When I connect, it always says I'm connected to and unsecured network.
This means your wireless connection is unsecure. Depending on what your belkin supports you can use WEP or WPA-PSK. The latter being the most secure Your Docs should show you how to set it up. Once you enable it on the router your card will no longer be able to talk to it until you configure the card.
Well that won't help. Hiding the SSID can give you a lot of troubles but it does not really increase security. The SSID is broadcasted on every logon so it can be found out by everybody. The positon of your WLAN can be found anyway, with or without broadcasted SSID.
You may see the manual to do so. Check if all your components support WPA. If they do use "WPA-PSK" and enter a long and random secret key.
That's even more useless then the hidden SSID. The MAC address is sent with every packet (even the encrypted) and it's very simple to fake it.
That are no special WLAN security hints but also very important. I just have to add that you have to read carefull what the firewall tool is asking. Never click 'OK' or 'Allow' without knowing what it means. But even without firewall you are pretty save. An attacker from the internet can see the router only.
And last but not least:
NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, use the Internet Explorer! Nearly every dialer, trojan horse or virus infecting your system from an internet page is doing so by using Internet Explorer scriping features (including several security problems). On other browser like Mozilla or Opera they just won't work.
A DSL router is a device connecting one or more computers to the internet over a DSL line. An Access Point is the base station for a wireless network. DSL WLAN router are a router and an Access Point in one device.
That are two possibilies. But it can also be any other personal firewall product.
Taking a moment's reflection, jojo mused: | | Really...I should use Mozilla or Opera? I have never heard of either. | I have been using IE for years and years. Does everyone here concurr?
If your browsing habits are safe, then IE will be fine. Certainly, there are other browsers that are more secure, but if IE were the insecure mess some believe you'd be hearing about how people have been hacked with it every day. But, more often than not, you hear about the vulnerabilities ... but very few actual accounts of it being exploited.
Regardless of the router's security you should always enable a firewall on your PC. Windows, Norton, ZoneAlarm or Tiny, they all do a reasonable job of keeping your system secure and, importantly, of preventing an infection spreading _out_ of your machine shoudl the worst happen.
Taking a moment's reflection, Radovan mused: | | Regardless of the router's security you should always enable a firewall on | your PC. Windows, Norton, ZoneAlarm or Tiny, they all do a reasonable job | of keeping your system secure and, importantly, of preventing an infection | spreading _out_ of your machine shoudl the worst happen.
Slight correction on your statement. The Windows firewall has little to no outbound protection ... especially when compared to the other software firewalls. If you have a router, the Windows firewall is pretty much redundant.
Taking a moment's reflection, Mark McIntyre mused: | | This isn't true. Clever social engineering or and hacked supposedly safe | websites can redirect you to dodgy websites without you even having to do | anything overtly unsafe.
Cite me cases which indicate this as a rash problem of epidemic proportions.
| You might want to read the technology papers a little more closely.
See above. I acknowledge that it is possible, but it's just not widespread given the shear numbers of people on the internet.
Agreed and disagreed. Agreed that MAC address filtering is not useless because it provides one more hurdle over which anyone intend on gaining access to your network must jump. I doubt, however, that it is a particularly high hurdle to someone who has already been able to crack the encryption, but it is still a hurdle.
Disagree with hiding SSID. If someone is out to hunt down access points and break into them they'll have the tools to spot your network, hidden or otherwise. The only people that hiding the SSID will defeat are the people that were not a threat to you anyway. More likely you'll cause a nuisance of yourself because people with nearby access points won't know you're there, and therefore what channel you are on - and if they don't know what channel you're on they might choose the same one. Even worse if they hide their SSID as well because then neither of you know about the other and spend ages wondering why networks run slow or have very limited range!
Agreed but hiding SSID is more of a cattle grid than a road block. Sure the cattle will be stuck but the guy with the pickup will just roll straight over it with no delay caused.
-- Simon Pleasants "Keep a dream in your pocket.... ....never let it fade away"
Taking a moment's reflection, Mal mused: | | These two points are not useless. Each of them increase the level of | skill and the amount of effort required to access the network.
Only in terms without encryption being used. With encryption enabled SSID hiding and MAC Filtering become redundant. Certainly, the potential negative effects of SSID hiding far out weight the security benefits.
Quite simply, anyone with the ability to even *attempt* to crack WEP or WPA passphrases will also have the ability to clone MAC addresses and detect an SSID whether hidden or not.