Last week, I turned off all the security features of my wireless router. I removed WEP encryption, disabled MAC address filtering and made sure the SSID was being broadcast loud and clear. Now, anyone with a wireless card and a sniffer who happens by can use my connection to access the Internet. And with DHCP logging turned off, there’s really no way to know who’s using it.

What’s wrong with me? Haven’t I heard about how malicious wardrivers can use my connection from across the street to stage their hacking operations? How my neighbors can steal my bandwidth so they don’t have to pay for their own? How I’m exposing my home network to attacks from the inside? Yup.

So why am I doing this? In a word, privacy. By making my Internet connection available to any and all who happen upon it, I have no way to be certain what kinds of songs, movies and pictures will be downloaded by other people using my IP address. And more important, my ISP has no way to be certain if it’s me.

In mid-April, Comcast sent letters to some of its subscribers claiming that their IP addresses had been used to download copyrighted movies. Since Comcast is not likely to improve customer satisfaction and retention with this strategy, it’s probable the letter was a result of pressure from the Motion Picture Association of America or one of its members. And to Comcast’s credit, it stopped short of direct accusation; instead it gives users an out. Says the letter, “If you believe in good faith that the allegedly infringing works have been removed or blocked by mistake or misidentification, then you may send a counter notification to Comcast.”

That’s good enough for me. I’ve already composed my reply in case I receive one of these letters someday. “Dear Comcast, I am so sorry. I had no idea that copyrighted works were being downloaded via my IP address; I have a wireless router at home and it’s possible that someone may have been using my connection at the time. I will do my best to secure this notoriously vulnerable technology, but I can make no guarantee that hackers will not exploit my network in the future.”

If it ever comes down to a lawsuit, who can be certain that I was the offender? And can the victim of hacking be held responsible for the hacker’s crimes? If that were the case, we’d all be liable for the Blaster worm’s denial of service attacks against Microsoft last year.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not deliberately opening my network to hackers and miscreants bent on downloading copyrighted material. I’m simply choosing not to secure it. That’s no different from the millions of people who haven’t installed anti-virus software and the millions more who don’t keep theirs up to date. Yes, their vulnerabilities allow viruses to spread more quickly, but that’s their choice, right?

What about the security of my home network? A determined hacker may be able to crack my passwords or exploit weaknesses in the operating system that I never even thought of, but how is that different from before? There’s no system that’s completely secure, so whether hackers are inside or outside my firewall will make little difference. I’m willing to trade a little security for privacy.

It feels strange to be opening up my network after years of vigorously protecting it, and it’s not without a tinge of anxiety that I do so. But there’s also a sense of liberation, of sticking it to the Man, that’s undeniable, as well as an odd sense of community. It seems there’s safety in numbers after all, even among strangers.

AT&T Inc. has agreed to buy T-Mobile USA for $39 billion, but the deal isn’t set to close until a year from now, and it will likely face tough regulatory scrutiny. Here’s what a completed deal could mean for customers:

– Bigger choice of phones for T-Mobile subscribers. T-Mobile, as a much smaller carrier than AT&T, doesn’t get as many exclusives on top-line phones, and it doesn’t have the iPhone. This won’t be a big benefit to T-Mobile subscribers who don’t have contracts — if they want the iPhone today, they can sign up with AT&T or Verizon Wireless. But subscribers under contract would find it easier to upgrade to an iPhone.

Federal regulators say Verizon Wireless has agreed to pay a fine of $25 million and at least $52.8 million in refunds to customers who inadvertently racked up data charges on their phones over the last three years.

The Federal Communications Commission says the fine is the largest in its history.

To forestall action by the FCC, Verizon Wireless said earlier this month that it would issue refunds, mostly of $2 to $6, to about 15 million subscribers.

The FCC started asking Verizon Wireless last year about $1.99-a-megabyte data access fees that appeared on the bills of customers who didn’t have data plans but who accidentally initiated data or Web access by pressing a button on their phones.

The House has passed a bill that bans inmates from using or possessing cellphones in federal prisons.

A similar bill already has passed the Senate.

Congress is trying to crack down on the smuggling of cellphones into federal prisons, where they can be used to direct criminal activities both inside and outside prison walls.

The bill approved by the House on Tuesday night would classify cellphones as contraband material. Currently, the devices are not specifically defined as contraband, and inmates and guards caught smuggling them into prisons are rarely punished. One report says inmates pay up to $1,000 for a cellphone. It cites a case where a correctional officer made $150,000 by smuggling phones to inmates.

U.S. consumers and businesses may get more options in wireless service starting next year, with the launch of a new wireless broadband network that aims to provide competition to the incumbent phone companies.

Private-equity firm Harbinger Capital Partners on Tuesday revealed details of the launch of its wireless network, LightSquared, which should cover 92 percent of the population by 2015.

But there are financial and regulatory hurdles to overcome. And in another wrinkle, LightSquared won’t initially be offering conventional cell phone service, just data. It’s possible to send phone calls over data connections, but that technology is not fully mature or standardized.

Nokia Siemens Networks will acquire the majority of Motorola’s wireless operations for $1.2 billion in a major thrust to gain a stronger foothold worldwide, the company said Monday.

The Finland-based company said the deal is “expected to significantly strengthen Nokia Siemens Networks’ presence globally, particularly in the United States and Japan.”

Nokia Siemens said it will “gain incumbent relationships with more than 50 operators,” including top American wireless carriers and cable companies, including Verizon Wireless and Sprint Nextel Corp. It will also improve its position with China Mobile, Clearwire, KDDI, Sprint and Vodafone.