Is there a reason for recommending an insecure network? Would suggesting a global default password for an encrypted network be better. It can be as simple as 'openwireless'.
The only use that I see for a standard-password approach is that it would circumvent some ISPs' terms of service that say you can't run an open network. But even then, a court may find that a closed network with a password like `openwireless` (i.e. as part of OpenWireless.org) is an "open network" anyway.
That's possible without a password too, except that anybody in the area can MITM you instead of just people who bothered to set up honeypots. AFAIK WiFi only provides encryption on networks with a password.
Right, this would avoid Google's argument that they can sniff unencrypted data from your wifi since it's being broadcast in the clear out into the street. At least having a per-session key would count as a legal defense against drive-by sniffers.
Using current standard consumer technology, it would have some security issues.
That's why they say:
> We're working with a coalition of volunteer engineers to build technologies that will let users open their wireless networks without compromising their security or sacrificing bandwidth.
There are a variety of technological solutions possible, many of which could be implemented in firmware (see OpenWRT). I'd guess if we dig deeper on their website, we might get to their tech plans; I am not familiar with them specifically.
Although, honestly, if you're counting on nobody being able to sniff your traffic in transit for security, you don't have enough security anyway. But still, yeah, I wouldn't want to make it that easy.