Why Google Wants To Sell You a Wi-Fi Router 198
lpress writes: Last quarter, Google made $16 billion on advertising and $1.7 billion on "other sales." I don't know how "other sales" breaks down, but a chunk of that is hardware devices like the Pixel Chromebook, Chromecast, Next thermostat, Nexus phone and, now, WiFi routers. Does the world need another $200 home router? Why would Google bother? I can think of a couple of strategic reasons — they hope it will become a home-automation hub (competing with the Amazon Echo) and it will enable them to dynamically configure and upgrade your home or small office network for improved performance (hence more ads).
Google, get your house in order first (Score:5, Informative)
Comparing various Starbucks locations (suburban and next to college campuses) where AT&T wifi networks were replaced with Google wifi, I would not buy a Google wifi router at present. In each case, the Google service is worse than its predecessor. This surprises me, but all I have to do is listen to the complaints of the students around me to know that I am not alone in this feeling.
Re: (Score:2)
That's been my experience with Starbucks' "Google Wifi" as well. I usually end up turning it off and relying on my T-Mobile LTE.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why they introduce a NEW router. Forget about the old stuff.
Google brought in their own gear. It should be their latest-greatest. If it is, it is worse than the Ciscos AT&T had in these locations; if it isn't, they must have weird ideas about customer service. Either way, I would be wary.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Google's end user products quality is generally apalling.
my nexus 7 tablet's quality is better than your spelling
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Google, get your house in order first (Score:2)
Orwellian advertising device (Score:2, Insightful)
Not only does it spy on your every move, you pay $200 for the privilege and unlimited advertisement injection for all!
ADVERTISING (Score:4, Insightful)
They want to control your network. They want to inject advertising into everything you do. They want you to have no choice but to use DNS servers they control.
This isn't some benevolent endeavor, its purpose is to make money by selling you again.
Re: (Score:2)
^^^^ THIS times a million billion trillion.
They want total control/monitoring of your network and they want to inject their ads into every page you view. They'll put ads on about:config if they could.
Re: ADVERTISING (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
^^^^ THIS times a million billion trillion.
They want total control/monitoring of your network and they want to inject their ads into every page you view. They'll put ads on about:config if they could.
Yeah, just wait until they get their dirty hands on the world's most popular browser... Oh, wait!
Re:ADVERTISING (Score:5, Insightful)
No, I think it's quite a bit more subtle than that. Trying to inject advertising into your internet stream would be a ham-handed approach the idiots at Lenovo would try. Google is more clever than to slit their own device's throat with something so stupid as that.
Google has a vested interest in improving people's online experience. That's why they invest in all sorts of network/internet technology, including a web browser they give out for free, fiber access to homes, and under-the-hood improvements to internet communication standards that make things more efficient and more secure. They want people to be safe, secure, and happy to be online. They want people connected to the internet all the time, with fast and stable connections, and they've seen that the current market of wifi routers is pretty much garbage, in terms of features, stability, and security.
ALL OF THIS relates to encouraging people to stay online, which in turn means relying on Google services, which they can then mine for data to sell to advertisers, which is how they earn their money. Yes, it's about advertising in the end, but not like you're thinking.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
THIS! I know everyone always assumes nefariousness when it comes to google, but this seems plain as day to me. Right now buying a good router is not an easy task. Walk into best buy and drop a decent chunk of change and you may still end up with junk. This is why I always recommend Apple's AirPort routers. Are there better routers for less? Absolutely. But with companies changing chipsets and keeping the same labeling sometimes you even have to look down the rev number on the router to know whether it is ju
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to be missing the main point: the router can data mine all your traffic at a very low level. Google is spreading its tendrils everywhere, not to make people, "safe, secure, and happy" online, but to be there watching what you do so it may better sell ads.
Re: (Score:2)
Google has a vested interest in improving people's online experience.
