Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: Which Is the Safest Router?

MindPrison writes: As ashamed as I am to admit it -- a longtime computer user since the Commodore heydays, I've been hacked twice recently and that has seriously made me rethink my options for my safety and well-being. So, I ask you dear Slashdot users, from one fellow longtime Slashdotter to another: which is the best router for optimal safety today?

386 comments

  1. The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The unplugged one.
    That's optimal safety, and minimal usability.
    Your question is ill-defined anyways.

    1. Re: The safest router is... by benedictaddis · · Score: 4, Informative

      I like Draytek routers. They have decent security and get updates for years, at a price thatâ(TM)s not cheap but not crazy either. If cost is an issue, install OpenWRT on any old router.

    2. Re:The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      The Russians are the experts in this. I'd buy one from them.

    3. Re: The safest router is... by saloomy · · Score: 5, Informative

      I like using Linux boxes with packet-forwarder turned on in the kernel, and using either IPTables or firewalld, depending on your flavor. I then use my "router" to serve me web content and handle my VPN for me while I'm away from home. Oh, and I would highly recommend something like this: tiny PC with multiple 1GB NIC ports, Wifi, BT, etc... so you can have a WAN and a LAN port. It is easier to configure it this way.

    4. Re: The safest router is... by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Mikrotik are also offering SOHO routers loaded with features. One needs to know how to configure them though.
      The hAP is a really neat box.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    5. Re: The safest router is... by misnohmer · · Score: 5, Interesting

      A self made/installed Linux box probably the least secure solution for most people. Unless you really know how to secure and lock down your Linux box AND keep it up to date on weekly basis, your "router" is far from secure. There are few people who really know what they're doing in this domain. Just because you can't hack it, doesn't mean it's safe. Misconfiguration is the most common cause for security holes (do you really know each and every piece of software you have running on it, every kernel module, driver, server, etc?), but even if you do manage to lock it down, security vulnerabilities in Linux and other open source software that Linux uses are discovered all the time and need to be patched fast as scripts exploiting them come just as fast. It's a full time job to keep a Linux box secured on the open internet.

    6. Re:The safest router is... by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 3, Funny

      The unplugged one.

      Not necessarily.

      You should always follow safety practices appropriate for each type of tool.

    7. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a cinderblock, a real cinderblock

    8. Re: The safest router is... by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wrong. Worst would be any windows solutions. Linux starts in a fairly secure and most are minimalist fashion. However, misconfigure and behind on updates can change that quickly. Just like on any router.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    9. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Most home "routers" are just embedded Linux devices running BusyBox. If you think the manufacturers are keeping them up to date, and are configuring securely, you are very wrong. Most semi-technical users are better off learning Linux and running their own. Iptables isn't hard for a basic home network.

    10. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bad idea, refer to Vault 7 leaks...this was one of the brands heavily targeted, horrible patching, avoid altogether or get hacked again.

    11. Re:The safest router is... by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      Is Latvia close enough?

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    12. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, the same vault 7 where for the exploit to work the default firewall had to be turned off. And it was a single exploit only, already fixed.

      Do you know whatâ(TM)s super easy on mikrotik routers - you send me a packet I did not ask for, you get dropped for 24 hours. Good luck with that.

    13. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No shit Sherlock! In other news, water is wet.

    14. Re:The safest router is... by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 1

      The unplugged one.

      Not necessarily.

      You should always follow safety practices appropriate for each type of tool.

      LMFAO.... More proof that even an unplugged router can cause serious pain and misery in the wrong hands.

      --
      Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    15. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? Slashdot users aren't like "most people".
      Keeping Linux secured on the open internet is not a full-time job. On most days, it'll be exactly 0 minutes of work.

    16. Re: The safest router is... by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      And your own install of a typical linux distro running on generic hardware will actually have updates available and easily installable, the same can't be said of the ancient embedded linux found on a typical cheap router.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    17. Re: The safest router is... by Bert64 · · Score: 0

      So if i send you packets you did not ask for which are spoofed from the ip addresses of google, slashdot etc, you will drop all traffic from those places too? Well done...

      Meanwhile someone who's trying to hack you probably has (or can get) access to thousands of random boxes, doesn't matter if you block some of the source ips as he has thousands more.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    18. Re: The safest router is... by RandomFactor · · Score: 2

      It's the days where it requires five minutes of work and you put in 0 that get you.

      --
      --- Mercutio was right.
    19. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      misnohmer what kind of router do you use @ home?

    20. Re: The safest router is... by saloomy · · Score: 1

      If someone owns my Linux box, not all is lost. My computers are independently secure. Plus there are plenty of guides and man pages. All one has to do is read, and it is a great learning exercise. I typically install fail2ban, since I have access from outside, and since I'm running a fedora variant, I cron yum updates. I am on the Kernel-ML path, so my kernels are pretty up to date, but I reboot it only on Monday mornings to mitigate outages when it's inconvenient.

      I beg to differ. It is much less secure to "trust" the closed routers than to know what you are running, given that you can read. I do know what mods and software versions I am running, I know what's exposed to what, but you DEFINITELY don't know what's running in your "off the shelf at Fry's" router. Those don't self update, and they get owned, prricipatenin botnets, run back doors, and may even have spyware running on them. No thanks.

    21. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I completely disagree, a good minimal install of Linux is a good secure option. Its not too hard to configure correctly ,maybe someone needs to put together a utility to make it easier. The weekly updates furthermore are a must have and the lack of it is a major weakness of routers. In the past having to dedicate a full PC to this could be expensive and bulky, and routers that you can easily install your own OS on were hard to come by. I think with some linksys routers you can install your own OS.

    22. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good thing tcp doesnâ(TM)t work like that.

    23. Re: The safest router is... by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's a bit of a personal-taste thing, but I rather like my Bosch 1617EV. I've also heard good things about the Porter-Cable 690LR. Neither have ever been hacked, to the best of my knowledge.

    24. Re: The safest router is... by skids · · Score: 1

      a good minimal install of Linux is a good secure option

      It is, whether a normal install or a WRT-based. The big problem is keeping it minimal. Distributions are founded all the time with an aim to be minimal and the same thing happens... a few years later their coming "out of the box" so to speak with crap like avahi-daemon running and dozens of open ports for different flavors of media servers and whatnot.

      weekly updates furthermore are a must have and the lack of it is a major weakness of routers

      Anything that needs weekly attention is running too much features/code. On a router you want to keep your attack surface area so low that you're really only exposing a few very simple and well worn services. If you are dealing with more than one effective exploit every year or two, you're running something you shouldn't be running on a router. In addition, it is not uncommon for "updates" to secretly enable new features without explaining their security implications or introduce bugs that didn't used to exist (e.g. the whole Cisco Smart Install debacle.) If you're doing it right, you'll read the bug reports and 95% of them will not affect you because you disabled that ridiculous feature, 4% will be "well, glad I haven't updated in two years and my software is too old to have that", and if you are lucky the 1% of things that might actually get you can be worked around with just a config adjustment. Upgrades are for the unlucky days, actual need for new features, or when you just can't psychologically live with yourself for running a 7 year old software load.

      As to TFA, since you have hacking chops, the biggest thing you can do improve your security is the thing nobody does because it is inconvenient: isolate your management interfaces on a separate hardware port and plug in by wire when you need to make any administrative changes. The second biggest thing you can do is start with a router that blocks everything and then painstakingly figure out precisely what packets need to be allowed in, out, and across that router, and permit only exactly those packets (hint: ICMP is actually kinda important.)

    25. Re: The safest router is... by molarmass192 · · Score: 1

      Ha, nice one! You probably went over 95% of the people on Slashdot's heads though. Not exactly the wood-shop crowd hanging out here.

      --

      Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
    26. Re: The safest router is... by yurikhan · · Score: 1

      A machine with two Ethernet ports can be called a "router" only in a very narrow sense. Pretty much the only kind of routing you can do with those is "192.168.0.0/24 dev eth0; 0.0.0.0/0 via xx.yy.zz.ww dev eth1". (Well, and any VPNs that go over your primary WAN connection.) Your provider goes down, you are stranded on land for the next day or three.

      I would like one LAN and at least two independent WAN ports. Three is better. In an inexpensive compact form factor.

    27. Re: The safest router is... by dromgodis · · Score: 1

      While possibly unhacked, I am not sure that a router of that kind could be classified as safe.

    28. Re: The safest router is... by Hallux-F-Sinister · · Score: 1

      This is basically where I was going to go. I wasn't going to name specific models, I was just going to point out that the only way a handheld model could be made safe is if it were designed to stop the bit abruptly if either hand were removed from either handle. (Some people think they can safely handle one one-handed, but those people are idiots, given the thing has a blade on it spinning at like, what is it, 30,000 rpm? Something like that?) I've never seen a router with this safety feature, come to think of it, but they should all have it. Only able to run with both hands holding the handles on either side. This is because the bit is spinning very rapidly and also they're quite torquey, if I recall correctly. It's been a while since I've handled one.

      --
      Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
    29. Re: The safest router is... by kosmosik · · Score: 2

      OpenWRT is great when paired with hardware which is supported well. But saying that OpenWRT installation "on any old router" will be secure is bullshit. Only few routers are well supported by OpenWRT. Most of the routers are poorly supported - poorly as in no updates for ages, software no stable. How this is secure?

    30. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ask and ye shall receive.

      Put pfsense on this:
      https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/m.aliexpress.com/item/32598483952.html

    31. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Draytek vulnerability alert :

      https://twitter.com/GossiTheDog/status/997410290869432320

    32. Re: The safest router is... by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      Palm routers are technically meant for one-handed use, but I definitely wouldn't run a full-size one with one hand. I'm also not convinced a palm router is that useful unless you're hand-carrying a bag of tools around and the weight is an issue. In addition, as you say, they'd be much more risky than a full-size one, you'd want to at least wear good-quality cut-resistant gloves in your free hand. Not sure how those would fare against a router blade, but the performance against standard blades is pretty impressive, and they could turn any contact at all, resulting in a nasty flesh wound, into maybe a bad bruise.

      In terms of the hands-off safety feature, I don't know how well that would work in practice, you'd have to couple it with a load sensor so it'd only stop the motor if the router was actually cutting and you removed your hands, otherwise it'd cut out every time you took a hand away to scratch your nose or adjusted the workpiece or whatever.

    33. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry to disagree but my Asus Router gets firmware updates all the time. They are easy to setup and maintain.

      -Geekpoet

    34. Re: The safest router is... by Chrontius · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So what the fuck do I give my 98 year old grandfather?

      I'm going to be blamed for any failures, including the failure to deliver a solution in a timely fashion.

    35. Re: The safest router is... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Wrong. Worst would be any windows solutions.

      Why? There are petty few Windows related security issues that don't exploit some part of the user mode. Out of the box Windows comes with firewalls galore, and most services including filesharing disabled. It automatically updates. It automatically reboots too :-). Without a user to spam the UAC control box or surf porn sites on internet explorer Windows itself is actually pretty damn secure.

      It's just so damn hard to convince people to leave it that way.

      Now let's flip it around. Linux has a 90% market share and Windows has 2% of experts using it. You can't honestly say that half the computer users won't have logged in as root, and chmod 777 -r * because something didn't work.

      Linux's biggest fault is it gives you so much rope you can hang yourself. It's biggest success is that most people currently picking up that rope understand that if they put it around their neck it is bad for them.

    36. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Er, that final point is exactly why the safety sensors are needed: those times you take your hand away are the times you lose control and suffer an accident.

    37. Re: The safest router is... by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      OpenWRT is great when paired with hardware which is supported well. But saying that OpenWRT installation "on any old router" will be secure is bullshit. Only few routers are well supported by OpenWRT. Most of the routers are poorly supported - poorly as in no updates for ages, software no stable. How this is secure?

      Would you have any links to info on which are the best hardware to OpenWRT combinations?

      I've long wanted to try this stuff, but would be helpful if I could start out on the right foot compatibility wise....

      Thanks in advance!!

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    38. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would recommend waiting a few more years. Your problem has a good chance of passing away.

    39. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      98 years old shouldn't use computer, silly you.

    40. Re: The safest router is... by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 2

      If you want to use a self-made box, a much better idea is to run software that is dedicated to being a router such as pfSense or OPNsense (a fork of pfSense; both are forks of the now-unsupported m0n0wall). They're based on FreeBSD. Either of those should be as secure as any of the open source software for dedicated router hardware (DD-WRT, OpenWRT, Tomato, etc) and will have more features. They're both fully open source. The companies that develop them make money by selling support contracts and pre-configured hardware, but you can also install them on your own hardware.

    41. Re:The safest router is... by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Basically the same as my answer, which was going to be, "The safest router is the one known as an 'air gap'!" Security and getting useful work done are two constraints that will always be at odds with each other.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    42. Re: The safest router is... by pincorrect · · Score: 1

      I have a 690. It's great, but I wouldn't say it's always safe. I have a few bits that give it a huge twist when you start it, even with two hands. I've been meaning to buy or make a table for it, which will help, especially when using bigger 1/2" shank edging bits.

    43. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I came here to say something similar. pfSense is "hardened" by default and is a purpose built firewall distribution. It has a nice pretty GUI that isn't even that hard to figure out as well.

      Being FreeBSD based, hardware support is a bit limited (if you want a wifi adapter, you're pretty much SOL, I got around this by simply plugging in an AP though) but it will run on the most minimal of hardware, and virtualizes really well.

    44. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As I recall, it took them a few months to roll out a patch for KRACK or whatever it was called. Still, I really like my RT-AC3200. I installed it in the basement on the wall, and I can usually connect to it almost half a block away, and have full strength on the second floor.

      My only WiFi issue stems from my shitty LG TV which just can't maintain a connection. It's a known problem that stupid me didn't bother to research before making a purchase. The official suggestion from LG is to "make sure your wireless router is within three feet of your TV" and they don't appear to be joking.

      Anyway, yeah. I'll take an ASUS router over any other consumer wireless product every damn time.

    45. Re:The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a pretty lame response, at least the latter portion of your "answer". You sound like Sheldon from Big Bang; therefore, the assumption must be made that you don't know the answer either. I cannot answer the question as to the best router either. I have a late model TP-Link router and I use general security measures and have never been hacked (to this point), but I don't have the experience a good network admin would have to answer the question. Stand aside and let someone with real-world experience answer.

    46. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If we are talking about morons that chmod 777 everything, then there is nothing we could do to help them keep a secure box. This is true even if they install a windows router. As the gp said, misconfiguration is the problem, but this also applies to windows installs. I have never seen someone that actually chmods stuff before asking if it's a good ideea. People are pretty good at figuring out if something is too complex for them and go around asking questions, especially the people that need/want a secure router and use slashdot. MS shills everywhere...

    47. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Merlin is a very devoted developer, you can install his asuswrt builds and still have nat accel(eg hardware nat, eg gigabit over WAN). he takes care of porting over both features and fixes to his firmware.

    48. Re: The safest router is... by Thumper_SVX · · Score: 1

      Be wary though; the J1900 in that box doesn't support AES-NI. While PfSense will work great on it today, the next major release is going to require those instructions. Something like this would work better for PfSense past version 2.5.

    49. Re: The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a reacharound

  2. Router? by Scutter · · Score: 2

    Not trying to be overly pedantic here, but do you mean firewall? Routers aren't necessarily security devices.

    --

    "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
    1. Re:Router? by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Many routers let you add rules for various packet types and features, which can add security.

    2. Re:Router? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... which means the router has firewall capabilities.

    3. Re: Router? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or if money AI a thing, I'd recommend a Palo Alto pa-200 with global protect / traps license with the wild fire and threat detection with the ssl decryption using self signed certs. ( Might need a pa-500 for this)

    4. Re:Router? by Riceballsan · · Score: 2

      Don't all routers pretty much have to have some level of firewall capabilities. A dumb out of the box router with zero configuration... pretty much by default will prevent any external traffic from connecting to your PC.

    5. Re:Router? by un1nsp1red · · Score: 2

      Not trying to be overly pedantic here, but wtf does OP mean in the first place by "I've been hacked twice"? Someone accessed one of his machines (the Commodore?) on the inside of his firewall through a regular ISP connection? Did someone "hack" into his Nest thermostat? If you don't understand basic equipment and security, I'm guessing you didn't find out you were "hacked" through a routine audit.

    6. Re: Router? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, you are confusing NAT with a firewall

      Two complimentary but different techs

    7. Re:Router? by aphelion_rock · · Score: 1

      A "secure" router won't help you. What does "hacked twice recently" actually mean?

      Quite possibly this person means like the vulnerability in this router:
      https://nakedsecurity.sophos.c...

      "We described a flaw that allowed attackers to force your router to open up its administration interface to the internet, something you would never normally do."
      Port forward every port you need to attack the host on the inside and go for it.

    8. Re:Router? by msauve · · Score: 1

      Yep, although he certainly doesn't have a firewall - just a cheap NAT gateway.

      And the whole thing about calling such cheap Internet NAT gateways, "routers", really needs to stop (not to mention when they're combined with 802.11 AP functionality). The vast majority of consumer ones can't even run a routing protocol, not even ancient RIP. Unless the user is an idiot and opens up incoming holes, they're almost good enough. Their vulnerabilities mostly lie in management weaknesses which allow them to be compromised from the outside so an attacker can open holes.

      I use a Juniper SRX (cheap on eBay!), but there are others which can provide enterprise class security. But configuring one isn't for a typical consumer, I've been doing networking professionally for 35+ years. Unfortunately, the vast majority of consumer NAT gateways are built to a price point, are based on chip maker reference designs/software and little else, and real security is only a minor afterthought. There's a market opportunity - no one AFAIK really makes a truly secure router/gateway for unsophisticated users.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    9. Re:Router? by jon3k · · Score: 1

      If it's moving packets between networks it's a router. If it does NAT as well it's doing more than a router is required to do to be called a router. Running a dynamic routing protocol isn't a requirement for being a router, that's why static routes exist.

    10. Re:Router? by msauve · · Score: 1

      You're being (less than) pedantic. If you really want to be pedantic with regards to IP, it's a gateway. In practice, it's neither a router nor a gateway in correct, modern terms.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    11. Re:Router? by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      To keep up with the pedantry, do the author need a "safe" or a "secure" router?
      A secure router is one that cannot be easily taken over by hackers. A safe router is one that won't burst into flames.

    12. Re:Router? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are absolutely trying to be overly pedantic, and you succeeded. You know damn well what they meant, but congratulations on showing everyone how smart you are.

