E-Mail:

Free WPA Wireless Client Software

McAfee Wireless Security offers free wireless security functionality to connect to WPA-PSK networks. Although this functionality is neither as robust nor secure as being a registered Member of McAfee Wireless Security (for only $4.95 per month), it may offer enough security for the wireless network of home users with non-critical data.


Features Overview

  • Basic wireless network security

  • Compatible with WPA-PSK, WEP, and Clear security modes
  • Simple user interface
  • 1 minute installation
  • “Best Practices” security reminders

What does this free functionality solve?

Many users have not been able to use WPA-PSK (Pre-Shared Key) security. Users have to go through the hassles and costs of upgrading to Windows XP or installing a 3rd party client. Using the McAfee Wireless Security Wireless Network Connections screen, Windows XP/2000/98/ME users can freely and easily connect wirelessly in the following security modes: WPA-PSK, WEP, or Clear.

What are the McAfee Wireless Security System Requirements for this free functionality?

Operating System
XP/2000/ME/98

Wireless Adapters
Most 802.11 wireless adapters
Note: For WPA-PSK security mode, the adapter requires WPA driver support

[FREE]

2 Comments

I tried to use your recommended WPA Security by McAfee for my Win98SE configured Thinkpad 240X. A faster i1300 was “upgraded” to XP Home, and is slower and more hardware hog than anything, so that’s not an option. And neither my XP nor Vista notebooks will lock to my WEP128 which the Win98 with Belkin 802.11G USB work fine with. But the Belkin can’t support WPA SPK in Win98. So most public access points cannot be worked either. Only problems are two; SEVERE – The Free McAfee WPA Security demands use of MS Q243199, which relates to NDIS, but seemed to create network connect problems when I loaded it. Then, once I put in the McAfee stuff, it would crash my machine at bootup EVERY TIME. I was only able to get back to the fragile net boot when I uninstalled McAfee. WHY does it need the MS Q, which seems to be needed only for something I do not believe I have? Am I the only one with this problem? If not, why do you continue to recommend this? I would appreciate an answer, especially iof you have a better fix. Thanks.

This article looks lika’ kinda’ sorry ad.

What Do You Think?