I agree, but OnHub is much more than improving Internet connectivity. With OnHub, Google will control the network inside your home. Every dialogs between your devices. Especially as OnHub also includes 802.15.4 layer (on which ZigBee [zigbee.org] is already based, and on which Thread [threadgroup.org] (created by Nest, owned by Google) is also built) that allows to to connect battery powered devices. Google will be able to much better understand how you live... for more targeted advertising (but this is also the door opened for more nefa
Re: (Score:2)
The wifi router is just an attempt at trying to stay #1 in compiling profiles on households, so they can continue to sell those to advertisers. But they still need a channel to deliver the ads.
This is even worse. The wifi feature is only how the device is marketed. Thanks to 802.15.4 radio, the device is in also a gateway for devices controlling or monitoring your home. Once you add those devices to your home (example: Nest thermostat), Google will be in the best position to better understand how you live for more targeted advertising.
Re:ADVERTISING (Score:5, Insightful)
They want to control your network. They want to inject advertising into everything you do. They want you to have no choice but to use DNS servers they control.
This isn't some benevolent endeavor, its purpose is to make money by selling you again.
I agree with the first part: "They want to control your network" but I don't think the intent is to screw with your network. I think the intent is actually defensive and it's to keep other people from screwing with your network. Same with DNS servers. They want to provide fast and reliable DNS servers so that their own service is fast and reliable. I think that's the same reason they initially entered the mobile phone market and the ISP market.. They are scared of walled gardens and the more they control the connection from you to them then the less dependent they are on the whims of some other corporation that would like to interfere with and steal their customers.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
For a company that has demonstrated zero respect for your privacy, then using their device, which every single piece of data flows through, wouldn't be such a prudent decision.
Oh, I wouldn't put it past them to attempt to data mine what sites you visit, but I don't see them trying to inject ads into your packets like the person I was replying to was implying.
Re: (Score:2)
They want to control your network. They want to inject advertising into everything you do. They want you to have no choice but to use DNS servers they control.
This isn't some benevolent endeavor, its purpose is to make money by selling you again.
Thank yOU!
If MS were selling routers everyone here would be screaming MURDER and SPYWARE etc. Google does ... oh that is because they want to advance technology as they care about all of us and never do any evil. BS Google will always spy and sell your information and push ads. That is who they are and what they do.
Re: (Score:2)
If MS were selling routers everyone here would be screaming MURDER and SPYWARE etc. Google does ... oh that is because they want to advance technology as they care about all of us and never do any evil. BS Google will always spy and sell your information and push ads. That is who they are and what they do.
Apple sells WiFi routers.
Actually, I bought one because the BT HomeHub 5 provided for free by British Telecoms is just absolute rubbish, trying to be "helpful" when it loses its internet connection and failing miserably. (The Apple Airport Express + BT modem doesn't seem to lose its connection, and if it does by unplugging the modem, it reports truthfully that the internet connection is gone).
What amazes me are some reactions to Google's marketing bullshit. So it picks a channel that is less congested
Re: (Score:2)
They want to control your network. They want to inject advertising into everything you do. They want you to have no choice but to use DNS servers they control.
That was just about my first thought too: "what are the odds this will have/allow something like Privoxy to do ad-filtering?" To be fair, I haven't bothered installing that on my own firewall just yet (relying on ABP and Ghostery for now), but it's on the to-do list - and having seen recent upturns in ad-blocking usage lately, I'm absolutely certain Google will have noticed that upturn too, and strongly suspect it's a factor in any move like this. (It's also interesting to note that Apple have just added su
Re: ADVERTISING (Score:5, Insightful)
True. I can hardly think of a company I'd trust less
chinese router companies laugh at your ignorance
IoT devices (Score:2)
And about IoT devices, they want to be the IP gateway to devices in your home as OnHub includes 802.15.4 radio. This allows to connect battery powered devices.
