I haven’t tried it yet, but have a router (Buffalo WRT-125) that is compatible (with some quirks), and planning to give it a go since recently run into some limitations of the factory firmware (that is not upgraded anymore). Anyways….

One of the many sources of the WPA cracking.
http://docs.lucidinteractive.ca/index.php/Cracking_WEP_and_WPA_Wireless_Networks
This might give some idea, what settings supposed to give a bit more security than others. And WPA2 is still secure – though there are some devices which cannot access it.

As for deciding such things in the courts. Maybe I’m biased a bit, but don’t feel too confident about it. The “jury of your peers” are very rarely your peers in these cases. As much as I’ve heard, anyone who have _ever_ downloaded anything that infinges on someone’s copyright (which, I think, the large majority of the computer literate population) are barred from the jury. What one ends up with is a bunch of computer semi/illiterate people (used this only as a description, not a pejorative term) who are unlikely to be filled in e.g. about the differences between the expected security of WEP and WPA… These are the people who think it is completely rational to award tens of thousands of dollars in damages for unauthorized downloading of a single copyrighted song.

The content industries have very powerful lobby, and it is not in their interest to fix the broken and on many level unenforceable copyright laws. I too believe, that it can be fixed, however that is not through the courts but with a bottom-up consensus, that would require both sides to compromise. I also believe that the content industry is missing out on new business opportunities that would mitigate most of the problems they have right now. Though this creates opportunities for disruptive startups.

Just some thoughts… Probably a bit long-winded, sorry about that

I’d ideally like to be able to share my connection with anyone, not just members of my sharing network, like FON. Joining a network like that gives a nice advantage to those who participate, which might be important to gain widespread traction. I’d like to believe, though, that most people are like me–they don’t mind people freeloading as long as they don’t impact my experience.

I knew WEP was broken, but thought WPA was still relatively robust. Anyone heard about WPA-2? Theses systems actually serve two separate purposes: data security and access control. I’m not particularly concerned with the former; at least with respect to WiFi, because eavesdroppers cruising around my neighbourhood are unlikely. All the important stuff like email and credit card numbers go over secure protocols. Neighbours getting on and using up all my bandwidth seems much more likely (and, as I said, it’s only the bandwidth part that I mind).

Though I haven’t had a chance to try it, their new router (2.0N) looks like a treat, but not selling in Taiwan at the moment…

(2): I had Demon http://www.demon.net/ in England, at they weren’t at all open about any of their policies. Throttled us (3 people on 3 computers in one household can easily go over 50Gb/month…) but couldn’t even point to any disclosed information of the existence of traffic limits… Hope your ISP is better…

(3): Bad idea on so many levels, and others think that too. Look at the popular demand in France and New Zealand going against the governmental wishes of such graduated response laws, even if the politicians still trying to push it through. Also EU legislature trying to adopt regulation against such laws, and Spain proposing internet access as human right.

On another note your wi-fi don’t have to be “shared” to be shared – WEP and WPA connections can be broken at relative ease. It’s just like putting a lock on your bike: sure it is easier to steal the bike that has no lock, but it does not stop the determined people to steal your bike if they really want to. So, just securing your wi-fi can leave you worse off in certain jurisdictions, since in case of any issues it much more likely that it was you instead of someone else.

Also: you don’t even have to share anything to be implicated. Researchers could trigger DMCA notices to any IP address they wanted, framing network printers, routers, etc…. http://dmca.cs.washington.edu/ Which means a bad / technically infeasible law, which should be changed, in my opinion.