    13. Re:Router? by dcollins117 · · Score: 1

      Why not throw caution to the wind and recommend one that is both safe and secure.

    14. Re:Router? by arth1 · · Score: 2

      ... which means the router has firewall capabilities.

      In the same way as a shoe has mallet capabilities.
      If you route UDP packets to 192.42.112.1/21 to a sink, or don't allow protocol 9 packets to traverse between internal and external networks, that adds security, but it does not make it a firewall.

    15. Re:Router? by swillden · · Score: 1

      Not trying to be overly pedantic here, but do you mean firewall? Routers aren't necessarily security devices.

      But they can become massive security problems if they're compromised.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    16. Re:Router? by Baton+Rogue · · Score: 1
      router

      A router is a networking device that forwards data packets between computer networks. Routers perform the traffic directing functions on the Internet. A data packet is typically forwarded from one router to another router through the networks that constitute an internetwork until it reaches its destination node.

      A router is connected to two or more data lines from different networks.[b] When a data packet comes in on one of the lines, the router reads the network address information in the packet to determine the ultimate destination. Then, using information in its routing table or routing policy, it directs the packet to the next network on its journey.

      A Netgear router, forwards packets from your internal, private IP network, onto the public IP network that connects to your ISP. Therefore, it is a router.

    17. Re:Router? by msauve · · Score: 1

      Most of them aren't routers, they're NAT gateways. They won't (and can't be configured to) forward packets without modifying them. And most know nothing about multiple networks, nor to they have any ability to forward packets anywhere but to the next hop in the Internet.

      They're routers in a purely technical sense, they do separate broadcast domains. But calling a Netgear a "router" is like telling someone you own an automobile when it's just a toy Barbie car.

      Don't rely on Wikipedia for technical info.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    18. Re:Router? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have a Nest thermostat, you deserve to be hacked.

      OP probably got hacked after following a link emailed to him by "his bank" about an issue with his account, and he was hoping the money from that Nigerian prince finally got wired in.

    19. Re:Router? by jon3k · · Score: 1

      They're routers in a purely technical sense, they do separate broadcast domains.

      Sure, but a switch separates broadcast domains, too. That's not a defining characteristic of a router. The difference is that a router (and layer 3 switches, etc) separates layer 3 networks.

      Don't rely on Wikipedia for technical info.

      Who's definition of router are you using?

    20. Re:Router? by msauve · · Score: 1

      "a switch separates broadcast domains, too."

      No, it doesn't. A bridge (a switch is just a multi-port bridge) separates collision domains. Broadcasts are flooded by switches.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    21. Re:Router? by jon3k · · Score: 1

      A layer 2 switch does not, you're correct, a layer 3 switch does.

      And again, what definition of router are you using?

    22. Re:Router? by msauve · · Score: 1

      Stop trying to learn networking from Wikipedia. "Layer 3 switch" is nothing but market-speak for something which does wirespeed routing (usually combined with L2 multiport bridging, AKA switching). And mostly, that's only for IP.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  3. Go Enterprise - Juniper SRX300 by kunwon1 · · Score: 1

    Can get one for $200 or less if you shop around

    Number one feature: No upnp available on the device

    --
    Specialization is for insects. -Heinlein
    1. Re:Go Enterprise - Juniper SRX300 by Kenja · · Score: 2

      Can get one for $200 or less if you shop around

      This is what I did, HOWEVER you are miss-representing the cost as you must also get a license and a support contract to keep it up to date.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    2. Re:Go Enterprise - Juniper SRX300 by iamgnat · · Score: 1

      Can get one for $200 or less if you shop around

      This is what I did, HOWEVER you are miss-representing the cost as you must also get a license and a support contract to keep it up to date.

      Depends on your level of comfort really. I got a 210B when they first came out and a 4 year contract. When that expired I didn't re-up as the only time I tried to use it was a waste (the community actually got me an answer before the Juniper tech could even grasp the problem...). After really borking the config once I picked up a 210HE to replace it and then I could use the 210B as my test bed for major changes and a backup if the HE failed.

      I went with the SRX (from dd-wrt) as I am not a networking person, but wanted to learn. It was a good experience and I'm glad I did it, but I got tired of fiddling with it and have recently switched to ubnt.com gear. 80% of the functionality, but much easier to manage.

  4. PEBCAK by sexconker · · Score: 5, Informative

    A "secure" router won't help you. What does "hacked twice recently" actually mean?

    1. Re:PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is a critical question - in what way was your system compromised? What vulnerability was exploited that allowed someone to access your machine? No single firewall or router can prevent all forms of compromise.

    2. Re:PEBCAK by GerryGilmore · · Score: 0

      Thanks! There are so many unanswered details about this "question" and the premise - all I need is a great router to be safe from hacking! - is obviously wrong on SO many levels.

    3. Re:PEBCAK by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      I also find it hard to believe just any person would get hacked. Is this actually a common thing, that an anonymous individual would have a high speed internet connection with a proper firewall not open to vulnerable software would get 'hacked' on multiple occasions? Perhaps there is something about this person that is making them a target, and the solution is to stop doing that. If you have ports open, take a good look at the software. Use non-standard ports if you have to. That kind of thing.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    4. Re:PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm guessing it means downloading of pron is involved.

    5. Re:PEBCAK by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 1

      Thanks! There are so many unanswered details about this "question" and the premise - all I need is a great router to be safe from hacking! - is obviously wrong on SO many levels.

      Start digging around and he's a torrent tracker, running a web/mail/DNS server with convenient telnet access and all sorts of yummy customer data... LOL

      (I don't know if that's what he's securing, or the nature of the "hacking", very good questions...)

      BUT, the nature of the question remains good.

      Based on the nature of Slashdot, we can assume his home network is already a little more sophisticated than the typical person who assumes WiFi=Internet, and if he's been online since the Commodore days (whether Amiga 4000 or Commodore PET with an acoustic modem), he's already a much more tech-savvy than the average.

      Someone with mechanical aptitude, even if they know nothing about cars, will have a pretty good idea that the sound of a bad front wheel bearing is a Very Bad Thing. Someone with no mechanical aptitude or experience will drive blithely along until the front wheel breaks off and flies through someone else's windshield.

      So, I second the question for my own purposes. I serve a web and ssh server behind a dynamic DNS solution. I do not want my firewall machine to live on the same machine as the server, and since electricity is fiendishly expensive here in Ontario (thank you, Ontario Liberals) I cannot afford to run a separate full host as a firewall, but a commodity router flashed with custom firmware as NAT and firewall.

      This question is therefore useful to me; my own solution seems to have worked fine thus far, but I would be happy to improve on it if anyone has any better ideas. Improving Internet security is good not just for me, but for the whole rest of the world.

      --
      Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    6. Re:PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm more concerned about the editor posting this, which is obviously wrong on SO many levels...

      Then I clicked on his twitter link... How does a person like this get a job approving content for slashdot.. man I knew it was bad, but just didn't realize how bad it was, but this place has really gone downhill

    7. Re:PEBCAK by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Most likely they just got infected with some random malware...

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    8. Re:PEBCAK by Excelcia · · Score: 5, Informative

      How about you stop being pedantic on what the background information means, and either helpfully answer the (fairly easy to understand) question or decide you have nothing useful to add to the conversation and not try to. The people who think they are clever by second guessing Ask Slashdot questions get rather annoying in short order.

      I actually came to this question with some amount of actual curiosity. I used to build Linux firewalls for small businesses. This was back before routers were appliances. When NAT was still "IP Masquerading" on Linux, and it was actually a dirty word because it let you "share" internet connections when the early cable modem providers wanted to sell you an IP address for every computer using the connection. I moved on to process control and automation work, project management, and then switched tracks into the Navy. What relevance is that? The point is, there are lots of people like me who had at one point been heavily invested in the current state of the art who, for some years, haven't had the time or resources to follow current best practices. Ask Slashdot questions like these are actually helpful to those of us who would like the benefit of the experience of those who are still up on the state of the art.

      When you, and those like you, roll in with your clever meta-answers, it helps no one. You and (especially) the five moderators who upvoted your post as "informative" should hang your heads in collective shame.

    9. Re:PEBCAK by GerryGilmore · · Score: 1

      Let's be real.
      First, if your are running ANY variation of: "... a web and ssh server behind a dynamic DNS solution. I do not want my firewall machine to live on the same machine as the server, and since electricity is fiendishly expensive here in Ontario (thank you, Ontario Liberals) I cannot afford to run a separate full host as a firewall, but a commodity router flashed with custom firmware as NAT and firewall." and are blaming "Ontario Liberals" and high energy prices (really?!?), then you've got much bigger problems that what you present. (i.e. pure ideological thinking vs utilitarian - look it up.)

    10. Re:PEBCAK by novakyu · · Score: 1

      I assumed she was hacked with an axe and was wondering why she would think a network router would help her.

    11. Re:PEBCAK by gweihir · · Score: 1

      People continue to look for easy answers, even after it has been made amply clear to them that these do not cut it. The human condition at work...

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    12. Re:PEBCAK by gweihir · · Score: 1

      There is a deluge of attacks coming in to everybody. Network-based, email-based, web-based. Do stupid things, get hacked, initially by some form of attack automation. For example, I have several emails with executable malware attachments per day. Don't do stupid things, and you usually do not get hacked, even if your set-up is not hardened.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    13. Re:PEBCAK by gweihir · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The answer is that the wrong question is being asked. Any other answer is less than helpful and may prompt the one asking the question to continue down the wrong road to solve this problem. The second part of the answer is to ask how this person was actually hacked. Very likely, he did some not-too smart thing and needs to stop doing that in order to solve his problem.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    14. Re: PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      High electricity prices?
      Current Ontario peak rate price is CAD0.132/kWh
      https://www.oeb.ca/rates-and-your-bill/electricity-rates/historical-electricity-rates

      My peak rate (First Utility, UK) is GBP0.204/kWH, which is CAD0.353/kWh!

    15. Re:PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a fake story to generate "debate" on a dying site.

    16. Re:PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Do stupid things, get hacked

      We all are doomed - doomed I tell ye ...

    17. Re:PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sad but true.

    18. Re:PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or just pay the $5/month for hosting and quit violating your contractual terms of service, idiot.

    19. Re:PEBCAK by rastos1 · · Score: 1

      If you were hacked by inserting a rogue USB flash drive or you allow access from world to ssh and use password authentication with weak password then no miraculous router will help you. We just want to validate your claim that the hack was due unsecure router. Misconfigured router or system is much more likely.

    20. Re:PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Amen.

      *Everybody* here understands the actual question. Which router/cablemodem/firewall (which is the same applyance in most cases) is easiest to make secure and *keep* secure.

      I have been researching the answer and came to the depressing conclusion the answer is basically: "NONE".

      Even putting tomato-wrt or dd-wrt or somesuch only gets you so far, they're still not *really* maintained (i.e. security patches on a regular basis).

      Some Synology NAS stations can double as a router I think. I've never owned one, but the release notes on their regular updates tell me the fucntionality must exist in on of their models. That may be you best bet, as the synology OS is actuyally maintained.

      Or what I did. consider the router a lost cause, a sort of a bridgehead of the evil outside world into your home. Don't trust it.

      Put a debian/freebsd running routing/firewalling computer behind it to separate it form your home network (I used a raspberry PI 3, but I don't do gaming so I don't really care about performance here).

      Wireless is a whole other can of worms. I chose to use the wireless from my (untrusted) cablemodem, and treat wireless as a public network. There's no route from wireless to the rest of my network except via VPN (which is only up if my Desktop is turned on, so that's not very practical, but oh well...).

      Each device which connects to wireless has it set to 'public network' or the equivalend. i.e. completely firewalled.

      Every now and then I try to check my cablemodem for signs of pwnage, but as I can't really put a network sniffer between the modem and the cable from my ISP there's only so much I can do. I expect my ISP will probably tell me if the modem (which is their property) starts acting up as a bot.

    21. Re:PEBCAK by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Any semi-technically literate person should be able to investigate an attachment before clicking on it.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    22. Re:PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If power is an issue, use a RPi for your "full host as a firewall". Costs around 30$ and draws ~5 watts from an USB port.

    23. Re:PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have the background you claim, then you should realize there's really not enough information to help this person.

      Ultimately, the answer is build a pfSense box, and load it with intrusion detection capabilities-- but that still won't stop someone in your house from clicking on biggerIsBetter.exe and compromising your entire network.

    24. Re:PEBCAK by sinij · · Score: 1

      How about you stop being pedantic on what the background information means.

      No, this background information is crucial to providing solution. Different router might not be an answer, if for example, the root cause of hacks is his unpatched VPN solution.

    25. Re:PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then I clicked on his twitter link...

      LOL

    26. Re:PEBCAK by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      How about you stop being pedantic on what the background information means, and either helpfully answer the (fairly easy to understand) question or decide you have nothing useful to add to the conversation and not try to.

      Actually he may be the only person so far who has something meaningful to add. *OMG I WAS HACKED HOW DO I STOP* is not an question that anyone can answer without further details. For all anyone knows every solution in this thread right now may have the same holes and present the same risk.

      Asking someone to clarify a question is not about being pedantic. Its the common sense lacking in so many technical people who love jumping to solutions or conclusions without ever considering if the problem actually exists.

      roll in with your clever meta-answers

      Where you saw a clever meta-answer, many people saw a very important question in order to suggest a good solution. But you sound like you're more interested in "state of the art" regardless of what "art" is actually being produced or asked for. Here, have some art: https://www.theguardian.com/ar...

    27. Re:PEBCAK by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      Funny that you haven't provided an answer to OP's question. When I read the question, I thought about how he was hacked. Your response to being hacked depends on the threat model you are trying to contain. Did he click on a bad link that implanted malware? Did he download a virus from a warez site? Did he have weak passwords that compromised his email accounts? The solution to each problem is different. For instance, using user accounts and not admin accounts would help. So would using uOrigin or OpenDNS or other program to block bad links. A virus scanner might be in order if he's getting malware. Heck, he might want to spend money on backup solutions to protect his data! Weak passwords? Two-factor and a password manager. So I understand why more information is needed to provide a good answer.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    28. Re:PEBCAK by jofas · · Score: 1

      You summed up everything I wanted to say. thank you.

    29. Re:PEBCAK by strikethree · · Score: 4, Informative

      While I appreciate your view, there are a few thigns you should be aware of:

      This is Slashdot. Much of the original crowd is pedantic for a reason. The original poster is indeed asking about routers and some people have answered that question directly. Sexconker has identified, correctly, that Mindprison is wanting to not get hacked.

      It is clear that Mindprison is under the impression that a secure "router" would help him not get hacked; however, if that it not what got Mindprison hacked, a more secure router will not help. Sexconker is trying to get to the root of the problem so that actual help can be delivered. Mindprison could buy a recommended router and STILL end up being hacked again. So how would just casually recommending a secure router help in this instance?

      As numerous other folks have pointed out, a router is not defined strictly as a security device. Slashdot has many network and security engineers in its ranks. I am one of them. My first line of thought went exactly as Sexconker's did: How can I actually help this person when they did not fully and accurately, using technical language, explain their problem? So he asked a question that many of us were thinking. (I think Sexconker is a he, I am actually unsure and it really doesn't matter).

      Denigrating him and the mods who modded him up (I was not one as I rarely read Slashdot while logged in anymore) is not terribly useful in this situation. To complicate matters even more, your minor tirade is actually an appropriate response sometimes, but this was not one of those times. Just keep reading other comments and you will still get the immediate type of response that you and Mindprison were looking for.

      Honestly though, Mindprison should have responded to Sexconker's question because then, the actual problem could be identified and addressed.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    30. Re:PEBCAK by MindPrison · · Score: 1

      I haven't answered because I just came home from work, and when I posted the question, it was before my bedtime. I'll answer it now, thanks for your concern.

      --
      What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
    31. Re:PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're gay

    32. Re:PEBCAK by MindPrison · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, I guess I was a little tired, and provided too little information, but I can explain why I kept it short.

      I talked to some of the security guys at work (I work at a HUGE world wide company, I can't disclose who for obvious reasons), and I told them a detailed story, which I didn't tell you.

      They came to the conclusion that the root of my problems was that I used an unsafe router that has been infected, and that the attackers had most likely infected my router and somehow upgraded it with malicious firmware. Therefor they came to the conclusion that I should go and get a much safer router. So my first instinct, tired and a little stressed from it all - was to ask you. I'm not in my 20s anymore, and I'm not as up to code about the hacking possibilities and vulnerabilities as I once was rightfully for my time. Today, I know next to nothing compared to you guys.

      The first time I got hacked:

      Firefox 54: I was visiting a page to get some schematics for some home made remote control system, and I noticed that the browser had all of my CPU threads busy, and the computer became oddly sluggish. I had No-Script installed, ad-blocker and my windows 10 was up to shape with the latest defender database plus latest updates I could possibly download, I always update immediately when it suggests an update.

      I immediately wanted to force stop Firefox so I went to the Task Bar and looked at the processes, oh my goodness - several instances of firefox (hidden windows /popups that aren't immediately visible?) was running, and it was creating more as I watched. I ended up killing all processes, and ran anti malware software (well, windows defender with the latest definitions) and it came out clean, or so I thought.

      Went to bed, and got woken up by my phone with several warnings from my various social media telling me that someone is posting from a different IP address than I normally used, I got out of bed and panicked.

      I immediately changed ALL passwords to hideously long random letter passwords on ALL my services, and went for two factor-authentication on everything I could.

      This stopped the attack on my personal accounts.

      Thinking it all was over, and safe - 3 weeks went by, and all of a sudden when I was working with something on my Linux partition, the computer crashed hard, and it rarely ever does that.

      After that crash, the Bios (or boot menu) was completely garbled. Interestingly enough, so was the bios on my second computer, which was 10 years old, and my new work computer was only a few years old, but with relatively fresh installations of both Linux (on an M.2. NVMe storage) and Windows 10 on an normal SSD storage, totally separated from each other (well, needing 2 different boot menues to access each one).

      I took a memdump of the entire bios, and found that the raw graphics area contained assembly code whereas it should be an image (you can look at the image with raw data image browser/raw graphics dump, it won't look like a clean image, but you can see that there is image data there).

      What I did, is that I reflashed the bios with the help of a separate hardware switch (my mainboard has two bioses, totally hardware separated with a switch), and looking at the manufacturers homepage, they already know that their bios had been comprimised, so they provided a beta patch with ME microcode included as well.