Why? Just why? More propritary spying crap. (Score:2, Interesting)
When I bought a Libre router I was doing it more for privacy and because I care about free software. What I didn't realize was I was going to get the benefits of being able to get latest bells and whistles not found in other routers because of the proprietary bits. The router I bought was from ThinkPenguin.com and runs a distribution called Librecmc. That distribution only runs on a small # of routers because there aren't any proprietary bits supported. The result of that though is I get the latest kernel a
Echo design (Score:2)
I think the comparison to Echo is obvious based on the design alone. That was my first thought when I saw a picture. But when I read the specs, it looks more related to the Nest products than Echo.
That said, I do hope they move to compete with Echo. I really like the idea of it, but Amazon tends to keep things too closely tied to their services for my taste. I would prefer to have something a bit more open (play local media, for example).
Re: (Score:2)
> but Amazon tends to keep things too closely tied to their services for my taste.
And Google doesn't? lol.
No router with out open wrt. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: No router with out open wrt. (Score:5, Interesting)
Apparently its built with Gentoo Linux.
I'm not sure how locked down this thing will be, but I am sure we'll be able to hack/mod it.
Re: (Score:2)
Not necessarily.
It might not accept any 'serious' changes over a Wi-Fi connection, but only through the Ethernet port. I'm sure you know the old truth - physical access is ALWAYS root.
Re: (Score:2)
Explain that to Google's Chromecast.
Re: (Score:2)
Whaddabout DDWRT?
Re: No router with out open wrt. (Score:2)
DD-WRT is a disaster compared to OpenWRT. But probably still better than the stock firmware.
I would recommend Tomato over DD-WRT if you can.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you expand on why? I have a couple of old routers that were given to me. One WRT54GS and a Netgear DIR-825. I installed DD-WRT on the Linksys and it seems pretty good. I have had no luck upgrading the 825 even though it says it is compatible.
From the comparisons I read, Tomato does not have the same amount of features and OpenWRT is more of a platform to build on. So I went with DD-WRT. But since I have these things that I don't mind bricking I am open to other options.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean Dlink DIR-825
Re: No router with out open wrt. (Score:5, Informative)
DD-WRT works, it just isn't very clean under the hood.
- The entire interface is a mess of PHP spaghetti code with intertwined HTML
- Old code with poorly implemented features bolted on
- outdated UI that is honestly a little confusing to navigate
- poorly documented, and outdated documentation
I will say the user community is huge and that is one major benefit.
OpenWrt is more like a Linux based router OS, but is well organized internally, incredibly stable, and very flexible. By default it typically does not have a UI. There are a few different ones to choose from [openwrt.org].
The original Tomato is actually a partially closed system. I should have been clear that I meant Tomato based firmwares such as the Toastman mod, Tomato Shibby, etc. which are based on TomatoUSB, an early fork of Tomato before it went commercial.
Re: No router with out open wrt. (Score:5, Informative)
In my opinion, OpenWRT is better than DD-WRT because OpenWRT is under pretty active development and has features that matter for making a better Internet.
DD-WRT is very difficult to compile, so in practice when a device comes out, you have one guy making a firmware stuffed with like 4 hotspots and 4 VPNs and 2 VoIP switches and DynDNS, or as many of those things as he can fit, and there’s no space for your own programs on the router. IPv6 is not a top priority at DD-WRT. And then nobody makes a new firmware for that device ever again, no matter how many security holes appear over the years.
In contrast, the latest OpenWRT comes with FQ-CoDel, IPv6, and DNSSEC. The default web-based administration these days is not bad, and the package system allows you to add interesting stuff, if your device has enough space. The Kconfig build system and the plain text configuration files make customization pretty easy.
The main downside is that OpenWRT is more picky about hardware. For DD-WRT, you have an ancient WRT54G, that’s fine, just install an equally ancient firmware. Ignore the problems; everybody else ignores the problems. Current releases of OpenWRT insist on a device that can run a modern kernel, with at least 4MB of flash and 32MB of RAM.
Re: (Score:2)
Linksys has a new WRT54 series that is up to date and fully open source with full Tomato. A lot changes in 10 years and Linux is too bloated today to run on such old hardware with limited specs and ram of 2005 at the embedded level.
