support WPA2… not a hardware issue, it’s a ‘user won’t update their drivers’ issue
. Unfortunately I can’t just lock them out.
I should have been more clear. I meant if you’re using WPA and better, then don’t bother with the two. But if you’re using WEP then it’s probably a good idea to layer the security even though every one of those security measures can be bypassed.
SSID hiding and MAC filtering are even more easily bypassed than WEP itself and aren’t considered good security measures because they’re so weak and they are so inconvenient to use.
But if there are several networks around, are you going to try and hack the WEP, or go for the unsecured? Some security is better than none.
Same here. I really wanted to use WPA2 but my wireless printer doesn’t support it.
I used to have the MAC filtering enabled, but it really doesn’t do much since you can sniff out wireless MAC address pretty easily. Being able to only configure it via a hardwire is smart though.
Huh, that’s interesting. Even the Wii supports WPA.
Definitely true. But it depends on whether the hacker wants to access data/passwords that are being sent over the network. If that’s the main goal then they would likely go after any and all available networks.
So 40% of Vista users are running 64-bit. So why to talk about it like a strange thing anymore because this year it is going to take the lead
I just noticed my router can be set to use WPA2-PSK with an option to make it compatible with WPA. I wonder what that means.. WPA2 for devices that support it, WPA for those which don’t?
Yup, I’m pretty sure that’s how the mixed support works.