      I told this story to our security guys, and they said the same as someone else in this thread, someone thinks you have something to hide, and they're not script kiddies, you've been targeted - I suggest you start with a badass router, and take it from there, disable all server services in win 10 + remote services like remote registry etc.

      I don't know that much about windows 10. But that's all I know for now. Appreciate all the feedback , you wonderful Slashdotters!

      --
      What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
    33. Re:PEBCAK by strikethree · · Score: 1

      Several people have recommended some good personal firewall/router solutions. Most of them will require some amount of configuration to make secure. The "best" are the ones with custom distributions of Linux or BSD, but of course, those require the most amount of knowledge and time to make the most secure. Try some of the commercial options if you are not wanting to dig deep, but do a port scan of the device after it is installed to ensure that there are no ports open and listening on the Internet facing side.

      I will keep an eye out to see more information about how you were hacked. It sucks feeling violated like that.

      I have worked as a network engineer and I am currently working as a security engineer. With more details, I can help you reduce risk to an acceptable level in general and provide insight into how to avoid having the same thing happen again. Good luck.

      Just so we are on the same page, I was not saying anything negative about your original post/question. I was merely helping someone understand why more information would be useful so they would not perceive the query from Sexconker as immediately unhelpful. Many of those types of questions are frequently unhelpful, but in this case, that is not true.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    34. Re:PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sexconker is a trolling faggot, FTFY

    35. Re:PEBCAK by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Yes, they should. It is not hard. It is just something you need to understand that you need to do and there a lot of literate and educated people fail. They just think they know better than the actual experts and then they get attacked. And, they believe, was then obviously not their fault.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    36. Re:PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I appreciate your view, there are a few thigns you should be aware of:

      This is Slashdot. Much of the original crowd is pedantic for a reason. The original poster is indeed asking about routers and some people have answered that question directly. Sexconker has identified, correctly, that Mindprison is wanting to not get hacked.

      It is clear that Mindprison is under the impression that a secure "router" would help him not get hacked; however, if that it not what got Mindprison hacked, a more secure router will not help. Sexconker is trying to get to the root of the problem so that actual help can be delivered. Mindprison could buy a recommended router and STILL end up being hacked again. So how would just casually recommending a secure router help in this instance?

      As numerous other folks have pointed out, a router is not defined strictly as a security device. Slashdot has many network and security engineers in its ranks. I am one of them. My first line of thought went exactly as Sexconker's did: How can I actually help this person when they did not fully and accurately, using technical language, explain their problem? So he asked a question that many of us were thinking. (I think Sexconker is a he, I am actually unsure and it really doesn't matter).

      Denigrating him and the mods who modded him up (I was not one as I rarely read Slashdot while logged in anymore) is not terribly useful in this situation. To complicate matters even more, your minor tirade is actually an appropriate response sometimes, but this was not one of those times. Just keep reading other comments and you will still get the immediate type of response that you and Mindprison were looking for.

      Honestly though, Mindprison should have responded to Sexconker's question because then, the actual problem could be identified and addressed.

      Once again, someone wrote a huge wall of text explaining the basics of security and why the OP is wrong for not asking a question they might not have even needed answered instead of answering the question that was asked. Yes, there are lots of attack vectors. As you said, this is Slashdot. Maybe the OP knows this already and asked the question they wanted input about? Yes, a router is not strictly a security device. How about limit the answers to routers that ARE security devices?

      Explaining, AGAIN, that the OP didn't ask a question YOU felt was good enough is even less useful than calling out people like you and the mods for doing stupid shit like modding up non-answers and getting so in the weeds that you're entire response is useless. Personally, I came to this thread for some input into routers that handled security well, have low known vulnerabilities, and are quickly and regularly patched. That information would actually help, though not guarantee the OP won't be hacked again. I don't know the specific answers to this right now and don't feel like researching or I'd give some advice but your post literally helps in no way except to discourage and be divisive. You're basically blaming the victim because you think you know what they really need to know better then they do. Maybe you're right but that's not a guarantee. Congrats on coming across like a dick, though.

    37. Re:PEBCAK by MidSpeck · · Score: 1

      Firefox 54: I was visiting a page to get some schematics for some home made remote control system, and I noticed that the browser had all of my CPU threads busy, and the computer became oddly sluggish. I had No-Script installed, ad-blocker and my windows 10 was up to shape with the latest defender database plus latest updates I could possibly download, I always update immediately when it suggests an update.

      I immediately wanted to force stop Firefox so I went to the Task Bar and looked at the processes, oh my goodness - several instances of firefox (hidden windows /popups that aren't immediately visible?) was running, and it was creating more as I watched. I ended up killing all processes, and ran anti malware software (well, windows defender with the latest definitions) and it came out clean, or so I thought.

      Went to bed, and got woken up by my phone with several warnings from my various social media telling me that someone is posting from a different IP address than I normally used, I got out of bed and panicked.

      So the problem is that they are on your computer. A router (by default) isn't going to stop that from calling home and letting them back in. You say the system is all up to date. Assuming that's true, there are three options:
      1) You executed a program that you shouldn't have. It didn't even have to be in Firefox, that's just when you noticed things.
      2) They broke into your router and from there are using a 0-day or unpublished exploit against you (since your OS is all updated.)
      3) Things are misconfigured to allow easy remote access and nothing was actually exploited. This could be at the router level, the computer level, or both.

      You should try and have things set so that even if an attacker is sitting right next to you, connected to the same network, that they will still have a tough time getting in.

      Best of luck with your new router. I think you should take a hard look at your system setup as well.

    38. Re:PEBCAK by strikethree · · Score: 1

      That may or may not be true; however, having an Anonymous Coward saying it gives it about as much weight as ... well, nothing is that lacking in weight.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    39. Re:PEBCAK by strikethree · · Score: 1

      Step aside and let the adults speak. You have no understanding of what is going on here and have no emotional maturity. You are also anonymous, so your opinion means jack and shit.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    40. Re:PEBCAK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very nice comment...this site is suppose to be tech 'helpful'...but, there's always jerks.

  5. The safest router is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    The disconnected one.

  6. Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by thebes · · Score: 4, Informative

    https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/e...

    Just a happy customer. Firewall, VLANs, scheduling, logging, etc. Can't beat the price either.

    1. Re:Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 4, Informative

      Have several and do like them, but buyer beware that you actually need to configure it to be secure and it is just an iptables firewall. The Unifi Security Gateway is supposedly going to offer some intrusion protection services, but I am not aware of the details.

    2. Re:Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by imidan · · Score: 1

      This is the brand I'd like to go for when I replace my current setup (Apple Airport Express). I haven't done enough research on them yet, but my impression is that Ubiquiti could be a great replacement.

    3. Re:Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you follow security researcher, Troy Hunt, he seems to like the AmpliFi line of routers by Ubiquiti. He did do some sponsored stuff for them but he was singing their praises long before they were a sponsor.

    4. Re:Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      They're good for a few hundred megabits. I had one at it was great when I had a 100/20 connections.
      I upgraded to 950/450 and it could only manage ~300Mbit.

    5. Re:Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by thebes · · Score: 1

      I meant to add that the UBNT community is full of people willing to help...perhaps the best asset.

    6. Re:Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by nine-times · · Score: 1

      I don't think I'd name that for "safest" in terms of security. I could be wrong, but I don't remember it having a whole lot of security features, e.g. web filtering, IPS, antivirus scanning.

    7. Re:Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Need to turn on hardware offloading and you get 900-950 Mbps.

    8. Re: Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by peragrin · · Score: 1

      Go usg, switch and access points and cloud controller That's all unifi, and is easy to setup and configure. Edgerouter has more options but less user friendly.

      Unifis real advantage is the access points, and configuration. They are slowly updating usg to edge level of options.

      Owner of edge router, usb8 150 w 1 indoor and 1. Outdoor AP.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    9. Re: Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have wizards built in that put it in secure state to start with.

    10. Re:Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by Foresto · · Score: 1

      If you're willing to learn how to configure a firewall, it's an excellent value.

      Bonus: If you don't like EdgeOS/Vyatta-style configuration, or you simply prefer open source, you can install OpenWRT on this device.

    11. Re:Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by jon3k · · Score: 1

      I'd recommend an EdgeRouter PoE. That's what I'm using now and my speedtests on my 1Gb fiber are >900Mb/s.

    12. Re: Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by ArhcAngel · · Score: 2

      A USG is actually an EdgeRouter with extra code to interface with the UniFi controller. It can still be configured the way the EdgeRouter is. The beauty of the UniFi controller is having the most commonly accessed areas at a glance. And you don't have to leave it running unless you are utilizing guest services ( and who doesn't want to be able to set their WiFi up to accept payment from the family/friends when they come over? ). You can even run it from a Raspberry Pi.

      --
      "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
    13. Re: Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 2

      The wizards just create a stateful firewall. Good starting point, but very basic... again in the perspective of buyer beware. There are likely a few "standard" firewall rules that could be added to further limit exposure, but it gets complicated quickly.

      (The community is very active though and helpful.)

    14. Re:Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by aaronl · · Score: 2

      You can get IPS/IDS on the Unifi USG / USG Pro if you run beta code. I've had that installed for quite a while with no problems at all. Throughput is decreased as it still disable hardware offload features, but it works fine. I believe it's Suricata based, and you can choose from quite a few lists.

    15. Re:Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Awesome Post! Ethernet is always going to be the safest way to connect. Now with IOT everything seems to be WIFI. For example, the nest thermostat and protect are wifi only devices!

      This is horrible for security but really good for convenience which the masses love.

    16. Re: Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by imidan · · Score: 1

      This is good to hear, thanks. I already have an unmanaged 1Gb switch (HP ProCurve) and I'm not sure I see the need for managed. I was thinking I'd start with a new router and access point and phase in other gear as it seemed useful. I don't run anything PoE at the moment, but I'd consider a camera or two.

      My main goal is never to go back to a situation where I have to reboot my router every day because it slowed to a crawl or just crapped out (e.g., LinkSys and NetGear). And I'd like to have some light firewall-type capability, at least on the level of iptables, to block certain traffic before it hits my clients.

    17. Re:Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by skids · · Score: 1

      Ethernet is always going to be the safest way to connect.

      Well... I can think of a few others that don't have quite the associated broadcast domain and packet forgery issues that require a enterprise level switch (or if you're me, packaging some other guy's dhcp snooping daemon for OpenWRT) to counter... but none that you'll find on the shelf at Fry's.

    18. Re:Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by SigmundFloyd · · Score: 1

      Their device management system requires Ubuntu 16.04+, Debian 9+ or CoreOS... WTF is that??

      --
      Knowledge is power; knowledge shared is power lost.
    19. Re:Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      God I hope you're kidding... Ubiquiti makes great radios but the routers are absolute shit.

    20. Re:Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like the UBNT stuff because it's SUPER easy to manage. The hardware and feature set are ho-hum but, man... that single GUI makes it easy to keep everything in relatively good order.

      However, personally, I've decided on Untangle (https://untangle.com). For home use, it's the cost of a spare PC with a couple of NICs then either the free level of the software or $50/yr. for the full-fledged package. And, when licensed with the $50/yr. "Home" level license, it rivals the big boys' firewall/IDS appliances at a fraction of the cost. GUI is decent but it can sometimes be a bit overwhelming for a novice since it has so many options - web filtering, application filtering, ad-blocking - and all at a per-user and/or per-device basis. There's even options to route some devices/users to different "stacks" for handling different groups.

      If you want to move up to nearly-enterprise-level stuff, Untangle is a good option.

    21. Re: Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      I did like some others have and set my guest network up with a password and made the login page look like some official government page for the nosy neighbors out there.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    22. Re: Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X by kcbnac · · Score: 1

      Leaving the controller running (Mine's running on an Ubuntu VM on my NAS) also lets you track bandwidth usage, in case you have limits or capacity issues you're trying to monitor for.

      Also also, you can (OPTIONALLY) configure the controller for remote login - sign into https://unifi.ubnt.com/ and gain the ability to remotely manage your network.

      MSPs use this extensively, I use it to help family that wanted a more secure option & replace an aging OpenWRT Buffalo device that only did 2.4GHz and wasn't getting updates anymore. (I update theirs shortly after I update mine) Could also link multiple sites off one controller, and just host it for them. (Bit involved to get it set up initially this way as you need DNS entries for the controller then; I haven't gone down this path yet so haven't confirmed how hard)

      They also sell a CloudKey (Intel Compute Stick, basically) that can run the controller; but since it only has 8/16GB of flash they don't recommend doing logging on the device.

  7. Depends on skills by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The safest router out there is the one that is off, but with that said, I'd recommend something based on pfSense. Security through obscurity hasn't helped, like with the second backdoor password found in some Cisco products.

    1. Re:Depends on skills by gweihir · · Score: 1

      pfSense is pretty good if you know what you are doing. A firewall is a very partial answer to the problem of "being hacked" though and will not address most attack vectors.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re: Depends on skills by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YOU ARE A FAGGOT

  8. Scissors Network Security by Nexion · · Score: 1

    http://purplebark.net/maffew/scissors.pdf

    It is a time proven solution to network woes.

  9. Safest Router. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In my opinion the safest router is one that can continuously be updated with the latest patches. About a year ago I used an ARS Technica guide to building your own router (Link below). Ordered a very inexpensive mini PC from china with 4 1 Gigabit ports and put Umbuntu on it. You can set it up to auto update, but I do it manually. Every week I log in and Ubuntu tells me in the login if there are any updates, and if any are related to security.

    Besides being a much better performing router with full firewall capability and just about any feature you want to download and install packages for it is on the bleeding edge of security updates.

    https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/04/the-ars-guide-to-building-a-linux-router-from-scratch/

    1. Re:Safest Router. by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Except that quite often, vulnerabilities are introduced in the form of patches. A well-designed unpatched system can be far more secure than one that receives frequent patches - a certain number of those patches are going to be to "improve user experience", not fix vulnerabilities, and released for marketing purposes to sell more, not to better protect people who have already handed over the money. The development teams are often not the same either - the engineers that created a fairly safe product are generally no longer involved once a system hits maintenance phase, and can't raise their hand and say "wait a minute" when someone proposes something stupid.
      Patching in UPnP and other autoconfiguration may add convenience and increase sales, but are security risks in themselves. And increased reporting capabilities or adding a backdoor for technical support convenience are other vectors to exploit. To say nothing about badly verified new code for other "improvements".

  10. safest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    one to which you have the source code:
    https://www.dd-wrt.com/site/index

    1. Re:safest by Zmobie · · Score: 5, Informative

      one to which you have the source code:
      https://www.dd-wrt.com/site/in...

      This AC is exactly right actually. If you don't want to deal with some god awful proprietary firmware or go commercial grade, pick up a Netgear router with good hardware and load DD-WRT on it. Been using it for years and it is the best decision I ever made for my home setup.

    2. Re:safest by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      I'm double NAT-ing/routing my kids traffic (only way I can do any kind of traffic control to reserve me some bandwidth for my school work and job) with a Raspberry Pi running Raspbian, handles that load fine. Wonder when we'll see something similar meant for routing and wifi AP setup, etc.

      If you don't care about power consumption, then an older PC and a few network cards and your preferred flavor of Linux or one of the BSDs.

      In the mean time, double ++ to a decent piece of commodity hardware and a Free OS to run on it.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    3. Re:safest by Woldscum · · Score: 1

      I have a R7000. Avoid Netgear Nighthawks. Horrible firmware support. Just look on the Netgear forums. 3 and 4 year old bugs acknowledged and not fixed. Also DD-WRT, Tomato and Open WRT will install and work. BUT at a huge performance hit. The USB3 port is a custom implementation so no support. Hardware acceleration is not supported so you only get 1/2 speed at best. If you are looking at a $100+ router. Look at Ubiquity.

    4. Re:safest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My provider supplies a fibre-optic modem from Huawei and a cheap ISP-branded generic router (also Made in China) that works with THEIR network. No option to use anything else, no "source code" or hope for that. Firewall options are obtuse at best. I think many people have this situation of having to work with the kit provided. The 'competition' ISP for example, sends you their MiC modem/router with the wifi pw stickered on the side of the box. Choices... :)

      The OP's description is very vague and so helping in any way is impossible.

    5. Re: safest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say avoid dlink and netgear altogether, seriously Google up your netgear or dlink router model followed by 'cve' and see how bad it really is. Both are notorious for late/bad patching and bricking. Also read up on the Vault 7 leaks regarding those brands.

      I've been singing the praises of TOMATO for years and I'm embarrassed to say I've been using an older build that is long outdated. However, at this point there's really only 2 semi active Tomato builds at the moment, with the most up to date is already a year behind. Seriously considering switching to dd-wrt for that very reason. Comments? Suggestions welcome/wanted.

    6. Re:safest by wonkavader · · Score: 1

      I think the raspberry PI is not a good option for most households because they are quite slow.

      But double-NATing is the way to go. Two different physical routers from different companies.

    7. Re: safest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That HUGE performance hit has to be your router or particular model. In my experience both Tomato and dd-wrt unlock your routers potential. Just wanted to clarify that your experience is NOT the norm.

    8. Re: safest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good suggestion about looking for cve vulnerabilities. I use Openwrt on an Archer C7.

    9. Re:safest by Zmobie · · Score: 1

      ityTheir stock firmware is absolute garbage, not arguments here. Loaded up with DD-WRT though I've never had an issue really. I ran an R6300 for 6 years and upgraded to the R7500 almost 2 years ago and both have been great. Benchmarks on speed have been excellent too, so I'm not sure where you're seeing the hit there? Not saying you're wrong, but mine has been great. I run the Kong flavor of DD-WRT which most anyone running netgear hardware has preferred for some time.

      I may look into Ubiquity though out of curiosity, never hurts to have alternatives.

    10. Re: safest by Zmobie · · Score: 1

      DD-WRT is great. I tried TOMATO many moons ago and wasn't a fan back then. Absolutely agree on avoiding the stock Netgear/DLink firmware. Netgear has great hardware, but they don't utilize it worth a shit in their firmware packs. Linksys is a bit better, but at this point I probably won't run stock firmware on any router ever again. When I bought my newest one to upgrade my router I specifically checked the models and revisions for DD-WRT support before even consider it an option.