Re: (Score:2)
I have yet to see a single router/ADSL2+ modem combo that supports OpenWRT. And I'm too sick of thousands of devices with a spagetti mess to get my life working to buy separate equipment.
I treat my own network like a foreign network. Let them back door my router and gain access.
Why? It's obvious... (Score:3, Insightful)
....they want to be able to mine your data at the lowest possible level, have a handy backdoor available in case the NSA comes calling, and so they can insert their own ads on every page of every website you ever browse.
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly. And there is no way in hell you should be trusting a Google which has remote access to your network, home automation, doors and every other thing Google thinks they're going to sell you.
Google is going to have access to the entire thing, be able to remotely control it, be forced to hand this over to law enforcement ... and in all likelihood introduce new security holes as they ensure they can remotely manage it.
No way, now how, not going to happen.
Google wants to do this to further own interests,
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. And there is no way in hell you should be trusting a Google
Exactly. And there is no way in hell you should be trusting a Verizon
Exactly. And there is no way in hell you should be trusting a D-Link
Exactly. And there is no way in hell you should be trusting a Cisco
is there any name you can plug in here that would be any different?
Re: (Score:2)
Awesome, so any one of those three can sell all the data?
Google Fi Access Points (Score:5, Interesting)
That's more likely what they're doing. Seeing how far they can expand the Fi network.
Re: (Score:2)
That's more likely what they're doing. Seeing how far they can expand the Fi network.
In what sense does this let them expand the Fi network? Maybe they could do a deal with an ISP like Comcast to let them do public facing access over home routers (http://cis471.blogspot.com/2014/03/isp-competition-testing-time-warner.html), but why would an ISP go for that?
Re: (Score:2)
ISPs would go for it if Google is paying for the FI traffic. Remember, not too long ago telephone service was the cash cow for most of the big ISPs (anyone with an investment in last mile and network wires). Moving phone traffic to Fi gives them back that stream and chips away at the wireless carriers' current dominance of voice and mobile data traffic.
Google could buy bull bandwidth and put Fi connectivity into their routers. ISPs wouldn't count Fi traffic against their customers.
-Chris
Control the living room (Score:2)
Control the living room.
Why do you think Microsoft spent billions of dollars to develop its gaming platform? Control of the living room and of the house is a huge deal. Google has made major inroads in the area by its purchase of NEST and this is an extension of that. In thirty years they want to be the company running every home's electronics.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I welcome our thermostatic overlords [postimg.org]
Re: (Score:2)
In thirty years they want to be the company running every home's electronics.
This is much more than that. With OnHub, Google will control the network inside your home. Every dialogs between your devices. Especially as OnHub also includes 802.15.4 layer (on which ZigBee [zigbee.org] is already based, and on which Thread [threadgroup.org] (created by Nest, owned by Google) is also built) that allows to to connect battery powered devices.
Re: (Score:2)
I live in Bellevue, WA, home to much of Microsoft and not far from their headquarters in Redmond, and I have never seen a non-Microsoft employee with an XBox.
you've probably never seen a non-microsoft employee, probably every resident of bellevue has worked at microsoft at one time or another
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> billions...Control of the living room
Funny how I've never seen an XBox in anyone's living room that doesn't work for Microsoft. I live in Bellevue, WA, home to much of Microsoft and not far from their headquarters in Redmond, and I have never seen a non-Microsoft employee with an XBox. Microsoft is failing at their plan.
14 million xbox ones sold, 100K MSFT employees, they're clearly in some living rooms.
Performance and security (Score:5, Interesting)
I know a couple of people who were involved in the development of OnHub and, FWIW, they say that the motivation was that there's a need for a Wifi router that performs better and is more secure. Not a strategic bet, just a perceived market opportunity which they thought Google was well-equipped to fill.
