Wi-Fi Router settings

I've got a D-Link DI-624 Wireless Router (works great - no probs), but with
the recent news reports about Wi-Fi security I've started to re-consider my
Wi-Fi security.

Currently I have the router set for 128 bit WEP. Everything works hunky dory
and so far (in a Housing Estate) the monitored logs have not shown any
"extraneous" accesses.

But I've found a couple of "other" settings for the Wi-Fi and would
appreciate the groups collective thoughts...

One is WPA and the other is WPA-PSK.

WPA asks for a "Radius Server #1 IP", a "Port" and a "Shared Secret", and an
(optional) Radius Server #2 with the same details...

WPA-PSK asks for only a Passphrase (and a Passphrase confirmation box).

Question...

Would I increase my WiFi security if I opted for one of these?... and what
on earth would be valid inputs?

All help appreciated
--
(E-Mail Removed)
Reply address is spamtrapped. Remove theobvious for valid e-mail address

"Paul King" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:eA8_c.128468$(E-Mail Removed):

> I've got a D-Link DI-624 Wireless Router (works great - no
> probs), but with the recent news reports about Wi-Fi security
> I've started to re-consider my Wi-Fi security.
>
> Currently I have the router set for 128 bit WEP. Everything
> works hunky dory and so far (in a Housing Estate) the monitored
> logs have not shown any "extraneous" accesses.
>
> But I've found a couple of "other" settings for the Wi-Fi and
> would appreciate the groups collective thoughts...
>
> One is WPA and the other is WPA-PSK.
>
> WPA asks for a "Radius Server #1 IP", a "Port" and a "Shared
> Secret", and an (optional) Radius Server #2 with the same
> details...
>
> WPA-PSK asks for only a Passphrase (and a Passphrase
> confirmation box).
>
> Question...
>
> Would I increase my WiFi security if I opted for one of
> these?... and what on earth would be valid inputs?
>
> All help appreciated

Depends on whether your client PCs can handle WPA. All
(sufficient?) is revealed here:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/u...expert/bowman_
03july28.mspx

Frank le Spikkin <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> "Paul King" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> news:eA8_c.128468$(E-Mail Removed):
>
>> I've got a D-Link DI-624 Wireless Router (works great - no
>> probs), but with the recent news reports about Wi-Fi security
>> I've started to re-consider my Wi-Fi security.
>>
>> Currently I have the router set for 128 bit WEP. Everything
>> works hunky dory and so far (in a Housing Estate) the monitored
>> logs have not shown any "extraneous" accesses.
>>
>> But I've found a couple of "other" settings for the Wi-Fi and
>> would appreciate the groups collective thoughts...
>>
>> One is WPA and the other is WPA-PSK.
>>
>> WPA asks for a "Radius Server #1 IP", a "Port" and a "Shared
>> Secret", and an (optional) Radius Server #2 with the same
>> details...
>>
>> WPA-PSK asks for only a Passphrase (and a Passphrase
>> confirmation box).
>>
>> Question...
>>
>> Would I increase my WiFi security if I opted for one of
>> these?... and what on earth would be valid inputs?
>>
>> All help appreciated
>
> Depends on whether your client PCs can handle WPA. All
> (sufficient?) is revealed here:

Well, if the client PCs can't, it'll be even more secure

On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 02:08:26 +0100, "Paul King"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Question...
>
>Would I increase my WiFi security if I opted for one of these?... and what
>on earth would be valid inputs?
>
>All help appreciated

WPA is undoubtedly more secure than WEP. If your router and clients
machines are able to use it will make your system more secure. If
not, I'd not lose much sleep over it. If you are just a home user a
decent 128 WEP key should be enough to deter casual attackers. If
enough time and effort is put into it then someone MIGHT be able to
crack the key, but why would someone want to stay parked outside your
house for days constantly capturing packets of data on your network to
break in when the likelihood of you having anything worthwhile (in
context) is almost nil.

If you do opt for WPA then WPA-PSK is the option to select. Make sure
you choose a key which is close to the maximum 60 characters and
includes upper and lower case letters, numbers and some ascii symbols.

You should be aware that WPA does (theoretically) increase the
processing overheads which may therefore have an impact on your
wireless thru-put. I used WPA for a while. I couldn't view WMV files
across the network, they were very stuttery. I have since switched
back to WEP (as I introduced a new client machine which does not
support WPA) and I can now view the WMV files. I can't say for
certain that WPA was the difference, it may just be that there was
other interference on the previous occasion.

I understand that WPA2 is now out and about - I wonder how many
consumer units will be upgradable by firmware revisions to this new
standard?