    11. Re: safest by Woldscum · · Score: 1

      No. Hardware acceleration will never be supported on the Netgear stuff. Straight from KONGs mouth. Google it yourself. Netgear has custom hardware stuff going on. With no public specs available. So zero support from the OS firmware. In my case on 300/30 ISP. I fell to 145/12 on DDWRT. Yes you get more settings. But performance is cut 50-60%. You also lose the USB3 port and the WPS button.

    12. Re:safest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to hear the logic behind this post.

      We have someone who has deployed a pi as an access point, and is quite happy with it. Then we get you, who have apparently not. Despite this you still claim to know that its no good, because "it's too slow". I'd like to hear your evidence backing up that assertion. Do you think consumer grade routers are super computers, or that they even need to be?

      FWIW, I've never heard of anyone complaining about a pi not being fast enough for the job. You can also combine its router duties with running pihole.

    13. Re:safest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's not like you can't put your own box on the inside of the box your provider requires....

    14. Re:safest by mrfaithful · · Score: 1

      I've never tried but the specs make it impossible. The Pi only has ethernet over USB, that onboard port isn't wired to any high speed bus other than USB 2.0. So you are limited to whatever you can do bi-directionally on USB2 meaning maybe 200mbit/s, in theory. That's not fast enough for cable or fibre connections.

    15. Re:safest by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      While there is fiber strung right in front of my house, it is coming from the wrong phone exchange. I'm lucky that I get 6mb down/1lb up DSL...

      WIth the kids simply streaming youtube/netflix/etc and not accessing anything internal to the house network except a printer the pi is certainly fast enough for what I need/want it to do.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    16. Re:safest by sinij · · Score: 1

      one to which you have the source code: https://www.dd-wrt.com/site/in...

      While WRT project (I am still on Tomato) is excellent solution, for every non-technical user and even most techies having access to the source code is irrelevant. You still have to outsource decision making and trust to developers. Only in this case they are open source, so it isn't typical commercial hack job but a work of motivated and well-meaning people.

    17. Re: safest by Frederic54 · · Score: 1

      Many people on the R7000 with Tomato can go way better than this, you have to enable CTF (Cut-Through Forwarding), you will lose some filtering support because of this, but you will have full speed.

      --
      "Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
    18. Re:safest by Frederic54 · · Score: 1

      I'm using Tomato (FreshTomato) on my R7000 and it is really great, it supports about anything that exist (vpn, usb, printer, torrent, etc)

      --
      "Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
    19. Re:safest by Woldscum · · Score: 1

      First do a speed test on the 2.4g and 5g wifi then the LAN/Ethernet ports. Second your WPS button does work. Third the USB3 port on the front of the router is dead. The USB2 on the back of the router does work.

    20. Re:safest by Woldscum · · Score: 1

      Some light reading. https://community.netgear.com/...

    21. Re:safest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you don't want to, but the vast majority of the general public is barely computer literate. It's gotten much worse since the mobile device replaced the desktop PC. They need Google Wifi's handholding.

    22. Re:safest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the point. How are you to decide what's "impossible" or not? Don't dismiss something as "useless" when you don't even know the use case. "Specs" and theoretical limitations doesn't mean squat if your bottlenecks limit you way below those. And most people by far doesn't have a 200Mbit connection. Not even close.

    23. Re:safest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      R7000 DD-WRT Kong builds are quite good. The performance with SFE enabled is nearly that of the OEM firmware even though it doesn't have HW acceleration. And what do you mean there is no USB3 support, it works fine? How old of a build are you running. You want the latest here:
      http://desipro.de/ddwrt/K3-AC-Arm/

    24. Re: safest by Brockmire · · Score: 0

      For wireless, they don't have the power, the antennas, or the receive sensitivity of a typical router AP. It would be OK for occasional use, but not for home use with streaming and backups. They really are fucking slow (this is relative, of course), just fucking google it.

  11. OPNsense by darkain · · Score: 5, Informative

    OPNsense, a fork of pfSense, which is a fork of m0n0wall. It is based on Hardended BSD, with a ton of additional security extensions not available in normal FreeBSD or pfSense.

    But really, security isn't just one device. Secure ALL of your shit.

    1. Re:OPNsense by niittyniemi · · Score: 2

      OPNsense, a fork of pfSense, which is a fork of m0n0wall. It is based on Hardended BSD, with a ton of additional security extensions not available in normal FreeBSD or pfSense.

      I'd concur with that. Go with a pf based solution if you can. You can search on Amazon or Ebay for "pfsense" and any number of cheap mini boxes will turn up.

      What sort of CPU/RAM etc. you want is dependent on how many packets you are pushing in and out. You might want to buy with an eye to any possible increases in the number of those packets that you see coming in the not too distant future.

      If you're on ADSL you might want to employ this nice little hack in order to improve things. For those who use vanilla FreeBSD, you need to rebuild your kernel with the altq(4) knobs turned on. OpenBSD it's not necessary.

      You obviously want to set the speed to whatever you've got and you'll want to replace "any" in those rules with something like "! 192.168.1.0/24" or internal traffic on your LAN could end up running like molasses. Been there, done that.

      --
      The Machine stops.
    2. Re:OPNsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's nothing really secure about HardenedBSD except the marketing of it. The lead and... frankly... only developer.... is one of those "researchers" that demo hacking a computer with sudo.....

    3. Re:OPNsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OPNsense is still development. For experienced users (*not* "average consumers"), pfSense is still better, though shortly will require hardware crypto, which is stupid.

  12. What are the parameters for "safety"? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    Does safety mean that you can trust the code in the router or does safety mean performance of router to defend against attacks because those are different requirements. If code trust is more important, I would recommend any router that you can replace the firmware with open source firmware like DD-WRT or Tomato. For performance, I don't know of any comparisons published on different models of routers.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  13. Norton Core - From Symantec by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Norton Core - Uses global intelligence network from all of symantec products, excellent wireless coverage, get notified or require acceptance for all new connections, super easy to configure and monitor. Free malware protection for endpoints and mobile devices included.

  14. Router Meaning Firewall? PfSense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.pfsense.org/

  15. A bigger box by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Get a PC running Linux/OpenBSD/pfSense/etc. with two NICs, enable any applicable hardening, enable automatic updates.

    Bonus points if you can get that running on a mini fanless system with an SSD.

    1. Re:A bigger box by Checkered+Daemon · · Score: 1

      You can run OpenBSD on an Ubiquiti EdgeRouter (fanless, SSD). Maybe not necessary, but gives you some more features and options. No hardening required. Simple updates via a cron job.

    2. Re:A bigger box by Nos. · · Score: 1

      APU(2) with pfsense is fantastic. Mine runs on a memory card, only down time was before I had it on a UPS. Handlers my 150/150 internet connection and probably 30+ devices at very load load. Click "update" now and then (or cron it) to keep it updated.

      Add in pfBlockerNG for some basic blocking of ads/malicious sites as well.

    3. Re:A bigger box by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many bonus points do I get for getting pf on a mini fanless system with a CF?

  16. Google wifi by buck68 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I chose it mainly for security. As a former Google engineer, I feel that Google's security expertise is top notch.

    1. Re:Google wifi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1

    2. Re:Google wifi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I had to work with a google home router a few weeks ago and it's a total piece of garbage IMHO. Not having a standard web interface meant I had to handle someone else's cell phone. It also doesn't do anything to prevent double nat or duplicate IPs. It's still green with no warning and allows other simple mistakes that much lesser routers point out instantly.
      I'm sure it will improve, but what I saw was total crap.

    3. Re:Google wifi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wonder what 'meta data' that leaks....

    4. Re: Google wifi by schklerg · · Score: 3, Funny

      As someone who is aware of Googles tracking preferences, I would say you are an idiot, but that's because my definition of safety includes privacy. Bsd based anything

      --
      Be Excellent To Each Other
    5. Re: Google wifi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1. Google is secure only if you aren't trying to keep Google from getting your data. Their security is based on trusting them with my data, which I certainly do not.

    6. Re: Google wifi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      do you use the internet? do you go out in public? do you have a cell phone? you're tracked, no matter what you do.

    7. Re: Google wifi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who is aware of Googles tracking preferences, I would say you are an idiot, but that's because my definition of safety includes privacy. Bsd based anything

      You are aware of Google's brand, as determined by the media and their competitors. You are not aware of what Google does and doesn't track. With effort you could research that, and you would know enough to distinguish between ad networks, services like Fi, and hardware. Since they are a large company they are held accountable to the policies you would discover in your research.

      I had to work with a google home router a few weeks ago and it's a total piece of garbage IMHO. Not having a standard web interface meant I had to handle someone else's cell phone.

      Yeah, their products can be very condescending. They have that MIT attitude.

      It also doesn't do anything to prevent double nat or duplicate IPs. It's still green with no warning and allows other simple mistakes that much lesser routers point out instantly.

      This is off the topic of security, and it's weird that you're asking it to simultaneously not be condescending and save you from your own mistakes. Perhaps you're holding it to a different standard even though you say you aren't? "Lesser routers" makes it sound like you are, subconsciously at least.

      The main security issue here is that Google patches bugs timely and automatically, and minimizes attack surface. Lesser routers generally do neither. There's no update after the initial shipment, usually. If there is one, you have to proactively discover and install it which no one does. And no thought was put into the attack surface so they are constantly suffering from remedial problems like XSS in their web admin forms and stupid bash and busybox bugs.

      On the downside Google tends to lose interest in products. I can't find a commitment to support Google Wifi or OnHub for a certain number of years. Any number is better than zero that you get with other companies, but if you are buying it for the "gets updates" feature you should see how much it costs per month over its life.

    8. Re:Google wifi by johnjones · · Score: 1

      its pretty decent and one of the few that actually delivers a "mesh" rather than just repeaters

      pity they do not actually use the bluetooth beyond the setup (could have been used for indoor positioning)

    9. Re:Google wifi by antdude · · Score: 1

      How much did you get paid for your post? :P

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    10. Re:Google wifi by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      I chose it mainly for security. As a former Google engineer, I feel that Google's security expertise is top notch.

      Unfortunately, it's not Google's total security expertise that built the router, but a bunch of schmucks that got pushed into writing embedded code for a piece of hardware that will probably get canceled soon, not exactly the hottest job at Google.

      When you need something to work, buy it from a company whose survival depends on it working; don't buy a "me too" product from a company who couldn't care less about the product.

  17. Any router... by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...as long as you put OpenWrt on it.

    --
    Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    1. Re:Any router... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...openWRT doesn't run on any router.

    2. Re:Any router... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't? Does it run on anything - at all?

    3. Re:Any router... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You typed OpenWrt, but you meant to type LEDE:

      Latest release 17.01.4 (Fourth Service Release) (October 18, 2017; 6 months ago) [±][1]

      and

      17.01.4 18 October 2017 r3560 Kernel 4.4.92, security fixes (KRACK, as far as addressable by server side fixes)[17]

      Note: The sidebar of OpenWrt acknowledges that LEDE it's superseded by LEDE:

      Latest release 15.05.1 (Chaos Calmer) Since remerging with LEDE, LEDE 17.01.4 is effectively the latest OpenWrt (March 16, 2016; 2 years ago) [±][1][2]

      Emphasis mine.

      tl;dr: OpenWrt is dead. R.I.P. Long live LEDE.

    4. Re:Any router... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      linksys and 'mcdebian' (google it)

      good stuff and pretty much, pure debian on a 'plastic router'.

      after that, its all up to you. but the guts are there and its updatable more than most.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    5. Re:Any router... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I love how every time I look for a router at my computer store, they carry every single model except for the ones OpenWrt supports.

      I still have one of those old, coveted Linksys WRT54GL routers in a drawer somewhere, I wonder how much an enthusiast would pay for it today...

    6. Re:Any router... by Fallen+Kell · · Score: 1

      I still have one of those old, coveted Linksys WRT54GL routers in a drawer somewhere, I wonder how much an enthusiast would pay for it today...

      Not much, as it is trivial to go online and order a newer router that supports N and AC with 128 or 256MB of flash storage (vs the 32MB on the GL) and run modern releases of DD-WRT, vs needing to use the completely stripped down mini-releases to fit on 32MB.

      --
      We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
    7. Re:Any router... by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      Been there done that. Unless you buy one or two specific models be prepared to lose tons of throughput. I was getting 1/3 the speed compared to the stock firmware.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    8. Re:Any router... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really. LEDE and OpenWrt have merged. The next release should be out sometime in June.

    9. Re:Any router... by skids · · Score: 1

      Heheh. Hate to break it to you, but name LEDE isn't the part of LEDE that is surviving the re-merge with OpenWRT. (I did like that name better, but it's the code and project processes that matter so I'm glad to see everyone pulling together again.)

    10. Re:Any router... by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 2

      OpenWRT used to discourage people to install on newer dual-chip routers, and indeed the bw was lower. But LEDE (the new OpenWRT) did amazing progress in this regard. Try it.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
  18. Re: The safest is NO router by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ...plugging directly into the modem is worse than no router.

  19. Router security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personal safety on the Internet depends on layered security approach. A "router" simply connects networks together, it's the firewall features and any IDS/IPS and filtering and malware scanning capabilities which make them more secure. There are open source projects and neat hardware platforms for this if you like to DIY, but for off-the-shelf products really you're looking at something like a FortiGate or SonicWall with threat subscriptions kept up-to-date. These are usually not cheap.

    At the end of the day though, having a fully-patched home router using OpenDNS for DNS lookups, password-protected management interfaces, strong wireless passwords, and fully patched endpoints with some form of anti-malware protection and a policy for only using apps from "known good" sources is generally best. Add in some browser plug-ins, stop running apps as an administrator, and use a password manager with complex passwords and don't click on links in emails without popping them into virustotal.com and you should be as safe as reasonably possible.

  20. Security is a process not a product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Security is not a router or a piece of software or a service.

    It is a process that includes rigorous applications of best practices, monitoring, auditing, testing.
    Security ensures when (not if) something goes wrong that you have all of the information and resources to recover in minimal time with minimal loss.

    You can build your own router. There are some nice projects and neat hardware to install them on. You can have as much control as you want and you can keep apprised of patches, best practices, monitored alerts.

    Or you might not have that kind of time. You probably just want an appliance you can buy that gives you good service and doesn't end up as a botnet node that steals your info.

    So just do a little research. See what vendors have a good track record, see how long they keep posting updates for their products. See what features you want. (Good wifi is worth paying for). Like with anything else, if you put in that effort you'll probably be ok. That's pretty much all you can expect from something you pay less than 200 bucks for.

    You want more, you'll pay for it in time and money.

  21. How did you know by vriemeister · · Score: 2

    I am also networking and programming savvy but I always assumed good hacking jobs would go unnoticed. What tipped you off to being hacked and do you allow admin login to your router from the wan side? I'm generally aware that is the most likely attack vector. Thanks for any info.

    1. Re:How did you know by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      There are a number of cross site scripting attacks that seem to be an issue (still), as well as default password problems.

    2. Re:How did you know by skids · · Score: 1

      good hacking jobs would go unnoticed.

      ...only 0.001% of hacking activity is of this quality, and it's usually not directed at your house.

    3. Re:How did you know by MindPrison · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I'll repost the story I posted as an answer to someone else in this thread, I am assuming too many people won't even find my posts in this insane amounth of posts, but here we go:

      Well, I guess I was a little tired, and provided too little information, but I can explain why I kept it short.

      I talked to some of the security guys at work (I work at a HUGE world wide company, I can't disclose who for obvious reasons), and I told them a detailed story, which I didn't tell you.

      They came to the conclusion that the root of my problems was that I used an unsafe router that has been infected, and that the attackers had most likely infected my router and somehow upgraded it with malicious firmware. Therefor they came to the conclusion that I should go and get a much safer router. So my first instinct, tired and a little stressed from it all - was to ask you. I'm not in my 20s anymore, and I'm not as up to code about the hacking possibilities and vulnerabilities as I once was rightfully for my time. Today, I know next to nothing compared to you guys.

      The first time I got hacked:

      Firefox 54: I was visiting a page to get some schematics for some home made remote control system, and I noticed that the browser had all of my CPU threads busy, and the computer became oddly sluggish. I had No-Script installed, ad-blocker and my windows 10 was up to shape with the latest defender database plus latest updates I could possibly download, I always update immediately when it suggests an update.

      I immediately wanted to force stop Firefox so I went to the Task Bar and looked at the processes, oh my goodness - several instances of firefox (hidden windows /popups that aren't immediately visible?) was running, and it was creating more as I watched. I ended up killing all processes, and ran anti malware software (well, windows defender with the latest definitions) and it came out clean, or so I thought.

      Went to bed, and got woken up by my phone with several warnings from my various social media telling me that someone is posting from a different IP address than I normally used, I got out of bed and panicked.

      I immediately changed ALL passwords to hideously long random letter passwords on ALL my services, and went for two factor-authentication on everything I could.

      This stopped the attack on my personal accounts.

      Thinking it all was over, and safe - 3 weeks went by, and all of a sudden when I was working with something on my Linux partition, the computer crashed hard, and it rarely ever does that.

      After that crash, the Bios (or boot menu) was completely garbled. Interestingly enough, so was the bios on my second computer, which was 10 years old, and my new work computer was only a few years old, but with relatively fresh installations of both Linux (on an M.2. NVMe storage) and Windows 10 on an normal SSD storage, totally separated from each other (well, needing 2 different boot menues to access each one).

      I took a memdump of the entire bios, and found that the raw graphics area contained assembly code whereas it should be an image (you can look at the image with raw data image browser/raw graphics dump, it won't look like a clean image, but you can see that there is image data there).

      What I did, is that I reflashed the bios with the help of a separate hardware switch (my mainboard has two bioses, totally hardware separated with a switch), and looking at the manufacturers homepage, they already know that their bios had been comprimised, so they provided a beta patch with ME microcode included as well.

      I told this story to our security guys, and they said the same as someone else in this thread, someone thinks you have something to hide, and they're not script kiddies, you've been targeted - I suggest you start with a badass router, and take it from there, disable all server services in win 10 + remote services like remote registry etc.

      I don't know that much about windows 10. But that's all I know for now. Appreciate all the feedback , you wonderful Slashdotters!

      --
      What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
  22. A faraday cage. by gr1d · · Score: 1

    In this day and age, nothing will help you. Buy a Microsoft phone and wrap a faraday cage around your bed. Use Microsoft Edge. PFSense is shit, a firewall wont help but disabling your Wi-Fi might.