With regard to performance, the antenna design of the OnHub is supposed to be dramatically better than anything else on the market, and the device incorporates ideas from the Software Defined Networking stacks Google developed internally for its data centers, to optimize data flow. I wouldn't have thought there was much you could do to make Wifi work better, since the ISP connection is generally the bottleneck, but apparently there is. With respect to security, it adopts a number of ideas from ChromeOS, plus fully-automated updates. Probably the biggest security benefit compared to the competition is that security is actually a primary design goal, which isn't the impression I get from makers of home routers.
We'll see if OnHub actually is enough better than the competition to justify its premium price. Based on what I know of the people working on it I expect that it will. I ordered one.
Re: (Score:3)
With regard to performance, the antenna design of the OnHub is supposed to be dramatically better than anything else on the market
I remember driving through a small country town one day and seeing a bicycle rim hooked onto every TV antenna on every house. Asking the locals they said that was their only way to get the SBS TV station without buying some fancy expensive high-gain antenna. A BICYCLE RIM!
Why do I tell this story? Well a 2 year old with down syndrome could design a better antenna than what is shipped with 90% of routers on the market. The vast majority of them emphasise form over function integrating their all in one antenn
Re: (Score:2)
Why do I tell this story? Well a 2 year old with down syndrome could design a better antenna than what is shipped with 90% of routers on the market. The vast majority of them emphasise form over function integrating their all in one antennas supposedly capable of the wide bands needed for wireless N as a little wire run around the inside of their modern looking cases.
What do you think makes an antenna _better_? You typically have 11 channels to chose, but only three can be used simultaneously without interference. Now anyone can design a _stronger_ antenna for their router, but that just means more interference with all the other routers in your neighbourhood. I don't want my neighbour's routers interfere with my home, so I shouldn't use WiFi that interferes with their homes.
What helps is for example a directional antenna, that aims at the device that is connected an
Re: (Score:2)
What helps is for example a directional antenna, that aims at the device that is connected and gives a good connection with that device, without affecting anyone else.
The right Wi-Fi antenna and the right emitting power is the one that allows all my devices to connect at the best performance.
OnHub seems to be the first device I know that claims to have software that will adapt dynamically your connectivity.
And as it is coupled with an app on your devices, I expect it will also be able to monitor quality on both sides of the connection.
So OnHub seems to have all in hands to be able to not use to much emitting power to connect my devices.
Google seems to really bring innova
Re: (Score:2)
What do you think makes an antenna _better_?
Oh any one of the many metrics used to define how an Antenna works. Low VSWR, low losses, selective to the spectrum you require, dispersion characteristics that suit the installation, correct impedance so you don't burn off part of your signal as heat going into the device.
Antenna gain is not about blasting your neighbour, .... unless you're an ass. It's about targetting the signal to where you want it. Classic example is a two story house, look at the E-field maps of a typical antenna in a home router and
Consumer Routers are Junk (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately the trend for the past 10-years has been ever worse consumer router hardware, a lack of security updates, decreasing performance and increasing prices. Further, a number of manufacturers have been going down the 'cloud' rathole. The industry is as bad as the telcos & cable, I for one welcome our new Google overlords.
While I'd rather run a pfsense box, these may still turn out to be much better than standard routers and be the one to recommend to your friends & family.
Re: (Score:2)
I have learned to never spend less than $100 on
I think you can still get a good mouse for under that, though.
A hope, rather than a guess (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think this is what Google had in mind, but I hope this will become part of their plan:
The real problem with Comcast isn't the connections to the home or to Comcast's servers, it's the routers which move traffic to other networks. Not just their peering relationships, but the hardware they overload along the way.
These devices have a network test function. They provide Google with a whole bunch of edge devices in the consumer Internet space which openly say they're going to communicate with Google. I'm hoping that Google will use these to map out ISP network and use the information to A. spoof DNS results to avoid overloaded equipment, B. Tattle on problems to partners to adjust BGP (or whatever ISPs are using now for routing tables), C. Use the information to bludgeon the ISPs (OK, really that just means Comcast) in the press and in Congress to force change to facilitate faster, cheaper connections.
So they can push more ads.
