<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Topic &#x27;Westall 327 vs Netgear WPN824&#x27; in forum &#x27;Westell&#x27; - dslreports.com</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Westall-327-vs-Netgear-WPN824-22664561</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 04:13:44 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 04:13:44 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Westall 327 vs Netgear WPN824</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Westall-327-vs-Netgear-WPN824-22670445</link>
<description><![CDATA[nwrickert posted : Make sure that your key is at least 20 characters long.<br><br>With WPA, you should be fine.  Disabling the SSID broadcast does not actually contribute anything to security.  The hackers can easily identify your SSID anyway.<br><br>I use WPA-PSK on my laptop, and I do not get that message you are reporting.  That's with XP-home.  Perhaps the message is coming from your firewall software, and perhaps it is set to be a bit too paranoid.  You might check to make sure it isn't warning you about some other problem.  Once you are satisfied with that, then there's no real need for concern.<br><small>--<br>AT&T dsl; Speedstream 5100b modem; Zyxel NBG334W router;  openSuSE 11.0; firefox 3.0.11</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Westall-327-vs-Netgear-WPN824-22670445</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 21:53:38 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Westall 327 vs Netgear WPN824</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Westall-327-vs-Netgear-WPN824-22670390</link>
<description><![CDATA[anon posted : Security wise, The westall  has WPA-PSK MIXED, WPA-PSK, WPA2-PSK. right now I'm using the mixed. This part is a little confussing to me. I did manage to set it up and I figured out how to setup so the ssid won't be shown & setup my laptop to connect, but I got a warning message that my computer privacy may be at risk. I thought that's why i hid my ssid, so it won't be found easily.<br><br>Thanks for your help.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Westall-327-vs-Netgear-WPN824-22670390</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 21:43:32 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Westall 327 vs Netgear WPN824</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Westall-327-vs-Netgear-WPN824-22664597</link>
<description><![CDATA[nwrickert posted : If your Westell 327w allows you to setup WPA security, then there should not be much difference in security between the two.  If you have an older 327w that only supports WEP, then I would go with the Netgear for WPA.<br><small>--<br>AT&T dsl; Speedstream 5100b modem; openSuSE 11.0; firefox 3.0.11</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Westall-327-vs-Netgear-WPN824-22664597</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:48:20 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Westall 327 vs Netgear WPN824</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Westall-327-vs-Netgear-WPN824-22664561</link>
<description><![CDATA[anon posted : Which unit is better for wireless in terms of security. I wanted to hookup the westall because it's only 1 unit, but I had been told it's not a very good unit, that it can be hacked easily even with a password, where the Netgear is supposed to be extremely secure. <br><br>Also was told the Netgear is faster than the Westall in wireless and networked.<br><br>Please set me strait as to the better choice. Thanks.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Westall-327-vs-Netgear-WPN824-22664561</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:41:09 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>