    1. Re: A faraday cage. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      If you are going to run MS, then simply shut off the power and pull all comm links. Then you will decently secured on MS.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  23. Good router by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please keep in mind that they make low-end routers as cheap as possible.

    And no, they don't care about the firmware. As long as it does the very, very basic.

    Thus, if you want a secure router, you can spend hundreds on a name brand 'secure' router, or you can install a stable, proven and free operating system on it.

  24. Configured One by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The one with updates installed and configured correctly. Do you really need the UPnP and do you really have to administer the router outside of your network? Do you really have to have administrative access from all your devices and does that really have to be available all the time? Do those unused functionalities have to be enabled and do you actually even have to share a printer in your home? (Consumer) Router firewall is not everything. Protect your devices behind it too from each other.

  25. OpenBSD by Narcocide · · Score: 2

    The truth is, nothing is secure unless you can educate yourself a little bit. However, if time to do so is not a problem, the most secure device to remote hacking is probably something running OpenBSD on some single-core CPU ancient enough to be immune to stuff like the recently discovered spectre/meltdown vulnerabilities.

    1. Re:openbsd by MindPrison · · Score: 1

      Thanks, this is actually excellent advice!

      --
      What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
  26. pfSense on WANBOX by MikeDataLink · · Score: 4, Interesting

    pfSense running on WANBOX...

    pfSense because its open source and free and "just works". WANBOX, because its reliable and supports AES-NI crypto onboard.

    --
    Mike @ The Geek Pub. Let's Make Stuff!
  27. Netgate by bferrell · · Score: 3, Informative

    A Netgate SG-1000 if you want a packaged solution;

    https://www.netgate.com/soluti...

    Else load up PfSense on an old PC or search ebay for pfsense... You'll find also repurposed appliance from other people loaded with PfSense.

  28. Ethernet by AHuxley · · Score: 2

    Fast so it can support a quality VPN.
    Then have a computer just for "internet" on it as the only computer on the network.
    An OS some bookmarks and what apps are needed.
    Have all long term data well away from any networked computer.
    Find a fast router with a good CPU that can support the best VPN protection.
    Make sure the loss of the VPN will not revert to any ISP ip.
    Should any malware get into a computer, they get nothing. Some bookmarks, some productivity apps.
    Everything can be restored and be back online quickly.
    Stay away from wifi, big brand devices with "helpful" always on microphones, webcams.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re: Ethernet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1993 wants its security quips back.

  29. Microtik or Ubiquity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Both reasonable price and insanely good features/security

    1. Re:Microtik or Ubiquity by tarellel · · Score: 1

      I absolutely love Mikrotik, I was introduced to them about a year ago. And have since then begun migrating everything to Mikrotik. And their Cloud Core routers will blow you away with the amount of features and performance you get for their price.

      --
      http://theworkaround.com/
  30. The question is nonsensical by alex.henrie · · Score: 0

    The safest router is the one that does not let any packets through at all. Taking a pair of scissors to your Ethernet cables would work fine.

  31. It's a subjective question, but for home users... by ErikTheRed · · Score: 1

    It depends on your needs and your budget. If you're a typical home user that doesn't have people specifically targeting them then your needs are very different than a corporate executive who is regularly hit with espionage attempts.

    I'll answer for a typical home user: Turris Omnia. It's a bit pricey ($339 on Amazon), but it runs a modified version of OpenWRT. It's easy-to-use, reasonably powerful in terms of features and capabilities, and is updated frequently.

    --

    Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
  32. Cisco Meraki MX series by LordBadger · · Score: 1

    The Cisco/Meraki devices are phenomenal.
    They are not cheap by any means, but you can a short stack of a Router (MX series security appliance, MX64 was given when I took the class,) POE 8-port switch, and Wireless Access Point for free if you attend a Cisco CMNA class.

       

    1. Re:Cisco Meraki MX series by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're funneh. Read the tech news lately about how Cisco keeps sticking backdoors in their products?

  33. Any router without "cloud" in the title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Routers are guaranteed to be unsafe if either:

    1. It has "cloud" in product title or datasheet.
    2. It comes in a plastic box.

    The absence of either of these things does not imply safety.

    Any DDWRT, *Sense or plain old Linux box with some iptables rules if you don't have a life is infinitely better than off the shelf crap by people who don't give a damn.

    While firewalls and network security in general are meaningless WRT to security at least having a router that won't be hacked remotely and conscripted into a coin mining DDOS launching botnet is a step in the right direction.

    1. Re: Any router without "cloud" in the title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any router built in a five eyes country is a security risk.

  34. Barking up the wrong tree? by danlor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Unless you are talking about your netgear or dlink box getting back doored, I think you are looking in the wrong places.

    Any NAT device is sufficient.
    Patch all your stuff
    Don't download crap
    Don't execute the crap you download
    Don't play web games
    Don't use internet explorer
    uninstall flash
    uninstall java

    If you are really looking for a good firewall, go grab a little pfsense box from netgate. But I think you have many other places to look at first.

  35. Roll your own by stikves · · Score: 1

    I use a cheap Pentium motherboard (also low power), and a quad intel Ethernet card (a used PRO/1000 for ~$50). It has all the bells and whistles of commercial units (captive portal, easy web ui, etc), but has the advantage of being based on FreeBSD.

    https://www.pfsense.org/

    If you were to prefer Linux, it would be possible to use openwrt instead.

    1. Re:Roll your own by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use a cheap Pentium motherboard (also low power), and a quad intel Ethernet card (a used PRO/1000 for ~$50). It has all the bells and whistles of commercial units (captive portal, easy web ui, etc), but has the advantage of being based on FreeBSD.

      https://www.pfsense.org/

      If you were to prefer Linux, it would be possible to use openwrt instead.

      you are an idiot, for flushing money and electricity down the toilet by leaving an old pentium turned on 24/7

      did you even think about electricity costs or are just just a fucking moron? never mind we know the answer

    2. Re:Roll your own by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 1

      I use a cheap Pentium motherboard (also low power)

      The first Pentiums were nicknamed "Coffee Warmers" for good reason.

      --
      Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    3. Re:Roll your own by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I use a cheap Pentium motherboard (also low power),

      This sounds suspicious to me. Define cheap, Pentium, and low power.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Roll your own by drnb · · Score: 1

      I use a cheap Pentium motherboard (also low power)

      The first Pentiums were nicknamed "Coffee Warmers" for good reason.

      You realize Intel still makes "Pentiums"? Not really anything like the original, but this is probably what the GP is referring to. 25-35W.
      https://www.intel.com/content/...

    5. Re:Roll your own by drnb · · Score: 1

      I use a cheap Pentium motherboard (also low power),

      This sounds suspicious to me. Define cheap, Pentium, and low power.

      Well there is the current generation Pentium G5500T, 2 cores, 3.2 GHz, $85, 35W, ... ?
      https://www.intel.com/content/...

      Or the previous generation Pentium G4400, 2 core, 3.3 Ghz, $45, 54W, ...?
      https://www.intel.com/content/...

      There is a G4400T at 2.9 Ghz and 35W but I don't know if its still available.

    6. Re:Roll your own by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A Pentium III uses about what? 35 watts or so? In the US they practically give electricity away.

      Now, the later Pentiums, I'll give ya that. They were swine. :)

  36. None of them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wouldn't trust anything off the shelf.

    Just get an old computer, connect a switch and/or a WiFi interface to it and put something like OPNsense on it. Better yet, roll your own solution from scratch.

  37. Its all in the config by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find that how you configure the firewall is more important then what the underlying firewall is. As an example, alot of systems are getting cryptolocked because you have RDP enabled on the internet, on a standard 3389 port forwarding to an unpatched system. Irregardless of the type of firewall and all the great deep level packet inspection, as soon as encryption kicks in (even with SSL decryption), its hard to catch the malware passing through.

    I think having all these subscription based services like IPS, and antivirus gives the false sense of security in this complex world of IT security.

    1. Limit your exposure of ports and IPs on the internet to whats necessary, not whats convenient.
    2. Ensure that the systems taking in these foreign connections are well patched and monitored
    3. Don't assume that you can't get hacked if you have no ports open. All it takes is downloading and executing a single malware file that can act as a secure channel back out to bring in its true payload

    KW

  38. It takes some googling to get it running..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Buy a small used Juniper router then do some research to get the latest firmware, and default setup for a NAT solution. 100Mbps models are around 100 bucks on Ebay

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/Juniper-SRX100H2-2GB-Flash-8-Port-10-100-Security-VPN-Firewall-w-AC-Adapter/202302842635?hash=item2f1a30670b:g:J4AAAOSwphNa6Ogj

    If you need to get above 100Mbps - get an SRX210 for about the same or a little more. Stay away from the POE models... their power brick/draw is pretty high but if you need POE too they aren't too shabby. Two of their interfaces are 1Gbps and the rest are 100Mbps.

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/Juniper-Networks-SRX210-Services-Gateway-Enhanced-security-applianc-SRX210BE/252042279570?epid=1500571488&hash=item3aaee3fa92:g:ptUAAOSwwBha9Hup

    These are commercial small-business routers on the cheap.

  39. Openwrt/lede by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get a router that you can replace the stock firmware with openwrt (lede was a fork, now merged back in). Of those watch get a *supported* mt76 based router (e.g. D-Link 860) or ath10k based one (archer c7). The ath10k has a small a binary blob problem, it's not like the fully open ath9k of years ago. The mt76 is the most open of current hardware.

    Just double check the revision of the router you pick is supported. Sometimes a new version is actually a completely new router!

    The other openwrt routers (e.g. Linksys) also run openwrt just fine, but rely on the manufacture to update the firmware to fix bugs the openwrt contributors can't.

    1. Re:OpenWRT/LEDE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Since people are asking for recommendations the following are some recommended routers (under $200) with great DD-WRT and/or OpenWrt support. Make sure to run the latest firmware regardless of which way you go.

      DD-WRT: R7000, R7800, or R8000: http://desipro.de/ddwrt/

      OpenWrt: R7800 (hnyman build) or WRT3200ACM (davidc502 build). Since OpenWrt 2018 hasn't been released yet back under this name, make sure to use those latest custom builds. Links here:
      R7800: https://forum.lede-project.org/t/build-for-netgear-r7800/316
      WRT3200ACM: https://davidc502sis.dynamic-dns.net/

  40. A couple of suggestions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First, I’d suggest going double nat using a couple of routers for a layered appproach. Internet connected to one, one connected to the second, internal network connected to another interface on that second. I also would look for something other than mass market stuff. Using different vendors at each layer would be a good idea as well. Update firmware, keep track of changes by reading the release notes. Also make sure everything inside your network is up to date and secure. Power it off if you can. Can’t hack it if it doesn’t have power. Generally.

  41. Heard good things about Cisco lately by DeVilla · · Score: 3, Funny

    I've heard good things about Cisco very recently. They put out lot of fixes.

  42. Went with Google WiFi for security reason by WindBourne · · Score: 2

    They constantly update, and then made it skinny. In fact, I wish I had a couple of features back. However, it does a decent security job.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Went with Google WiFi for security reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it violates your privacy (as Google products and services do) then it cannot be secure.

  43. The safest Router is by genfail · · Score: 1

    One not connected to a network powered off and in an underground fallout shelter, air-gapped from the world by a vacuum chamber inside a Faraday cage. Everything else is hackable.

  44. OpenBSD not Linux by drnb · · Score: 4, Informative

    A self made/installed Linux box probably the least secure solution for most people. Unless you really know how to secure and lock down your Linux box AND keep it up to date on weekly basis, your "router" is far from secure. There are few people who really know what they're doing in this domain.

    This is why OpenBSD was created. Out-of-the-box security, time between remote exploits measured in years, and a firewall is part of the default install. Yes, it still needs patches but one is starting from a far far better place than Linux.

    1. Re:OpenBSD not Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      BSDs probably have more bugs in low-level kernel stuff than Linux.

      https://media.ccc.de/v/34c3-8968-are_all_bsds_created_equally

    2. Re:OpenBSD not Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Linux kernel is really just as secure as an OpenBSD kernel. You can also easily configure a distro with the exact same services and no more that would run on a default OpenBSD install.

    3. Re:OpenBSD not Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > This is why OpenBSD was created.

      Yes. An OS that you cannot install is completely secure.

    4. Re:OpenBSD not Linux by drnb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The Linux kernel is really just as secure as an OpenBSD kernel. You can also easily configure a distro with the exact same services and no more that would run on a default OpenBSD install.

      As the GP pointed out, Linux distros need a bit of reconfiguration and expertise to do so. This is a common point of failure in the Linux based approach.
      In contrast, OpenBSD's default configuration is minimal, just enough to do those core infrastructure systems like a router/firewall.

      The problem is the human, not the kernel, which is why OpenBSD is often considered far superior for this specific task, a router/firewall. Few opportunities for human based errors.

    5. Re:OpenBSD not Linux by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      Assuming your hardware has a CD drive or USB socket, I doubt you will find an OS that is easier to install than OpenBSD today. (I admit that was not always the case).

      Making it useful might involve understanding what software is/does, and how to use Google. I imagine most people here can do that.

      Do not expect to run Windows apps, or the latest, untested, bug infested dross from obscure sources, without reading the manual first, but it IS well written and correct. (And a bad idea).

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    6. Re:OpenBSD not Linux by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      Default configuration is minimal... Well that's one way to put it. Severely lacking is a much better way to put it. BSD is close to being 20 years behind Linux in security. I remember the BSD cool aid years ago when a bunch of us simply ported the linux hacks over to bsd and had a field day. It's not more secure. Not even close. SELinux buys way more security than BSD has, however to explain it to you would take a few days because I'm sure you have no idea what things like mandatory access controls and such are.

      Do yourself a big favor, throw your BSD machines away. Don't get ubuntu or the other debian crap. Base it all off of Fedora. You'll be fine.

    7. Re:OpenBSD not Linux by drnb · · Score: 1

      Default configuration is minimal... Well that's one way to put it. Severely lacking is a much better way to put it.

      You seem rather ill-informed regarding OpenBSD. It is minimal for security reasons. However this minimal configuration that is part of the ongoing security audit provides what is necessary for infrastructure boxes like a router/firewall.

      BSD is close to being 20 years behind Linux in security.

      Your lack of info regarding OpenBSD is becoming even more apparent. The time between remote exploits in OpenBSD for that default install is measured in years.

      Do yourself a big favor, throw your BSD machines away. Don't get ubuntu or the other debian crap. Base it all off of Fedora. You'll be fine.

      Actually for Linux boxes I use CentOS for internal purposes, except where OpenBSD is superior (ex firewall/router). I do use Ubuntu for some development and compatibility testing because users pick the target platform, not developers. That said, the thing you are failing to see is that BSD and Linux serve different roles. Each better in different areas.

    8. Re:OpenBSD not Linux by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      Default configuration is minimal... Well that's one way to put it. Severely lacking is a much better way to put it.

      You seem rather ill-informed regarding OpenBSD. It is minimal for security reasons. However this minimal configuration that is part of the ongoing security audit provides what is necessary for infrastructure boxes like a router/firewall.

      I do security for a living. I've been doing it for over 30 years from very small businesses to government agencies. It's not minimal for security reasons. They like to say that. Doesn't make it true.

      BSD is close to being 20 years behind Linux in security.

      Your lack of info regarding OpenBSD is becoming even more apparent. The time between remote exploits in OpenBSD for that default install is measured in years.

      It's in years because there are a lot better things to go after. Last time I remember this debate came up someone ported a few Linux hacks over to BSD within days. They are not more secure. They are less secure. Besides, why hack a BSD box? Only of value to the guy that put the bsd gateway in place thinking it's more secure. Behind Linux boxes are often high value assets. Sometimes junk as well. They are also much harder to get by. I just hope that they have an old version and it's not patched. The only systems of mine that have been hacked that I know of are the ones that they decided nothing ever happened so they stopped paying me for support. Then I'd have to come back in and fix it. Sometimes it's humorous what happened. How they tried to compile stuff, took hours and it ran out of disk and dropped them... repeat every day for weeks until it got bad enough for them to call for help.

      Do yourself a big favor, throw your BSD machines away. Don't get ubuntu or the other debian crap. Base it all off of Fedora. You'll be fine.

      Actually for Linux boxes I use CentOS for internal purposes, except where OpenBSD is superior (ex firewall/router). I do use Ubuntu for some development and compatibility testing because users pick the target platform, not developers. That said, the thing you are failing to see is that BSD and Linux serve different roles. Each better in different areas.

      I used to use bsd. Hell I used to build X11 and the whole environment on freebsd back in the day. Loved it. But then Linux came out and left it behind. Linux can be a very minimal installation as well. There are distros for that. As I said, there is a whole lot more to it and you seem to have no idea what that is. Not surprising, you don't know what you don't know.
      Ubuntu just kind of gets me. I hear ubuntu fan boys saying things like the networking and wifi works so great. Then I have to show them that the software that they say is so great - RedHat wrote that. The only claim to their fame is apt-get to get around rpm hell. They wrote an entire new packaging system, and did it poorly. yum/dnf works much better.

    9. Re:OpenBSD not Linux by drnb · · Score: 1

      Last time I remember this debate came up someone ported a few Linux hacks over to BSD within days.

      Not all BSDs are the same, OpenBSD is different. Your FreeBSD experience does not quite qualify you for comment here.

      Linux can be a very minimal installation as well. There are distros for that. As I said, there is a whole lot more to it and you seem to have no idea what that is.

      Actually at work where we used Linux for a high profile big hacking target server application we used no Linux distrobution. We built a minimal environment by hand from scratch, absolutely no services/software that wasn't necessary for the server role.

    10. Re:OpenBSD not Linux by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      Last time I remember this debate came up someone ported a few Linux hacks over to BSD within days.

      Not all BSDs are the same, OpenBSD is different. Your FreeBSD experience does not quite qualify you for comment here.

      So you think I've never tried openbsd? I don't know why you'd think that. I thought with my response it's clear I've used it, and hacked it. Doesn't matter I suppose. If you think you're safe with it and love it, continue to use it. You'll make it easier for someone else to get in. Maybe I see you on a web cam soon?

      Linux can be a very minimal installation as well. There are distros for that. As I said, there is a whole lot more to it and you seem to have no idea what that is.

      Actually at work where we used Linux for a high profile big hacking target server application we used no Linux distribution. We built a minimal environment by hand from scratch, absolutely no services/software that wasn't necessary for the server role.