Same reason Facebook wants to be a universal login (Score:2)
I think it's pretty obvious why Google wants to monitor every bit of information they can get their hands on. The more information they can track, package and re-sell about your identity the better.
Re: (Score:2)
The more information they can track, package and re-sell about your identity the better.
the chinese are already in your router, but this doesn't seem to bother you
How hackable is it going to be? (Score:2)
SSL CA (Score:2)
Re:Ulterior motive implied (Score:4, Informative)
lpress the submitter, is literally linking to his own blog as an article for us to read.
Re: (Score:2)
The cheeky bastard! Who dies he think he is, Beanhead Arseholeton?
Re:Ulterior motive implied (Score:4, Insightful)
Speculation hey?
1: Release Google Branded Router with a user friendly way of updating firmware.
2: Deploy routers to as many locations across the US/World as possible.
3: Introduce a patch allowing users to use some of their bandwidth as part of Google's 'Project Fi' (messaging & voice over WiFi).
4: Introduce a patch allowing users to share a small portion of their bandwidth with other users as part of Project Fi - extending googles network coverage.
Admittedly home users might not be so interested in sharing their bandwidth for text/voice but small business and community ventures in areas with poor cell coverage? I think this could definitely be something that would interest them :)
Re:Ulterior motive implied (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, I was thinking much the same, except slightly more cynically:
Re: (Score:3)
Why not just add a gb or two for cache on the router? That'll speed up streaming for us, and google could store advertisements on it that would otherwise take more bandwidth.
Re:Ulterior motive implied (Score:4, Informative)
Why not just add a gb or two for cache on the router? That'll speed up streaming for us, and google could store advertisements on it that would otherwise take more bandwidth.
nope, more buffering slows things down
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bufferbloat
"When a router device is configured to use excessively large buffers, even very high-speed networks can become practically unusable for many interactive applications like voice calls, chat, and even web surfing."
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Cache size and buffer size are not the same thing.
Re: (Score:2)
unless there is magic out of band data transfer, more cache is not going to speed anything up
Re: (Score:2)
Latency is not bandwidth.
Latency affects perception of speed.
You have completely misunderstood buffer bloat and how it applies to udp-style / tcp-style traffic. A voice call uses udp-style transfers. An advertising carousel does not.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What is this "voice call" you speak of?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Uh hello spying.
Google will own the DNS. Google will packet sniff your network. Google will look at your Netflix habbits. Google will push ads through your router on all platforms.
Come on folks Google is not your friend or cool while MS is somehow evil that Windows 10 has telemetry data. The router is a great way for Google to continue what they are doing and I doubt it is philanthropy like they actually care about us. We are just products to sell ads and personal data by the highiest bidder!
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, data collection. Yes, outright spying.
But more importantly: Advertising.
Google wants to control the last mile to push advertising to you and MOST IMPORTANTLY they do not want you to have an AdBlocking router, because those are soon going to be everywhere.
Re: Ulterior motive implied (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I think a key motive is simple.
Try to get people from using cheap Walmart wi-fi routers and get something more reliable.
Because most people will blame their ISP or website if their wi-fi sucks.
With a good connection that means more you tube and allows Google to implement more streaming type services.
Re: (Score:2)
They'd have to also fix the crappy Wifi in the cheap client device.
Re: (Score:2)
Not proven. Yay speculation!
As piss poor as home wifi is I say let Google give it a shot. They are talking about making it have QoS that doesn't suck so I'm interested.
I'm not saying Google is doing naything evil, but of course they have an ulterior motive. They're not a non-profit, sheesh.
While this may benefit those who use the product, rest assured, that it also benefits Google in some manner.
Re: (Score:2)
My ISP supplied DSL modem is a 'wi-fi router' as it is. That doesn't mean that I use it for anything of the sort. There is no way in hell that I want a carrier-accessible wi-fi router in my house. So I disable the wifi on the DSL modem and just use the Ethernet jack to connect the wifi router that I own and have (hopefully, still) the sole access to.
