WiFi Encryption

By howard ·
My observation is that wifi encryption cause a performance hit on my CPU. As a consequence, I don't broadcast my SSID and I use MAC filtering instead. Most everyone else seems to think that encryption is the way to go. Does encryption cause as much overhead as I think?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Answers

Collapse -

You are vulnerable

by TechExec2 In reply to WiFi Encryption

Not broadcasting your SSID and using MAC filtering is nice but is really no protection at all. WEP is not enough either. You must use WPA-PSK with a strong key. Encryption can have some overhead. But, you need it.

WEP: Dead Again, Part 1

WEP: Dead Again, Part 2

Cracking WEP and WPA Wireless Networks

Collapse -

Different levels of security

by curlergirl In reply to WiFi Encryption

Using MAC filtering and preventing your SSID from broadcasting are both good security measures. They help prevent unauthorized but otherwise fairly "honest" people from stealing your bandwidth by piggybacking off your wireless connection. However, encryption is a different level of security. Encryption protects the data in the pipeline rather than the connection itself. This is necessary to protect yourself adequately from someone hacking your data. So, regardless of the small hit you take in your pipeline by using data encryption, it's worth it IMO.

Hope this helps!

Collapse -


by stilmas In reply to Different levels of secur ...

You won't notice any difference, turn it on. Use WPA2 (XP SP2) if you have the option. I like either TKIP or AES. AES is stronger encryption I believe (256-bit).

Related Discussions

Related Forums