Ethical Hacking

Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package.
Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute

Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors.




Network Security Security-Basics
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Is Dynamic WEP Secure Enough?

Subject: Re: Is Dynamic WEP Secure Enough?
Date: 23 Mar 2005 12:40:31 -0000
In-Reply-To: <BAY23-F17FDF23357CBAAF81FA301874E0@phx.gbl>

All,

Forgive me for my ignorance and please correct me if I am wrong OR if I have 
wrongly understood these/ any of the replies to the Dynamic WEP question

We have all considered how insecure Wireless is using dynamic WEP in the 
scenario mentioned and I quote - "Due to one of our applications, we will be 
sending a clear strong signal to the parking lot". As also the mail says "Right 
now my plan is use PEAP w MSCHAP v2 with dynamic WEP crypto for my corporate 
SSID" to quote from the mails of Rocko.

My understanding of Dynamic WEP is that, in the case of PEAP or for that matter 
any other form of EAP derived security, there is no single common WEP key that 
is derived and used for all the clients. The point I am trying to lay my stress 
on is "no single common WEP key". In this scenario - if we were to look at this 
organization where we assume, should I say about 100 Wireless clients, then at 
an average of 15 people under each Access Point, this translates to 15 
different keys - one key per person on the same Access Point. Add to this the 
probability of people moving from one Access Point to another at every (say) 
3hours interval. Add to that the probability that the keys are not all changing 
at a defined point in time - this implies that based on when the user has 
derived the first dynamic key - the key changes at configured intervals. 

To an external user (sitting in the parking lot) this poses 5 levels of 
randomness - 

1.  different users have different keys
2.  different users changing their keys at different points in time 
3.  different users traversing across Access Points and hence changing their 
keys 
4.  The physical security that is existing on the ground that can contribute 
(if not greatly - at least to a reasonable extent) and hence the probability of 
finding out a parking lot hacker 
5.  Add again the probability of this guy getting sufficient numbers of weak 
IV's

Add to this, the number of users that are really sitting down in an area that 
provides a strong signal to the parking lot. Add also "direction finding 
capabilities" - (I am not too sure what this direction finding capability of 
the Access Point is, but based on context I guess it is something that deals 
with improving security). 

SHOULD WE STILL BE AS PARANOID AS THESE MAILS SOUND OR CAN WE RELAX A BIT. 

Ofcourse I would also like to add that we have not looked at whether this is a 
scenario where we have a Patch Antenna/ Parabolic Antenna that transmits 
signals in a defined direction - in this scenario there is a possibility of the 
replies above being used as an effective hack

Moreover, most Organizations that have this level of consideration for security 
should be having some form of IDS/ IPS - NIDS/ HIDS - wouldn't these have 
detected/ alarmed the Admin in some way or the other if he is on the LAN/ some 
Server/ workstation

Technically, if we were to sit down in front of a box, it will crack after 
sometime, but realistically in the scenario - is this possible, I guess this is 
the outlook that we should take when we discuss on such problems. Moreover, 
this immediately puts a doubt in the mind of the person about PEAP and EAP 
related security measures or for that matter any solution when thought from 
this point angle

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE COMMUNITIES' VIEW IN THIS SCENARIO. 

Rgds,
Shankar






So if I follow the thread, WEP is OK ... j/k.

Upon further digging with my staff, we have very few wireless devices even 
on that network.  Therefore scrapping them won't hurt as much as I thought.
Mr. Martin's last post does raise a question; how fast can you rotate keys?  
Why not every 3 minutes?  I assume overhead would be a problem.

Lastly, my preferred solution is Trapeze Networks.  There system seems very 
slick with the multiple security systems I need.  The next closest was 
Extreme Networks, but they don't seem to be as advanced.  Plus we have all 
their switches and the APs are same fruity purple.  The questions is, has 
anybody had any experience with Trapeze (good or bad), they seem to be newer 
company.  Any intel would be awesome.

Thanks

Rocko



From: Kelly Martin <kel@securityfocus.com>
To: Jon Smith <like2hax@hotmail.com>,security-basics@securityfocus.com
Subject: Re: Is Dynamic WEP Secure Enough?
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:53:24 -0700

No, WEP can be cracked in less than ten minutes (even on a network without 
much traffic - a hacker can stimulate his own traffic). Rotating keys just 
isn't enough to cover the weaknesses, unless you want to rotate keys every 
three minutes. :) Personally I think WPA is the only way to go, or else you 
might as well keep the network open and turn WEP off entirely.

We published the following articles by Michael Ossmann on SecurityFocus 
recently:

WEP: Dead Again, Part 1  http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/1814
WEP: Dead Again, Part 2  http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/1824

Regards,

Kelly Martin


_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>