It seems i have the option but i have a vague memory of someone telling me not to bother with it unless i had a good reason

  • zurohki@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    3 months ago

    If your devices all support WPA3, go for it. There’s a good chance older things won’t.

    • BigFatNips@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      Most routers include backwards compatibility with WPA2 as a fallback, while newer devices will use WPA3. Should be relatively seamless

      • vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        3 months ago

        The drawback is that evildoers can still attack the WPA2 handshakes and can force devices to downgrade, so you’re still getting effectively WPA2 level security until you actually turn off WPA2.

        But if it doesn’t cost you anything, you can just turn it on and make their life just s little bit harder.

  • TedZanzibar@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    Admittedly it was a few years ago since I last tried, but even in WPA2 compatibility mode I had no end of trouble either getting things to join in the first place or weird stability issues afterwards.

    Maybe things have improved now, but when 2 “just works” and is good enough for most use cases I’ve been reluctant to try 3 again.

  • jecht360@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    Technically, the “best” option would be to VLAN the WiFi network separately from a wired network where all the important devices are connected.

    But honestly, for normal people, that’s over the top. Try WPA3 first and see if you have any devices that won’t work over it. If you run into issues, swap over to WPA2. I generally say start stricter and loosen the metaphorical belt only as necessary.