      Interesting. Funny actually. So you're trying to convince me that you know what you're talking about? That's not the way to do it. This is a lot like saying linux is to a car and you built a car to test. So you used some Ford, GM, Tata, Rolls Royce, Mercedes, Zen... and so on parts? You're not proving anything that would be useful in this exercise. Linux is a base. You have to build on top of that and there are some decisions that will take you more towards a RHEL type box or Debian type box. From there you have a lot of other decisions to make. In the end, so what? Even if you hacked it, why would that be useful? Distros correct things. Sometimes they correct it and re-introduce the same bug back in a year later. I know a lot of that just by memory. Do you also make all of your food from scratch as well? No flour, you make your own flour too and this tells you something about the Wonder Bread company? Makes about as much sense (to me).

      If you want a high profile target to hack, you're going to use RHEL. That's what they use, I don't see much of anything else out there anymore. Well, Oracle linux too, which is really RHEL with problems. They have worked with the Government and guys like me to make it tough. It's FIPS certified, and so on (Debian up to this last version couldn't be bothered enough to get FIPS certified.. they don't care about security). You'd have none of that stuff. Unless you're a guy like me you wouldn't even know how to properly compile openssl. You're showing me that you really don't know much about this stuff. Probably just enough to be dangerous. Practice, learn, keep up with it. How did they hack things? What about things like a docker instance? The possibilities keep going down each year. Well, except for Windows. Seems like each year they open another hole big enough to drive an amtrack train through. Become a certified security guy. It's a lot of work. Stay on the right side of the law. Being on the wrong side of the law can be no fun.

      If you live, eat, breath, drink this stuff you can really become competent like I am. That's all I've done for the past 20 years. You can also make a great deal of money doing this. An active pen tester. To stay in practice I work with local businesses and hack them, then fix them. Sort of like picking locks. Have to stay in practice. If you do that BTW, try the master red "lock out" lock. That's the best cylinder master lock makes... and they put it in a plastic case.

      Actually, I'm really worried about you if you're depending on bsd. It kept me up some last night.... because I know better. You'd be a LOT better off getting Solaris 11 and using that instead if you really hate Linux. It's an orphan, very few hacks for it, down side is it's toxic waste as far as a Unix system goes. They really screwed it up. Understand that they use a database like a registry so files don't necessarily make changes to the system. However IMHO, it's a lot more secure than BSD is. I also get good performance with it. To me it's simple to set up. It was good enough to me that I made so much money consulting with it that it built my house decades ago.

    11. Re:OpenBSD not Linux by drnb · · Score: 1

      So you think I've never tried openbsd? I don't know why you'd think that.

      Perhaps referring to BSD in general and occasionally mentioning using FreeBSD does that.

      I thought with my response it's clear I've used it, and hacked it.

      Remotely, a default install? And you reported it?

      Doesn't matter I suppose. If you think you're safe with it and love it, continue to use it. You'll make it easier for someone else to get in. Maybe I see you on a web cam soon?

      You really have a reading comprehension problem don't you? I've been referring to infrastructure applications using the default install, firewall/router for example. Not a desktop. No web cam.

      Actually at work where we used Linux for a high profile big hacking target server application we used no Linux distribution. We built a minimal environment by hand from scratch, absolutely no services/software that wasn't necessary for the server role.

      Interesting. Funny actually. So you're trying to convince me that you know what you're talking about? That's not the way to do it.

      Another reading comprehension error on your part, let me translate. We essentially created our own distro that was more minimal than those commercially available. Literally no service, no tool, no application was installed that was not actually needed. It was a "distro" customized precisely to our particular application. Minimal points of attack. What services, tools and applications that were used had their main source repositories monitored and our software was kept up to date.

  45. Routers, firewalls, and IPS oh my by gavron · · Score: 3, Informative

    If all you need is a router there are plenty and they're mostly safe because they don't do much.
    If you need a NAT gateway, Intrusion Protection System, etc. Now you're talking firewalls.
    Firewalls are MUCH more difficult to get right.

    Even Cisco just got dinged today (2018-05-17) for having a fixed-password backdoor in some
    enterprise-level hardware.

    If your goal is to spend less than $200 then you will not be getting anything worth describing
    as "secure". Go to your nearest Walmart, Safeway, ACE, or whatever, and buy the feature
    set you want, knowing you'll need to do regular firmware upgrades and these will always be
    BEHIND the hacker curve. The companies selling "commodity" or "small business" products
    don't do research to break their stuff. They just sell as cheaply as possible.

    If your budget allows some latitude, check out the Juniper SRX series. They'll do what you
    want and thus far are considered great.

    If your budget is limitless, Palo Alto Networks or Fortigate.

    Again - router just moves IP packets and this can be done by a cellphone running Android.
    Firewall, however, includes inner/outer networks, NAT, forwarding rules, possibly packet inspection, and a higher layer of security.

    Good luck! This is a quest LOTS of people are on!!

    Ehud
    Tucson AZ

    1. Re:Routers, firewalls, and IPS oh my by jon3k · · Score: 1

      Even Cisco just got dinged today (2018-05-17) for having a fixed-password backdoor in some enterprise-level hardware.

      Software. Which Cisco found during it's own internal audit.

    2. Re:Routers, firewalls, and IPS oh my by MSTCrow5429 · · Score: 1

      you'll need to do regular firmware upgrades and these will always be
      BEHIND the hacker curve.

      Ehud
      Tucson AZ

      Until they just stop bothering with firmware upgrades, with zero notice. I bought a not the cheapest Netgear router years ago, and it's gotten two firmware updates, then plop.

      --
      Slashdot: Playing Favorites Since 1997
    3. Re: Routers, firewalls, and IPS oh my by Dharkfiber · · Score: 1

      Trolling

    4. Re: Routers, firewalls, and IPS oh my by Brockmire · · Score: 0

      I once interviewed at Fortinet. I made some joke about CIA backdoor access and the response wasn't so much a denial, as a 'we work with law enforcement' type response. I was not expecting the exact way it was said, somewhat proudly.

    5. Re:Routers, firewalls, and IPS oh my by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Software. Which Cisco found during it's own internal audit.

      Why didn't you mention that this is the fifteenth time they've been caught by the same issue in recent memory? Surely that would have made them sound even more secure, and you seem to be doing their advertising for them, so I assume that's what you wanted?

  46. SparcStation IPX by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    Get a SparcStation IPX. Install a second ethernet card in one of the Sbus slots.

    Install OpenBSD/Sparc on it. Set it up as a router.

    1. Re:SparcStation IPX by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      Oh man you're living in the past, that's an answer for 18 years ago

      OpenBSD doesn't run on 32 bit Sparc any more, only UltraSparc (64 bit)

  47. A Safer Solution by CAOgdin · · Score: 1

    Everybody has a different set of principles by which they judge a gateway router...but here's an approach I recommend. Insofar as I know, it's damned hard to "beat" this solution, unless the invader is able to modify the routers' own firmware:

    In a solution I call "Friday's Folly," I use TWO cascaded routers: The first is in my ISP's connection equipment, which has it's own configuration. I use that to assign a distinct and unique IP address range (don't use 192.168....; it's too often used for novices, so they don't have to think.). Pick a different range altogether...that's the first point of confusion for the erstwhile hacker. The time delay through both routers is virtually undetectable.

    The SECOND cascaded router has, on its' input side, an incoming address (as odd-looking as possible within the first router's LAN range). On the other side (multiple outlets for the LAN), i use a completely different IP Address range, picked almost at random. It is that range (which is masked down to just a small range) to access the protected LAN resources.

    Why would any hacker/cracker want to work so long to get inside the LAN; he(/she) would have to find a way to "probe" for the valid ranges inside the cascaded routers. At that point, I make the choice to install routers for which any signal on the WAN side can't be used to configure the router...therefore, its' configuration is withheld from all but qualified parties on the INSIDE of the network, on the LAN.

    Anybody figured out how, with a $20 second router in place, that cascaded router scheme can be easily hacked? The goal was to make the solution so cumbersome (from the WAN side), that they'll go try to invade some other, simpler, less well protected target.

    The opponent may be able to get past the first router by peeking inside the ISP vendors' equipment...but that's a chimera, reaching only the SECOND router...for which they have no resources inside the first router to leverage to open up the second router. So, now they're constrained to fashion some tool on the first router that will arbitrarily scan the second router, looking for a hit.

    1. Re:A Safer Solution by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 1

      The SECOND cascaded router has, on its' input side, an incoming address (as odd-looking as possible within the first router's LAN range). On the other side (multiple outlets for the LAN), i use a completely different IP Address range, picked almost at random. It is that range (which is masked down to just a small range) to access the protected LAN resources.

      Why would any hacker/cracker want to work so long to get inside the LAN; he(/she) would have to find a way to "probe" for the valid ranges inside the cascaded routers. At that point, I make the choice to install routers for which any signal on the WAN side can't be used to configure the router...therefore, its' configuration is withheld from all but qualified parties on the INSIDE of the network, on the LAN.

      Anybody figured out how, with a $20 second router in place, that cascaded router scheme can be easily hacked? The goal was to make the solution so cumbersome (from the WAN side), that they'll go try to invade some other, simpler, less well protected target.

      I got to do a fair bit of locksmithing over the years, and most of today's attacks against residential broadband networks are likely to be script kiddies (ie. crackheads looking for unlocked car doors); maybe the occasional slim-jim attack to get at the coins you keep in your car's console.

      Don't leave any coins in your console - yeah, I know they're convenient for tollbooths. And anything you do that makes your network harder to hit than the average Comcast user running Windows 7 and a million WiFi devices probably makes you a much less desirable target.

      Burglars almost always move to the easier target, the guy with the cheap Kwikset door lock instead of the Schlage.

      Blending the automotive and network security analogies again, I used to have a 1976 Dodge Ram pickup truck. And back when Sony Discmans were still worth something, I'd park my old truck on a rough street in Toronto or Detroit, with my Discman clearly visible on the dashboard. Across my back window was a gun rack, and in the back was an old Honda Civic engine lying on its side. Driving a vehicle that made me look like a badass redneck has its moments too. Of course, the possibility of a physical confrontation with the owner of a truck whose Discman you've just liberated is a lot more threatening than it is to some cheesedick in Russia who is half a world away. Some badass is for show, but for any badass to work, you have to back it up. Publish your log files making fun of the people trying to get in. Again, they're mostly script-kiddies; show them what the rusty camshaft you keep under your front seat looks like. And NEVER show fear.

      --
      Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    2. Re:A Safer Solution by Excelcia · · Score: 1

      This will work fine for vanilla applications - anything that requires a single outgoing port should work fine, but anything that requires UPnP to open a listening port will run into issues. Games will be hit and miss.

      Sure, it's cumbersome enough to an attacker that it prevents easy hacking, but that's also not very good if it's so cumbersome as to be a burden to the user as well.

    3. Re: A Safer Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your "solution" is called double NAT and it's not a security measure, it's just an ugly hack (not the "cool" kind) using a technology (NAT) for something it was NEVER intended for.
      NAT is not a security measure. It developed as a way to preserve IPv4 addresses.
      Any "intruder" who can navigate through 1 layer of NAT, can just as easily navigate through 2, 3, 4 , 5 or more layers of NAT. The only thing it will do to an attacker is make them laugh at you. Not to mention, if they can own your edge device, nothing else really matters. At that point they can direct and manipulate your traffic however they want.
      Additionally, choosing an address range outside of 192.168.0.0/16 does absolutely nothing for your security. It won't confuse anyone.

    4. Re:A Safer Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A number of router exploits use Javascript on a malicious website to log in to your router, effectively from inside your own network. Assuming you have a good password and their aren't any vulnerabilities that can be exploited on your router's web interface, then you might be safe from this kind of attack.

    5. Re:A Safer Solution by MindPrison · · Score: 1

      The cascaded routers was actually one of the suggestions suggested from the security team I talked to, so kudos for suggesting that - I'm leaning towards that now..

      --
      What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
    6. Re:A Safer Solution by MindPrison · · Score: 2

      That's the thing... ...The security guys I talked to at work, thinks I've been targeted by anything else than scriptkiddies, they mention that I've just been unfortunate to be attacked, someone out there thinks I've got something serious to hide, and they've tried LONG to get to it, so the better you're at "hiding" whatever you're hiding, the more interest you're gonna attract.

      So I'm thinking - maybe I should just let the damn fools in :/

      Anyway, I realize that my information was a bit sparse, so I'm reposting what I've reposted a lot of places in here, just as a "thank you" to all who replied and suggested:

      Well, I guess I was a little tired, and provided too little information, but I can explain why I kept it short.

      I talked to some of the security guys at work (I work at a HUGE world wide company, I can't disclose who for obvious reasons), and I told them a detailed story, which I didn't tell you.

      They came to the conclusion that the root of my problems was that I used an unsafe router that has been infected, and that the attackers had most likely infected my router and somehow upgraded it with malicious firmware. Therefor they came to the conclusion that I should go and get a much safer router. So my first instinct, tired and a little stressed from it all - was to ask you. I'm not in my 20s anymore, and I'm not as up to code about the hacking possibilities and vulnerabilities as I once was rightfully for my time. Today, I know next to nothing compared to you guys.

      The first time I got hacked:

      Firefox 54: I was visiting a page to get some schematics for some home made remote control system, and I noticed that the browser had all of my CPU threads busy, and the computer became oddly sluggish. I had No-Script installed, ad-blocker and my windows 10 was up to shape with the latest defender database plus latest updates I could possibly download, I always update immediately when it suggests an update.

      I immediately wanted to force stop Firefox so I went to the Task Bar and looked at the processes, oh my goodness - several instances of firefox (hidden windows /popups that aren't immediately visible?) was running, and it was creating more as I watched. I ended up killing all processes, and ran anti malware software (well, windows defender with the latest definitions) and it came out clean, or so I thought.

      Went to bed, and got woken up by my phone with several warnings from my various social media telling me that someone is posting from a different IP address than I normally used, I got out of bed and panicked.

      I immediately changed ALL passwords to hideously long random letter passwords on ALL my services, and went for two factor-authentication on everything I could.

      This stopped the attack on my personal accounts.

      Thinking it all was over, and safe - 3 weeks went by, and all of a sudden when I was working with something on my Linux partition, the computer crashed hard, and it rarely ever does that.

      After that crash, the Bios (or boot menu) was completely garbled. Interestingly enough, so was the bios on my second computer, which was 10 years old, and my new work computer was only a few years old, but with relatively fresh installations of both Linux (on an M.2. NVMe storage) and Windows 10 on an normal SSD storage, totally separated from each other (well, needing 2 different boot menues to access each one).

      I took a memdump of the entire bios, and found that the raw graphics area contained assembly code whereas it should be an image (you can look at the image with raw data image browser/raw graphics dump, it won't look like a clean image, but you can see that there is image data there).

      What I did, is that I reflashed the bios with the help of a separate hardware switch (my mainboard has two bioses, totally hardware separated with a switch), and looking at the manufacturers homepage, they already know that their bios had been comprimised, so they provided a beta patch with ME m

      --
      What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
    7. Re:A Safer Solution by CAOgdin · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that feedback. I appreciate the validation. I've been using the "cascade" technique for 17 years, now. Some of my colleagues scoffed at the idea when I first proposed it...but, since then, they've all been hacked...and I'm still (I assume, since I've found no untoward behavior on our small network) invasion-free.

  48. Any BSD box by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    A plain PC with two interface running a Linux or BSD system will do the job fine. And since it was not cited yet here, NetBSD can run that as free as secure as the other ones.

    A disadvantage (or advantage, YMMV) is that it requires learning some bits of Unix system administration.

  49. Olde school... by ElitistWhiner · · Score: 1

    Dual ethernet cards/firewall and SAMBA stood up to all but the inside attack

    Maybe someone could update current configuration to today

    1. Re:Olde school... by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 1

      Dual ethernet cards/firewall and SAMBA stood up to all but the inside attack

      Maybe someone could update current configuration to today

      Samba is an amazing piece of software, especially since the project has had to do so much to reverse-engineer a secret language. But making Unix talk to Windows is like making a PhD in Linguistics learn to say "Goo-goo-gah-gah baby want a rattle?". So sad that the world is full of babies.

      --
      Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    2. Re:Olde school... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      Hrm... my dad taught speech/language development and was actively researching "baby talk" (on the baby's side, not the parent's side), bilingual environments, and developments of speech impediments (stuttering, etc)... so there is at least one use case for someone with a PhD in Linguistics to deal wtih "goo goo gah gah" type language :)

       

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
  50. No router! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Simply disconnect completely and there is zero chance of getting hacked.

  51. In Germany, we swear on FritzBox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    as home routers.

    They actually care about good firmeware/software quality, have a shitload of features (most can also be disabled, so no bloat), and most importantly, *always* give you automatic updates. Even a decade after, you still get the newest OS and actually new features. The only case where I saw them not offer a new feature, was when the hardware physically could not support it.

    So yeah, unless you want to set up your own router from scratch, a FritzBox is a safe bet.

  52. NAT != firewall by anon+mouse-cow-aard · · Score: 2

    Please dont advertise NAT as security. NAT just allows allocation non-routable addresses that has a convenient by-default side-effect of denying all incoming traffic. In IPv6, you want to just use access lists, rather than NAT, and NAT should die in a fire from its being terribly overused. Lots of people have this idea that NAT is "secure", and access lists arent and put NAT in places where it really has no business Its a very bad rumour that causes people to think that public addresses themselves are *insecure* and that we need to break end to end for security. Leads to many issues. NAT has it's place, but it isn't fu^%%*ing everywhere.

    1. Re:NAT != firewall by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Technically it doesn't explicitly "deny" incoming traffic, the inbound traffic is addressed to the gateway and it doesn't know which (if any) of the machines behind to forward it to.
      It's not intentionally denying incoming traffic, just that incoming traffic is broken due to nat.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    2. Re:NAT != firewall by anon+mouse-cow-aard · · Score: 1
      A firewall with rules set to deny incoming connections, with a few allow rules for services you might have, and it's fine without NAT. There aren't any routers that come setup that way for IPv4, but all the IPv6 ones are, and it's fine. NAT works great for small offices and homes, which is where it is fine, and the side effects of not routing inbound traffic is easier than setting up rules, but many people take that small case, and make the leap to: NAT is always what a firewall is supposed to do and then apply it in enterprise settings, so that large organizations are deployed using non-routable addresses. That is a mess, especially when there are mergers or remote management or certain types of offpremises services which are all complicated a lot by enterprise application of NAT.

