Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

6 Burning Questions About Wireless Networks

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the i-think-that-might-be-stds dept.

alphadogg writes "Answers to wireless network questions such as: What impact will 802.11n have? Which wireless security threats are scariest? What of wireless VoIP? Will your organization need to change to support enterprise mobility? How do you control costs in an expanding mobile and wireless environment? What can you do to stop wireless denial-of-service attacks?"

7 of 201 comments (clear)

  1. My question by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here's my question. When are router manufacturers going to start requiring people to use WPA security? I got a Wii a couple weeks ago, and used the wireless part of my wireless router for the first time. Setup of WPA was very easy. I also found about 5 other open networks that I could have connected my Wii to. I find it amazing that people are leaving their connections open when setting up a secure connection is so easy.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    1. Re:My question by dattaway · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Those open connections are just part of the redundancy of the internet. And the next time RIAA come knocking on our door, we just point fingers again.

    2. Re:My question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Require? Why the hell should they 'require' it? I can see turning it on be default, but no way should it be required.

      I choose to share my wireless with anyone who might need to connect to check their mail etc. I VPN from my laptop to my OpenBSD gateway to keep my own work encrypted, and also allow access my wired home server.

      I use the packet filter to ensure I get first dibs on traffic, but any spare bandwidth is open for others to use as the need.

      Having it on by default is good. Having it required is not.

    3. Re:My question by c_woolley · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I agree. I also think we should point out the number of people that simply do not understand what they are doing or what is needed to secure a wireless connection. My mom is fairly tech-savvy for an older (I hope like hell she doesn't read this) woman. She understands quite a bit more than the average user. She was new to wireless connections, and decided to give it a try. When she called me to ask if there was anything to do besides plugging the provider's connection to her router, she was surprised when I told her she needed to secure it. She assumed (as someone else had already mentioned in a later post) that security was enabled by default. I walked her through the process without any problems, but it still remains that she did not know that enabling security was required. I asked her why she didn't figure it was needed and why wouldn't she feel that anyone could connect if the wireless connection. It didn't ask her for a password or some type of authentication, her computer was able to get to the Internet. Wouldn't that mean Joe Anyone could get there through her connection too. Her answer was simple, and yet effective. "Well, when I plugged my computer into my old router, it never asked me for a password either...smartass." And there is the answer. People are used to not having to secure their physical connections. If they do, it is usually much worse a situation for the average user, since their home is probably being burglarized at the same time. Now, it isn't the same situation for everyone. Some people know fully well that they need to secure their connections, and just don't. Call it lazy or whatever, maybe they just don't care enough or don't think their information is worth stealing. I have even run into one man who opened his connection up so that his neighbors could surf on his dime. He paid for a 12Mb connection and only used the Internet to surf the news. He didn't care that his neighbors were playing World of Warcraft or other online games. As long as his connection to the news was good, so was he. I suppose the bottom line is that there are reasons for everyone. Increasing some people's knowledge about it can help, others may just not care. Either way, I'll still be able to sit at home and open up my network connections and see unsecured networks. It's on me to decide whether or not to take advantage...and on my neighbors to figure out why they have to rebuild their systems every two weeks (just kidding).

    4. Re:My question by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Corrolary question, when will they give me a wireless security setup that matches what I want.

      I want to share about 30-40Kpbs and have intelligent performance algorithms managing the rest, I want to have my transmissions encrypted while allowing others to SHARE my web-access. (I know that's a big word, like "communist").

      When we move to 802.11n (Assuming the same number of wireless routers as currently exist there will be almost 80-90% coverage in urban areas, why would I need a cell phone if we all shared, how about intelligent sharing between networks as a mesh? Once we overflow the casual bandwidth limits we can stop dealing with this "expensive last mile" crap and start getting isolated fibre channels.

      My computer is secure, my internet access is mostly encrypted or tunneled, but I don't have access everywhere for affordable prices, I don't think security and sharing have to be mutually exclusive.

  2. Is 802.11n more reliable? by jonnyj · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The article seems to assume that 802.11n offers so much more bandwidth that no-one will bother with ethernet any more. Unless the new standard is less susceptible to neighbouring networks, that's just not the case

    18 months ago I set up a MythTV setup based around an 802.11g wireless network and, at first, it worked flawlessly - two clients and the server could simultaneously stream TV to/from the router. Then my neighbours started using own networks in anger and the bandwidth available to me gradually dissolved.

    Now my network can't come close to supporting one streaming device. Even surfing the net wirelessly is painful, with regular 2-3 second dropouts when the whole street hits the airwaves simultaneously. I've long since given up on wifi and switched to homeplug.

    I'm not alone. Most people I know who live in densely populated areas have the same problem. Does 802.11n suffer from the same problems? I imagine that the increased range will just lead to increased contention when its popularity increases. I'm not about to buy it.

    1. Re:Is 802.11n more reliable? by CallFinalClass · · Score: 5, Interesting
      N suffers from all these problems.

      Let me be more specific - 2.4 GHz N suffers from all of these problems. For now, I expect the 5 GHz N implementations to be in much better shape.

      Tip of the hat to Apple for making all of their N gear 5 GHz capable.

      Wag of the finger to just about everyone else for making their stuff 2.4 Ghz only, likely for backwards compatibility and cost savings.