Re: (Score:3)
Could you explain why? Since the ISP supplied the modem and your packets all travel through their tubes anyways, what additional vulnerabilities do you have by using their router?
Serious question. I stopped scrutinizing my home networking gear when everything seemed "good enough", so apart from the fact that my isp could have me pwnd a number of different other ways, why should I be particularly worried about using the freebie router?
Re: No Way In Hell. (Score:2)
Personally I am not a fan of ISP provided gateways/routers for three reasons:
- ISP can modify settings at will, quite literally their own back door into your network
- software cannot be upgraded or fully configured by myself
- usually of poor hardware quality, with 100M ports, poor wireless range, etc
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>> but I personally only ever used it to make config changes on behalf of our customers.
Corrected that for you.
Re: (Score:3)
I've found that my ISP (Belgacom/Proximus) has gone in to my DSL router (modem, wifi etc all-in-one box), and turned on FON internet sharing despite us not being signed up for and me manually disabling it previously.
The ISP you worked for might be a-ok, but others sure as fuck aint.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I am not a fan of ISP provided gateways/routers for three reasons:
- ISP can modify settings at will, quite literally their own back door into your network
- software cannot be upgraded or fully configured by myself
- usually of poor hardware quality, with 100M ports, poor wireless range, etc
Yup, only thing I want from my provider is a layer 2 handoff. The CPE they provide me should just be a media converter for whatever last mile access method they're using. I'll handle layer 3 and above on my side.
router accesses, protects LOCAL network (Score:3)
Most people don't have a separate firewall applicance separating the internet vs their local network. The router is the point of separation and it has full access to the local network. Because it's part of my local network, I want control over it.
The ISP can do what they want with packets out in the internet side of things, but that's okay because I already consider the internet to be a potentially hostile environment.
Re:No Way In Hell. (Score:5, Informative)
Could you explain why? Since the ISP supplied the modem and your packets all travel through their tubes anyways, what additional vulnerabilities do you have by using their router?
All packets don't travel through their tubes. If I access a shared disk, or a wifi camera, the packets go through the router, but not the modem. If the two devices are combined, the ISP has potential access to everything.
Re: (Score:2)
They are already combined when you get a modem from Verizon FIOS, and, I suspect, other providers. I do not know if customers have a choice of a standalone modem vs modem/router
Re: (Score:2)
I use my ISP provided modem/router only as a gateway. They have no access or control over my wifi network. They have no need to know which or how many devices I have connected to my network. They are only the gateway. If I used their router they would have a presence on my wifi's subnet.
Re: (Score:2)
I use my ISP provided modem/router only as a gateway. They have no access or control over my wifi network. They have no need to know which or how many devices I have connected to my network. They are only the gateway. If I used their router they would have a presence on my wifi's subnet.
I take it a little bit further. The router connected to my cable modem is only a border router/firewall. It connects back to my central switch, which handles all the internal routing. The only packets it will ever be possible for them to see is ingress/egress WAN traffic, and as much of that is encrypted as possible.
On the other hand, my home network is just a wee bit bigger and more complex than your average home users.
Re: (Score:2)
Comcast and other have been guilty of tracking, ad insertions, and DNS hijacking.
Which is why I left them for crappy CenturyLink DSL and bought my own $200 Linksys 54 series that geeks use which is opensource and can run Tomato if I wish. Hell I can even create vlans and separate wifi networks for crying out loud!
Re: (Score:2)
I A home router is more secure if configurable only from a local, physical jack, whether ethernet or USB.
because there's no possible way there could be a backdoor into your ethernet controller...
Re: (Score:2)
You got it backwards, your Router will be sucking your data and sending it off to who-knows-where.
because only google routers would do that, nobody else would ever do such a thing
Re: (Score:2)
Not at the cost of localnet privacy, no. I suppose if it's user flashable and has hw that's more capable than other $200 routers it might be.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, it's been about 5 years since I last encountered a Fon hotspot. They're still around?
Re: (Score:2)
+1