Slashdot Mirror


The Year 2003 in Wireless Network Security

OenMarK writes "I ran into an article that is basically an overview of events, software releases, and happenings related to wireless security. There's also a Q&A with some wireless security experts, one of which is from IBM. What's your take on wireless security? Are we there yet?" This is the same site that also hosts the look back at Linux security we posted earlier. They complement each other well.

66 comments

  1. At the very least, wireless security... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...gives the Microsoft security staff something to look down on.

  2. Not a very informative article. by plover · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I would much rather more information about attacks and their severity.

    A study of honeypot projects that showed most wi-fi abuse was "bandwidth stealing" doesn't exactly fill me with a sense of dread. More useful would have been a list of attempts hackers sitting outside of unsecured businesses trying to get at the corporate data.

    Or are they trying to lull potential customers into a false sense of security?

    --
    John
    1. Re:Not a very informative article. by azaris · · Score: 1

      A study of honeypot projects that showed most wi-fi abuse was "bandwidth stealing" doesn't exactly fill me with a sense of dread.

      Maybe it should. With the current state of "Internet crime" paranoia, having a wide-open anonymous access point, while not yet comparable to lending your gun to strangers on the street, might well be compared with leaving the keys to the ignition of your car with the exception that you know whoever takes it will bring it back.

    2. Re:Not a very informative article. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So its OK if you use you connection as a distrobution point for pirated RIAA music so that you are implicated for the crime! Or maybe you might prefer someone to use you bandwidth to host illegal pornographic material so that the FBI can track it down to your IP address!

  3. Wireless? security? by pdbaby · · Score: 1

    What's this? Wireless and security in the same sentence?
    Wireless and security seem to be two words that are mutually exclusive these days, it would seem: between cocky administrators not securing their wireless networks, that few networks seem to be using WEP and huge bugs in phone's implementations of bluetooth...

    Know anyone who trusts WiFi? I don't. Even my university doesn't (and it isn't well known for good security practise). Useful, but slightly untrustworthy.

    --
    Global symbol "$deity" requires explicit package name at line 2. - If only $scripture started "use strict;"
  4. VPN... by craenor · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just have your wireless devices set to a DMZ that opens to one page, a VPN portal. Then you have a wireless connection, with VPN providing your security. Voila...a little bit more cumbersome, but isn't your network integrity worth it?

    1. Re:VPN... by JKR · · Score: 3, Informative
      Or use WPA with RADIUS, and centralise all your external authentication. Based on my experiences with a NetGear FWAG114, that would be my preferred option.

      Jon.

    2. Re:VPN... by Brushfireb · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sure, VPN will do it, but it will eat up your bandwidth too.

      Anyone who has done any significant work with large-scale wifi infrastructure knows this, any form of VPN will eat 20-30% of your bandwidth away just for itself. This is very bad for networks with hundreds (thousands) of users, like large corporations and universities.

      In cases like those, WPA/Radius is a better implementation, or you can use CISCO proprietary LEAP (i think..). They wont eat your bandwidth for breakfast, but they will provide security that is 100x better than WEP (what a joke).

      Combining this with some simple form of network authentication (authenticated DHCP, nocat, or whatever) works pretty darn well.

    3. Re:VPN... by Brushfireb · · Score: 2, Informative

      One more thing... The reason that something like A VPN is useful, which I forgot to point out (that you were perhaps hinting at), is that Universities jumped on board too quickly, and they now have boatloads of 802.11b equipment floating around. In such a case, VPN is really their only option, all bandwidth issues aside. They could potentially use the CISCO stuff, but that would mean that ALL users would need cisco cards, something which is NOT possible on large universities (they will see everything from high end proxim/cisco cards all the way down to dinky D-Link shit in the dorm rooms).

      So, when dealing with 802.11b, VPN is really your only decent option, even if it does drive your bandwidth to shit.

  5. Always use backend security by bagboy · · Score: 3, Informative

    Despite the advances made in 802.11i - WAP/TKIP (TLS/TTLS/EAP/PEAP) - the best solution is "on-the-wire". 3DES IPSEC and now SSL Tunneling are two examples we are using to avoid new exploits as hacks become available for the wireless standards. The above are tried and true methods of encrypting data. If the end user simply runs a client (3DES IPSEC) or uses the well known SSL standard (no client needed) between themselves and your NOC/Colo/Facilities - you can gaurantee a measure of security for their data.

  6. Wireless security is an oxymoron by Punk+Walrus · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I have as of yet, found no way that you can make a wireless system secure. Sure, you could say the same with wired, but at least you can contain wired security. Someone has to break into the building, or use "social engineering." Some personal contact has to be made.

    Wireless has no such limits. This is even skript kiddie level stuff.

    This is my report on it.

    1. Re:Wireless security is an oxymoron by crapulent · · Score: 1

      Oh please. Your "report" mentions MAC filtering and WEP. SUre, if those are the only thing that you know about then sure wireless is going to always be insecure. But, duh, there are tons of other methods to positively secure your wireless network. Such as: a SSH tunnel, IPSEC, VPNs, etc. Get a clue please before you denounce wireless as "insecurable."

    2. Re:Wireless security is an oxymoron by Punk+Walrus · · Score: 1
      Clues are not solutions. Are you saying, with absolute certainty, that SSH, IPSEC, and any VPN cannot be hacked? On a $99 Linksys router you got from Circuit City?