      For IPv6, if you are doing NAT on your home router, you're doing it wrong.

    3. Re:NAT != firewall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NAT does not deny by default. It only does in your head where you think of the ideal implementation. In reality, there is no spec, there's many different implementations, and many of them can be easily tricked to expose the LAN. Telling people to use NAT is like telling people all they need to do is install an anti-virus and they're safe. Except this anti-virus has all kinds of security holes and it's running as root.

  53. Apple Airport by pubwvj · · Score: 2

    I've had Apple Airports up and running, more than a dozen, since they first came out with newer ones over the years. Never had a problem. Excellent security. The fact that they are no longer being sold just means the price is cheaper - they're still excellent hardware and software.

    1. Re:Apple Airport by molarmass192 · · Score: 1

      I was coming to say this, never had a problem with these, they were really excellent and well locked down little routers. However, they fact they're discontinued is a big red flag, I can't recommend them without ongoing support.

      --

      Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
    2. Re:Apple Airport by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just remember to disable UPnP first thing, since it ships enabled by default. Apple calls it something different though.

  54. Untangle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have an untangle firewall in front of my router... the free version works fine on a little "book" computer I built for about $150, but I paid for content filtering for my kids computers/phones. It's been great so far.

  55. Untangle and Sophie home utm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surprised no one has said anything a bout untangle at home and the Sophia home utm. It’s a supply your own hardware and wireless, but they have all the next gen features like clam and ssl inspection. I use ubiquity wraps for the wireless

  56. UBNT is CRAP by Cyberax · · Score: 0

    UBNT routers and access points are crap. They are utterly dependent on their "central management" which you quite often do NOT want and which is dependent on their cloud services.

    1. Re:UBNT is CRAP by MikeDataLink · · Score: 4, Informative

      UBNT routers and access points are crap. They are utterly dependent on their "central management" which you quite often do NOT want and which is dependent on their cloud services.

      Don't spread FUD. You can run their management controller (which totally rocks by the way) on any Windows or Linux PC for free or on a small appliance they sell for less than $100. After you've configured them you never have to run the controller again unless you want to change something.

      --
      Mike @ The Geek Pub. Let's Make Stuff!
    2. Re:UBNT is CRAP by Foresto · · Score: 2

      I can only imagine that you had a frustrating experience with one product and mistakenly assumed that all of the company's other products work the same way. My EdgeRouter works rather well, and has never required any centralized or cloud management of any kind. I usually manage it via ssh.

    3. Re:UBNT is CRAP by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Wait, you can't use use a web interface like most routers?

      Could be a deal breaker as I prefer to avoid being reliant proprietary software that may or may not work with my OS and hardware. Is there and Android version, for example?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:UBNT is CRAP by coofercat · · Score: 1

      The Edgemax routers have their own admin interfaces (web/ssh etc) - no additional things required at all.

      If you want an Wifi access point then you need an admin tool, which you can either run on the same machine as you use to operate the browser (and shut it down when you're done), or a raspberry pi, or in my case a VM on my Qnap nas.

    5. Re:UBNT is CRAP by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I didn't know that. Seems strange that the WiFi stuff needs an app. why not web interface?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:UBNT is CRAP by coofercat · · Score: 1

      Their wifi stuff isn't so much 'home' kit as it's 'pro'. The admin tool means you can configure a bunch of APs at the same time, put them into groups, aggregate stats and whatnot - it's actually very good (even for home, with maybe 2 APs around the house), but it comes at the cost of needing to run the tool somewhere. I believe they do an appliance for it, although as I say, a Pi is enough if you want it to run 24x7. For home use, you could just start it up on your laptop, do the config and then shut to down until you next need to make a change though.

    7. Re:UBNT is CRAP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They also have a controller (tiny little box) that you just plug in a network port.

    8. Re:UBNT is CRAP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      UBNT routers and access points are crap. They are utterly dependent on their "central management" which you quite often do NOT want and which is dependent on their cloud services.

      Don't spread FUD. You can run their management controller (which totally rocks by the way) on any Windows or Linux PC for free or on a small appliance they sell for less than $100. After you've configured them you never have to run the controller again unless you want to change something.

      Or Mac, btw.

    9. Re: UBNT is CRAP by Brockmire · · Score: 0

      On nearly ALL devices, accessing the webGUI during high and sustained throughput takes a hit on the throughput. Might be because of it being a bridge, or from the limited CPU/RAM. When trying to build a scalable platform, you do want to avoid individually managed interfaces and not have double the work dealing with on and off device management.

  57. OpenWRT on Turris Omnia by Cyberax · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My current setup: OpenWRT on Turris Omnia. I've disabled Turris internal WiFi module (and installed a 4G PCIe LTE modem for a fallback connection) and I'm using TP-Link PoE wireless access points throughout my house. TP-Links are pretty well maintained, support VLANs and don't have any extra fluff.

    Turris MOX is an upcoming project that will make it even easier.

  58. This question exposes the real issue! by oldgraybeard · · Score: 1

    Your average individual has tech that is way beyond their ability to manage and secure, So security is performed as an add on by 3rd parties. And the truth is most of these 3rd party methods are not up to the job.
    It is not the fault of the user, since it is the vendors putting the devices out there for all. And not everyone is up to the job of properly managing their devices. It also does not help when vendors put inferior products out there, don't provide updates, etc. The normal user does not know or have the information to select one that makes the grade. In fact it is often true that security is seen as a hindrance to the ease of use and thus discarded by choice. As a result I think there will always be 100s of millions of compromised devices in the eco system.

    Which leaves me with this answer, with out proper hands on management you can not have a secure environment for ones devices today.

    Just my 2 cents ;)

  59. The Router Isnâ(TM)t the Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Variants of your password are. Have good AV and a password manager on all of your devices. Use a random password for each website. Keep up to date on security updates for your OS, your web browser and programs like Office, Adobe Reader, Adobe Flash, Java and other apps that are common attack vectors. If necessary buy software that can automatically patch common third party apps if you donâ(TM)t want to spend the time.

    Make sure your OS comes with its own firewall, turn it on and severely limit the open ports.

    Get a good business class router/firewall from a reputable company that offers support and maintenance. Keep your firmware up to date or select a firewall that will automatically download and install firmware updates during hours itâ(TM)s not in use.

    Ideally have no ports open ports on the firewall that allow for unsolicited incoming traffic. If youâ(TM)re going to host your own email server, web server or other service that requires open ports that allow unsolicited incoming external traffic donâ(TM)t go that route. Use a reputable third party provider instead. If remote access is necessary find a reputable vendor with a product that can do it via HTTPS.

    Recognize that you get what you pay for. If youâ(TM)re trying to DIY and you donâ(TM)t know what youâ(TM)re doing then donâ(TM)t do it. Pay for secure products and services from reputable vendors. The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of a low price.

  60. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree, Cisco backdoors are the best.

  61. OpenWRT/LEDE by kbahey · · Score: 4, Informative

    My main router was a Netgear running OpenWRT for years. They lagged behind in updates. Another group picked up where they left, and started the LEDE Project. Now the two projects have merged again.

    They provide updates regularly now, and it is very customizable.

    Highly recommended. Just pick a router that is explicitly supported.

  62. openbsd by geekymachoman · · Score: 1

    If you have technical knowledge... OpenBSD. Actually I find pf(4) to be easier to handle than iptables(8).

    But there might be better solutions depending on your use case... like are you using WiFi, etc.. but from security standpoint I would go OpenBSD any day.

    Also... it's very lightweight, you can run it on almost anything.

  63. IPFire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been running IPFire Linux for years and its been great. Cant believe nobody mentioned it. Was one of the first to feature fqcodel QoS and the transparent Squid URL filter has been handy for filtering sites for the kids.

    https://www.ipfire.org/

    Works good virtualized on ESXi as well.

  64. IPFire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    www.ipfire.org and your choice of hardware, then Guardian and Snort add-ons.

  65. If you're looking for plug and play... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bitdefender Box 2

    It's supposed to cover everything in your home...

  66. The Safest Router Does Not Run UPnP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or Samba, HTTP, FTP, DLNA, etc. Every service is another vulnerability.

    Minimally, all the router needs to do is route, possibly with NAT, preferably IPv6 only. It does not even need to be pingable. A few ipchains rules will turn the machine into a black hole. A router that is off does not qualify as it does not route.

    The opposite of security is convenience.

  67. One that doesn't use wi-fi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I took the antennae off of my WRT54GL router (besides disabling wifi in software.) Oh, and I flashed it with Tomato WRT which is so old it doesn't have the heartbeat bug in it.

  68. just no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.wired.com/2016/12/ton-popular-netgear-routers-exposed-no-easy-fix/

    1. Re:just no by Zmobie · · Score: 1

      Did you read my post? Install DD-WRT and this is a non-issue. I am using the hardware from netgear not he firmware. I actually hate their stock firmware anyway and would recommend not buying the router if you don't plan to install custom firmware.

    2. Re:just no by skids · · Score: 1

      If you loaded an opensource firmware on the netgear like he said, you would not have been vulnerable to that bug because you would not have been running Netgear's firmware.

      (Recently got a chance to configure some of NetGear's prosumer/enterprise gear and it was mostly sane... allowed you to turn off all the crap and put all the mgmt on an out of band interface and/or pick and choose which services bound to which SVI. They claim they are starting to take this security more seriously, and at least on the enterprise side it looks like they might be.)

  69. Palo Alto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The term router is thrown around today to mean many different things.

    As far as security and preventing break-ins and hacks, NO router or simple firewall/NAT device will protect you. That's not their function.

    You really need to investigate NGFW appliances. These are devices which recognise, understand and act upon all traffic on your network, and traffic leaving/entering your network. That is the only way to actively prevent an intrusion. These tend to integrate a router, firewall, NAT, PAT, IPS, IDS, active virus scanner, and network traffic analyser/controller.

    I own and am protected by a Palo Alto PA-220 device, which is an excellent investment. If you are serious about security, and unless you are a serious security expert, you don't roll your own solution. Pure and simple.

  70. Any router that isn't so popular by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

    Hackers will always want the biggest bang for their buck, so they'll attack very popular routers. Who wants to bother with the product used by 5% of the population?

    1. Re:Any router that isn't so popular by DogDude · · Score: 1

      You're exactly right. I use one of those less popular routers, and I don't even want to say what brand they are.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
  71. Something helpful and free - OpenDNS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look in to using OpenDNS. It's free and will keep you away from a lot of bad "stuff"

  72. The safest router is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...any router that's powered down, & has had an unfortunate encounter with a sledgehammer, especially if you're a CenturyLink customer.

  73. Skip the firewall and go straight to a Chromebook by coryhamma · · Score: 2

    If you visit a security conference, you will find that most of the attendees are using Chromebooks. They are much more secure than your typical Windows or Apple device. Another issue people often have is that they re-use the same password for multiple services. One of the services gets compromised, and the attackers use your credentials to access your email account, and thus other services. Set a unique password for each account. Save those passwords in a password manager. Enable the 2-factor authentication feature on your email account. Firewalls will not protect you against modern threats. Antivirus will only protect you against some of the modern threats. I also suggest you also consider taking an internet security class, to avoid common pitfalls. Most modern issues can be avoided by educating yourself against common attacks, which often involve social engineering.

  74. Make sure you firewall understands Zones for IPv6 by thogard · · Score: 1

    If your going with IPv6, make sure you firewall understands zone concepts. Using address ranges is a very bad idea when IPv6 is used as things can change and testing becomes nearly impossible. For home use you might have a zone for your gaming systems, a zone for your work computers, a zone for guest wifi. Also make sure that it can cope with things more complex than the "Trust/Untrust/DMZ" model which was fine before multi-port routers and VLANs.

  75. Router Firewall More by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Recently discovered Check Point's security appliance, with all the options configured, it works very well.

  76. Configuration and maintenance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The router you use is irrelevant if it's poorly configured or maintained.

    It's hard to gauge whether you're talking about domestic or commercial routers, but I assume you're talking about your home router. Myself, I'm partial to Mikrotik routers. But, they recently had quite a nasty flaw that had existed for some time too. So, your approach should be to consider security first. Perimeter firewall, host level firewalls, SELinux, AppArmour, least privilege, etc.

  77. ASUS routers are rock solid by WiseWeasel · · Score: 1

    I've been loving my older ASUS wifi router. If I were buying one today, I might get something like this model:

    https://www.amazon.com/RT-ACRH...

    --
    "I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
    1. Re: ASUS routers are rock solid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      my Asus has been getting updates for over 3 years now, so that's something

  78. F-Secure Sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least F-Secure have a router aimed for the not so tech-savvy consumers.

  79. For consumes boxes: Fritz!Box by Casandro · · Score: 1

    There's a German brand of routers/ATA/IAD/DECT-base/WLAN combined boxes called Fritz!Box. They don't use the web frontend provided by the chipset manufacturer so they use their own, which means that the bugs in 99% of other routers don't work there. Firmware updates regarding features are available for a few years, bugfixes even longer. Costs start at 30 Euros for a refurbished middle model and go up to >200 Euros for the top of the line models.

    Other than that, use some Linux computer to build your own router.

  80. The one you can COMPLETELY manage yourself by doragasu · · Score: 1

    I'm assuming we are talking about home routers (no enterprise grade stuff here). If you have the required knowledge, buy a router supported by OpenWRT. Install this distro and keep it properly managed (keep security updates up-to-date, create a sane configuration, etc.).

    Otherwise you are screwed.

  81. Measure Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You question implies that you can measure and compare security.

  82. The problem here is... by Casandro · · Score: 1

    ... that those vulnerable parts of the router firmware typically aren't made by the router manufacturer. The manufacturer usually just reskins the web interface. That's why it's now common to have cross-model attacks on large percentages of the routers.

    So you'd probably end up running virtually the same firmware as 90% of the rest. Price is no indication, BTW, as I've seen even expensive routers doing just that.

  83. the one you made yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Honestly if you know your way around iptables its easiest to make a small linux box. Rasp pi with add on usb ether ethernet port will do.

  84. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  85. Endian products keep a nice balance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm using Endian product for my business since a couple of year and I have to say that those are good products. Easy to use also for non expert.
    Their product are based on open source software so is safe as the open source code can be safe. In my experience they are quite fast in the update as soon a new vulnerability is discovered

    They have a community edition for free.
    endian.com

  86. turris omnia - opensource, updated, secure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have a look at Turris Omnia - https://www.turris.cz/en/

  87. pfSence is what you need. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or stop running unneeded services (I am looking at you Ubuntu)... Or if you are running Windows, for the love of everything holy; STOP!

  88. What are you trying to secure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Proper security is usually end-to-end so your router might even be compromised. The next hop (ISP) is untrusted anyway. Make sure your end devices are secure.

  89. Turris, maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://omnia.turris.cz/en/
    https://www.turris.cz/en/

  90. Nothing beats an air gap by mrwireless · · Score: 1

    I created a device that disconnects my home network from the internet..
    - during sleeping hours
    - when it detects that there are no phones and laptops on the network.

    It's part of an Ethical Smart Home experiment where we are designing a privacy friendly smart home. Some details:
    - It has a hardware switch to reconnect at any time.
    - It's fail safe. In case of power failure the internet is reconnected.

  91. a pc by sad_ · · Score: 1

    use a small pc, these days you can find enough motherboards with two ethernet connections, and install linux or a bsd on it, done.
    the pc doesn't even have to be powerfull or be able to run a gui.
    been doing it this way for 20 years, always up to date with patches, easy to replace and get back running if broken, etc.

    --
    On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
    1. Re:a pc by MindPrison · · Score: 1

      This is a good, in fact GREAT suggestion. Essentially a firewall/router is just a computer anyway.

      I'm however looking for a more finished solution, as I'm old and tired, very tired of messing around with the inner workings of it all, I just want some peace of mind.

      --
      What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
  92. Not enough. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Somebod recently managed to leak data through the power cord.

  93. Router not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Generally all routers are basically the same for consumers. If you want more security you need to look towards safer practices running better security on devices and using complex passwords.

  94. Answer the question that was asked by Excelcia · · Score: 2

    In any scenario there are explicit facts and implied facts. The explicit fact in this scenario is that the asker was hacked twice. The implied fact, from the question, is that one or both were related to his router. Turning that around on the asker questions his competence to ask the question, and is an arrogant assertion that your mere assumption that he likely doesn't know what he's talking about is more probable than the poser's clear implication in the question that the router is pertinent to the discussion.

    There are some Ask Slashdot questions where the implied facts are inherently inconsistent with the question being asked. In cases like that, go to town pointing it out. This here, however, is pretty open and shut and the asker deserves deference in his scenario. In general all implied facts should be assumed to be in favour of the poser of the question knowing what he's talking about.

    In short, and I'm going to bold this so you can refer back to it, unless there is an overwhelming reason not to, either answer the question asked or exercise your constitutional right to remain silent.

  95. Laptop not on home wifi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A router won't help you when you take a laptop to a cafe or some other place.

    You want better security on the endpoint devices. Assume 0-trust of any network including your home one.

  96. Prove it was your router ? by rojash · · Score: 1

    What a lot of comments to a 2-line post where the person doesnt even explain what happened, leave alone what router was being used. People just jump into conclusions !?? Obviously your security setup was bad, in which case the router wont matter. Use a VPN.

    1. Re:Prove it was your router ? by MindPrison · · Score: 1

      I'll post what I replied to a lot of people to you as well so you see what the details are:

      Well, I guess I was a little tired, and provided too little information, but I can explain why I kept it short.

      I talked to some of the security guys at work (I work at a HUGE world wide company, I can't disclose who for obvious reasons), and I told them a detailed story, which I didn't tell you.

      They came to the conclusion that the root of my problems was that I used an unsafe router that has been infected, and that the attackers had most likely infected my router and somehow upgraded it with malicious firmware. Therefor they came to the conclusion that I should go and get a much safer router. So my first instinct, tired and a little stressed from it all - was to ask you. I'm not in my 20s anymore, and I'm not as up to code about the hacking possibilities and vulnerabilities as I once was rightfully for my time. Today, I know next to nothing compared to you guys.

      The first time I got hacked:

      Firefox 54: I was visiting a page to get some schematics for some home made remote control system, and I noticed that the browser had all of my CPU threads busy, and the computer became oddly sluggish. I had No-Script installed, ad-blocker and my windows 10 was up to shape with the latest defender database plus latest updates I could possibly download, I always update immediately when it suggests an update.

