News of the Weird, Network Version: Security Guru Leaves His Wireless Network Open

[Lemur]

This is kinda odd. I have immense respect for Bruce Schneier; I think his writing on network security is must-read material for anyone with an interest in the subject. (WHacker? Thoughts?)

He's posted an article about how he leaves his home WiFi network open, and how it's a great idea. I am left scratching my furry little head.

Security is always a trade-off. I know people who rarely lock their front door, who drive in the rain (and, while using a cellphone) and who talk to strangers. In my opinion, securing my wireless network isn't worth it. And I appreciate everyone else who keeps an open wireless network, including all the coffee shops, bars and libraries I have visited in the past, the Dayton International Airport where I started writing this and the Four Points Sheraton where I finished. You all make the world a better place.

[R'as al Ghul]

Yes, the folks at boingboing.net also think it's a good idea.
What I found most odd was this statement:

And yes, if someone did commit a crime using my network the police might visit, but what better defense is there than the fact that I have an open wireless network? If I enabled wireless security on my network and someone hacked it, I would have a far harder time proving my innocence.

In Germany for example, the owner of the connection is liable.

[Xiahou]

And yes, if someone did commit a crime using my network the police might visit, but what better defense is there than the fact that I have an open wireless network? If I enabled wireless security on my network and someone hacked it, I would have a far harder time proving my innocence.

That makes no sense at all- particularly with his being a IT security professional. I think an unsecured wireless network, in his case(as opposed to your average slob, who could plead stupidity), would smack of willful negligence on his part- practically begging someone to connect and do something bad.

To me, it's basic politeness. Providing internet access to guests is kind of like providing heat and electricity, or a hot cup of tea. But to some observers, it's both wrong and dangerous.

So really, this is all about his social views on wireless rather than security. In that regard, you could say he's speaking out of his area of expertise. That a "security expert" would advise people to do something that is by definition, totally unsecure because he feels it polite is... puzzling.

If he wants to let people freeload on his home network because he feels it's the right thing to do, he can go for it- but it's totally unsecure. For myself, I'll keep WPA.

[Ramses II CP]

It would seem obvious that the key word is 'guests' should have free access from your home. Not the kid next door hunting **** or the random nutter sitting nearby doing who-knows-what.

My guests do have free access, just as soon as they punch in their key.

[drone]

Even if you don't mind strangers eating your bandwidth and doing questionable/illegal things through your ISP connection, I would think that in most cases your standard wi-fi router is the first line of defense for your home network. By leaving this open, you are inviting potential attacks from behind the WAN firewall, relying on your PC malware defenses to protect you. Doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

WPA encrypted and MAC address filtered here! Go to a Starbucks, ya freeloaders!

[Husar]

My router is pretty secure in that regard.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

It's not a WLAN router. hahaha