      I immediately wanted to force stop Firefox so I went to the Task Bar and looked at the processes, oh my goodness - several instances of firefox (hidden windows /popups that aren't immediately visible?) was running, and it was creating more as I watched. I ended up killing all processes, and ran anti malware software (well, windows defender with the latest definitions) and it came out clean, or so I thought.

      Went to bed, and got woken up by my phone with several warnings from my various social media telling me that someone is posting from a different IP address than I normally used, I got out of bed and panicked.

      I immediately changed ALL passwords to hideously long random letter passwords on ALL my services, and went for two factor-authentication on everything I could.

      This stopped the attack on my personal accounts.

      Thinking it all was over, and safe - 3 weeks went by, and all of a sudden when I was working with something on my Linux partition, the computer crashed hard, and it rarely ever does that.

      After that crash, the Bios (or boot menu) was completely garbled. Interestingly enough, so was the bios on my second computer, which was 10 years old, and my new work computer was only a few years old, but with relatively fresh installations of both Linux (on an M.2. NVMe storage) and Windows 10 on an normal SSD storage, totally separated from each other (well, needing 2 different boot menues to access each one).

      I took a memdump of the entire bios, and found that the raw graphics area contained assembly code whereas it should be an image (you can look at the image with raw data image browser/raw graphics dump, it won't look like a clean image, but you can see that there is image data there).

      What I did, is that I reflashed the bios with the help of a separate hardware switch (my mainboard has two bioses, totally hardware separated with a switch), and looking at the manufacturers homepage, they already know that their bios had been comprimised, so they provided a beta patch with ME microcode included as well.

      I told this story to our security guys, and they said the same as someone else in this thread, someone thinks you have something to hide, and they're not script kiddies, you've been targeted - I suggest you start with a badass router, and take it from there, disable all server services in win 10 + remote services like remote registry etc.

      I don't know that much about windows 10. But that's all I know for now. Appreciate all the feedback , you wonderful Slashdotters!

      --
      What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
  97. It's easier than that. by Type44Q · · Score: 1

    The safest router would be the one with rounded corners.

    1. Re:It's easier than that. by q4Fry · · Score: 1

      CVE-2018-1337 Corners of ACME Technologies routers meet at an angle under the recommended MITRE/ASME specification of 90 x 90 x 90 degrees, which can be exploited to infect resources with the LOCKJAW worm (aka CVE-1421-0004 Tetanus). This affects models produced between 2014-01-01 and 2015-04-01. Mitigation: File the corners down.

  98. Sophos by ryanmc1 · · Score: 1

    I have been using Sophos UTM for years and I love how it has a default secure state and you have to unblock everything you want to use. However UTM is getting close to EOL and so I switched to their new XG firewall. IT is more open as a default but that is easily fixed with a new rule that blocks everything. After a bit of learning I like the new xg firewall and because it is free I can't complain about the price. I bought a cheap desktop online and added a second nic card. It has been running for about 6 months without any problems.

  99. Look at Synology home routers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bought a Synology home router appliance about a year ago after observing that:
    - my Synology diskstation NAS had been receiving firmware updates for years (with auto updates)
    - their routers appeared to run similar firmware (including the same borderline gratuitous web admin interface)
    - the published change log for the router firmware included reasonably frequent releases and fixes for many CVEs: https://www.synology.com/en-us/releaseNote/RT2600ac

    In particular, I bought this one: https://www.synology.com/en-us/products/RT2600ac

    So far I'm a happy customer. The router checks for updates automatically, sends an email to me as an FYI when an update is available, and auto updates itself.

    I was pleasantly surprised to be able to enable 2 factor authentication on the admin interface (using Google Authenticator), although it has the downside of making it harder to get in when the Internet connection is down.

    My only complaint feature wise is that it's only possible to restrict access to the wired network from the guest wireless networks, not the primary wireless network -- and it's not possible to turn off only the primary wireless network. I.e. it's not possible to completely disable wireless access to the wired network.

    Obviously frequent auto updates, historically long device update support, CVE fixes, and 2 factor authentication don't guarantee security, but they beat a lot of what I've seen in the home router appliance market. Synology doesn't have a long history of building routers, but they have a decent history of building reasonably popular NAS appliances. I doubt that their routers get as much attention from responsible security researchers as more popular manufactures' do, though.

  100. A no-snark reply with actual hardware listed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The main problem with routers is they have outdated firmware and sometimes they're leaving open ports for devices that have outdated firmware, OS's not updated, or there are devices on the network that were hacked through no fault of the firewall (phishing, installing infected apps, etc). To eliminate #1 and #2, I suggest a router that always provides updated firmware with minimal effort on your part.

    The one that does that best is Google Wifi as long as you don't care about what's in their updates. They're intended for the non-technical user.
    If you're willing to keep the router updated on your own, and know enough to flash firmware, buy any router with decent ratings and price that has DD-WRT compatbility. DD-WRT is 3rd party open source firmware software for routers that stays continuously updated. Most router makers abandon their routers within a year or two and many routers being sold today don't even have that long to go before they're abandoned, because they've been on the shelf a while.

  101. One that runs 3rd party firmware... by bobbied · · Score: 1

    For home use, the *best* in safety is that firewall/router that runs third party firmware like DD-WRT or OpenWRT. Personally, I run OpenWRT on my WRT-1900ACS Linksys with a USB powered cooling fan sitting on top. Also, run the minimum on your router. No VPN end points or other services on the router connected to the internet. Don't port forward, except to DMZ based hosts, and don't have the DMZ host on your private LAN, always go though another firewall/router to get to the real stuff.

    However, I'm guessing that unless you have port forwarding, you got hacked from the inside by some exploit you willingly executed. All the secure network equipment in the world won't help if you don't keep malware and virus detection actively running and updated regularly, AND if you insist on running stuff from hazy sources.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  102. Best Router by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sonicwall is the best.

  103. Untangle Home by ET+Admin · · Score: 1

    Untangle Home It is $50 per year for home use, and includes all of the premium features, at a fraction of the cost. Untangle is easily comparable to the other retail security appliance vendors, but it is Much easier to configure. Many of the admins that favor a "lock out everything" mindset do not appreciate Untangle because it does not take that approach. But that makes it easier for the home-gamer to setup and fine tune. There will be a definite learning curve because there are so many more features available. For hardware, I recommend; A barebone headless pc that can be kitted out for $230 or less.

  104. bitdefender box 2 by btroy · · Score: 1

    Check out the bidefender box 2.

  105. Router got hacked twice .. by najajomo · · Score: 1

    "I've been hacked twice recently and that has seriously made me rethink my options for my safety and well-being. So, I ask you dear Slashdot users, from one fellow longtime Slashdotter to another: which is the best router for optimal safety today?"

    What make of model was this modem and was it running using the default username/password, UPnP enabled and the ISPs remote upgrade enabled. Personally I've ditched the supplied modem, use a third party model with customized software running as a blob.

    The current crisis security problem demonstrate the dangers of a monoculture, as in when a virus comes along, it wipes out most of the ecosystem. The solution being to mix-and-match the hardware/software combinations to effectively produce unique devices, not all susceptible to the latest malware.

    'CyberInsecurity: The cost of Monopoly How the Dominance of Microsoft's Products Poses a Risk to Security'

    1. Re:Router got hacked twice .. by MindPrison · · Score: 1

      The router was a TP Link Archer C2 (Gigabit dual band router)
      It says it's firmware updateable, but It always failed to update.

      The security guys I talked to, said that this was mostly due to malicious firmware, and I should remove this router from my system asap. And get a new one, hence why I went to the slashdot crowd.

      --
      What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
  106. The router is not your problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You were hacked because you did something stupid, like trust a website or an app or a download that you shouldn't have. Just like most people whose home system have been hacked. No router, firewall or ruleset is going to stop you from doing stupid things.

    And how do you stop doing stupid things? You identify the stupid thing you did in the past: what you did, why you did it, and what the results were, intended and otherwise, so you know what behavior not to repeat in the future. You'll never stop repeating a mistake if you don't understand it.

  107. Install OpenBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Install OpenBSD, it's the only way to be sure

  108. answers.... to the question in the OP by Nex6 · · Score: 1

    first, like the questions everyone keeps asking is how are you getting hacked? more data would be helpful... baring that...
    somethings I would recomend.....

    -if you want to change your router any of the decent reviewed routers are ok. or you can roll a bunch of options like ddwrt, etc. I just use a
    commercial one.

    - make sure your computers firewall is ON and that it logs all connections. (and that its blocking inbound)
    - if windows, makes sure the logging and auditing are on.
    -use the latest version of what ever your OS is...
    -look at whats actually installed, and what your actualling installing. doing install anything thats not 100% trusted. no 'warez', or priated
    software, no pirated mp3, movies anything. if its not 100% trusted it needs to go... this is an important step....
    -if you suspect a hack, full reinstall of everything is in order period full stop....
    -do an opsec review of all your accounts, cleanup on the privacy and security settings and change all your passwords. and update security questions etc. every account should have unique random password, use something like lastpass or 1password.
    -make sure your using the latest browser versions chrome is pretty good here and add flash, and ad blockers. and add httpseveryhwere
    -dont click on untrusted links, or run anything untrusted like facebook games etc.
    -if your using mac or windows use malwarebytes and a good security endpoint product.. sophos is free and decent.
    -setup an opendns account and use it block all the bad sites in it.
    -make sure all your software is always up to date
    -dont run as admin, run as standard user and if windows us UAC to full. use 2nd accout for admin.

    this should help your out alot.

    -Nex6
     

  109. Change your setup! by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

    There is no simple solution to this problem, it's a full network design issue.

    My current network setup:
    1. ISP Connection.
    2. PFSense Firewall with Suricata.
    3. Unifi Gateway: https://store.ubnt.com/collect...
    4. Router: https://store.ubnt.com/collect...
    5. Switch (Managed): https://store.ubnt.com/collect...
    6. Wireless AP's: https://store.ubnt.com/collect...
    7. ELK Server, so I can monitor the network and computers

    Finally firewalls on all the computers, which are all running Linux, so I use UFW and Firejail to make everything nicely locked down. I don't use those exact parts, but close enough. Make sure to disable any built in AP's that come bundled with ISP Modem / Routers. Your ISP connection should ONLY be a modem.

  110. The one that you disconnect from the network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The safest router is a router that you don't connect to any network.

  111. My recommendations by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

    My recommendations for the most secure options for home or small office use:

    Dedicated hardware: Asuswrt-Merlin ( https://asuswrt.lostrealm.ca/ ) combined with one of the compatible ASUS router models. It's being actively supported; new versions appear every one to two months, and would likely appear more quickly if there were a major zero-day exploit. Not as feature-rich as DD-WRT or the like but more frequently updated.

    Build your own PC or pre-configured PC: pfSense ( https://www.pfsense.org/ ) or OPNsense ( https://opnsense.org/ ). OPNsense is a fork of pfSense, which in turn is a fork of the now unsupported m0n0wall. They're based on FreeBSD. The companies sell pre-configured systems and support contracts as a source of income, but the software is free and open source and you can roll your own system. A PC has more memory and computing power than a dedicated router box, so these are more feature-rich than anything that runs on one of those boxes.

    1. Re:My recommendations by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      One catch with pfSense and OPNsense is that they are not designed to be wireless access points, so you will need one or more separate APs for that. Really high end wireless NICs aren't available as PC plug-in cards in any case. The usual home routers can be used as access points by disabling the routing functions or not using them. If you take a typical home router and plug an Ethernet cable from your router into one of the LAN ports, configure a static IP address in the correct range (optional but recommended as it makes it easier to get to the router's control page if needed), and disable its DHCP server, it will function as an access point. Or you can buy dedicated APs from companies like Ubiquiti Networks ( https://www.ubnt.com/ )

  112. but routers hack you by swschrad · · Score: 1

    I would also recommend using carbide bits, as a 98 year old might not be able to change them easily, holding the shaft lock while torquing on the latching nut.

    yes, this was off-topic. but it's a nice giggle.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  113. No such thing by dontfearthereaper · · Score: 1

    There is no such thing as a perfectly secured router/firewall/gateway. Any degree of access required increases attack surface. The most you can do is lock down everything you possibly can, intelligently allow the absolute minimum of access (bi-directionally) required to do what you need to do, and pray. Most reputable open-source *ix based solutions work the best (unless you're talking commercial/industrial appliances) , and which one you want depends on which featureset you require combined with available hardware. There are even pre-spun *ix distros for this specific purpose. The other half of this is intelligent use of the interwebs. It's already been said, but don't go to sketchy sites, don't fool around with flash/java games (remove flash and java from your PC if you can), don't use windows/OSX unless you absolutely have to, and don't click stupid stuff.

  114. Pre router protection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have an external pfSense firewall, also running Snort also, running on a controller that is the first entry point from my ISP's input box. My router then connects to the pfSense firewall. This affords me some protection from anyone getting to my router through the internet. Over wifi is another problem, but we are hard wired only here. You can setup pfSense on an old computer.

  115. Great Firewall by geekysmurf1 · · Score: 1

    If you have a Mac, I love and have never had a problem with LittleSnitch. https://www.obdev.at/products/...

  116. Turris by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about Turris Omnia?

  117. Anything that does NOT have ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "UPnP."
    "Web Configuration"
    "Dependancies on External Vendors"
    "Remote Configuration"

    The above excludes almost every device you are likely to find in Best Buy / Wallmart / FUture Shop / etc -- almost every single "consumer" device.

    Has a proper stateful firewall whether or not included with a "proper" NATP implementation (not cheap Chinese NAT).

    This will drive your price point over $5000 for a NEW device.

    Again, make SURE that all remote access and web configuration features are disabled. If you cannot entirely configure the device from your computer when only your computer is connected to the device and absolutely nothing else whatsoever is connected to anything anywhere, then you may as well just cut off your nuts with rusty pinking shears since you have zero security ...

  118. See how good your router/firewall is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of the things I've used off and on in the past is Steve Gibson's grc.com shields up testing.

    It does a decent job of scanning all of the normal ports, as well as being able to scan any port range you want.
    It gives a graphical representation of the results, where if every square is green, then you're set as far as outside -> inside attack vectors.

    They also have a leaktest, where you load an agent and it runs a few tests.

    I know Steve's something of an odd-duck, but damn if his Spinrite software hasn't saved my bacon a few times, so I know he does solid work in at least most areas.

  119. Proprietary software is the enemy: no safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Proprietary software is the enemy: no safety with it exists and most routers are dependent on proprietary components. The only routers that I'd consider purchasing are ones that we have a complete set of source code for. LibreCMC is regularly releasing updated packages and releases more often than most other distributions. The embedded distribution also only ships free software, is endorsed by the Free Software Foundation, and actually has routers commercially available that can be purchased with the complete set of source code included from https://www.thinkpenguin.com/ even the bootloader code is available!

  120. Synology by AceViper · · Score: 1

    I recommend Synology RT2600AC. It uses the Qualcomm IPQ8065 chipset.

  121. FreeBSD and m0n0wall or pfsense by Agripa · · Score: 1

    One of the FreeBSD router packages like m0n0wall or pfsense running on x86 hardware works well enough. Even better, use an inexpensive VLAN switch as an Ethernet port expander so that m0n0wall or pfsense can route between every device on your network allowing you to choose what can see what. By default, everything can then see the internet, the internet cannot see anything, and nothing on the internal network can see anything else on the internal network. This will prevent one compromised system from compromising other local systems.

  122. NFGW + DNS Protection by geronimo1000 · · Score: 1

    I'd take a look at the free firewall software from Sophos (Sophos XG Firewall Home Edition). You can load that onto a low-power/fanless PC. Pair that with OpenDNS (also free), and it make for a very secure solution.

    You could also look at some of the next-generation firewall appliances out there, but that typically requires spending more and sometimes a subscription is required.

  123. You have it wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the reason you got hacked twice is because you think the router is what provides safety. The router does not provide you any safety, that is the job of the firewall. You don't even understand the the difference between the two, so you are bound to be hacked over and over again. Get a good firewall, use whatever router you want.

  124. soekris hardware + openbsd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    soekris hardware + openbsd (as other have mentioned) is going to be a very reliable, relatively secure solution.

    you most likely could leave it running for 5 years and not be hacked, un-updated. that assumes you're just running a tcp/ip stack and PF enabled, and expose no tcp/udp services and otherwise restrict packets by default in to the host.

  125. Roqos Core being open-source updated automatically by suysal · · Score: 1

    Roqos Core is a Debian Linux based completely open source firewall IPS router that one can login and run any command as "root". All cybersecurity solutions must be open as otherwise you don't know if the router has been hacked code, has malware in it, or participates in DDOS, etc. Roqos Core is the only Intrusion Prevention System based on Suricata in the residential market. Currently it has more than 10,000 signatures specifically compiled for homes, and they are updated automatically every day 4 AM local time, as well as automatic software updates, hence no more firmware updates. For zeroday attached they are updated instantaneously. More information is at http://roqos.com./ Disclosure: This may sound biased opinion as I am affiliated with Roqos :)

  126. Have you considered OPNSense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have been dabbling with https://opnsense.org and you cant beat the price as well
    Its pretty much turnkey, allows GeoIP blocking, intrusion detection etc..

  127. Pi-Hole? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think Pi-holes are now available prepackaged and ready to go now for improved simplicity?

  128. Re: A Safer Solution - Rebuttal by CAOgdin · · Score: 1

    I appreciate your claims...but I invite you to actually explain how--if they can get "inside" the first router, and suss out the address range for the second router, they can get into that second router. The routers are not platforms for programming; each has its' own proprietary-ness that must be coped with. Then, even if they gain first-level access, they've got to suss out how to program that second router, too, and develop code for that...which they have to somehow slide past the first router to get into an executable environment on the LAN side.

    In general, most security methods are deterrents because they raise the price to the potential attacker to an unacceptable level, and that encourages them to quit and go find that laptop user in a coffee shop using the local (and free) Wi-FI connection. It's a lot of work, just to find out that you've just hacked "Grammy Rose's" Facebook access platform!

    In conclusion: I published a common IP-address string. Are you so dense as to believe that I would publish my actual IP Address? And, yes, I've known it as "cascaded NAT," but you can call it "double NAT" if you wish. All I know is that it all works for me, and has for over 30 years. Someday, maybe, I'll have to toss it out and do something more elaborate...but, so far, I've been pleased with my local results.