      I envy your faith.

    3. Re:Wireless security is an oxymoron by crapulent · · Score: 1

      Yes, that is PRECISELY what I'm saying, and it has nothing to do with the quality (or lack thereof) of the wireless hardware. SSH, IPSEC, et al. work based on sound cryptography. They are designed such that it doesn't matter whether the attacker can see the entire message conversation between A and B. The link is still secure. The security doesn't come from the wireless hardware, it comes from the fact that you drop all packets except those that pass through a ssh tunnel, which itself is secured by public-key authentication. If you're somehow saying that you know of a backdoor in SSH that makes it vulnerable to a man-in-the-middle attack then you'd certainly be smarter then the dozens of cryptologists who have studied this for years and years.

  7. Easy Setup and Mantainance of Security is Key! by dduardo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    On Linksys' site they have 7 things people should do to keep their wireless network safe:

    1. Change the default SSID.
    2. Disable SSID Broadcasts.
    3. Change the default password for the Administrator account.
    4. Enable MAC Address Filtering.
    5. Change the SSID periodically.
    6. Enable WEP 128-bit Encryption. Please note that this will reduce your network performance.
    7. Change the WEP encryption keys periodically.

    Now your telling me average joe (or administrator) is going to preform all these tasks, and remember to regularly change the WEP encryption keys. This is a problem, and until security setup and mantainance is automated and/or easy enough for the everyday folk, there is going to be a continual growth of attacks on these type of networks.

    ------------

    1. Re:Easy Setup and Mantainance of Security is Key! by kfg · · Score: 1

      When my SO got a bit stupid and left her jacket containing her wallet and keys unattended for several hours in a bar, resulting in theft of said jacket with keys and ID (letting thief know exactly where the keys would work) it would have been nice if all the locks on the house and car changed automatically and the credit cards automatically changed their account numbers making them unusable by the thief but not interupting our own use.

      But we live in this universe, with these laws of physics.

      Yes, a computer can make some of these things more automagic, but I'd like to see how the average Joe reacts to having his network "fail" every month or so until he resets his password.

      Ultimatly we are, and shall remain, responsible for taking care of ourselves.

      KFG

    2. Re:Easy Setup and Mantainance of Security is Key! by dduardo · · Score: 1

      What if we used smart electronic locks? The keys of the house are embedded with an RF chip with a unique hash that identifies each key. If a key gets stolen, all you have to do is remove that specific hash number from the acceptable list. You can go even further by calling the cops or sounding an alarm when a banned key is used.

      As I just demonstrated, it just takes a little effort to come up with a solution or workaround to a problem.

      Engineering takes those laws of physics and makes practical things happen!
      ---------

    3. Re:Easy Setup and Mantainance of Security is Key! by kfg · · Score: 1

      Solutions that make dealing with the situation somewhat easier, yes, but do not make them automatic.

      KFG

    4. Re:Easy Setup and Mantainance of Security is Key! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The trouble is that all 7 things mentioned don't actually work. If you turn those features on, all you do is make it more difficult for normal users to use the system, while it does diddly squat to the crooks.

      Your only solutions are VPNs or maybe Bluetooth.

    5. Re:Easy Setup and Mantainance of Security is Key! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've a BEFW11S4.
      "Filters enable you to prevent certain PCs on your network from accessing your Internet connection." Straight from the horses mouth.
      The big problem I have with Mac Address filtering on it is the filters work on addresses you wish to filter not addresses you wish to allow and filter all others.
      I'm not going to spend all damned day every day looking at a web browser connected to 192.168.1.1 to see who might be connected that isn't supposed to be nor am I going to tie up a machine for this purpose.

    6. Re:Easy Setup and Mantainance of Security is Key! by jbplou · · Score: 1

      why use keys at all then, why not embed chips in our hands that unlock our houses and cars.

  8. Are we there yet? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Are we there yet? Lets see..

    1) 802.11i is still not yet approved as a standard
    2) WPA (the impetuously released TKIP variant) is not widely available and like 802.11i relies on 802.1X.
    3) 802.1X has been withdrawn by the IEEE pending a re-write. Its broken for wireless. Don't expect to see the revision any time soon.
    4) No semblance of a seamless, inter operator, inter hotspot, non web-pagey user authentication scheme for mobile devices is widely deployed for 802.11.
    5) Other wireless networks that are deployed are insecure (E.G. GSM)

    I think maybe there's a way to go yet.

    --
    Evil people are out to get you.
    1. Re:Are we there yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1)True, but 802.11i chipsets will be out in 6 months. Just like with other approved standards not having an official standard isn't going to stop vendors from shipping their prodcuts well before the standard becomes "official"

      2) WPA is widely available. Vendors like Linksys and Dlink have had WPA devices on the market for months now. It doesn't get any more available then being able to do down to your local Compusa.

      3) Right now 802.1x the best thing going and it provides decent security for most applications. Sure we are all waiting for the holy grail, but plenty of companies doing just fine with it. So yea it has warts, but its a lot better than static wep. Anything under the microscope has problems, but except for very sensitive applications I'll take 802.1x. Wireless opens up some dam good possibilites that I'm simply not willing to turn my back on and just throw away. Functionality or Perfection. Pick one.

      I agree that wireless security has been a real mess and where we'll be in 6 months is where we should have started with, but we are finally getting there and within a year things will be looking really good.

      For now best things for businesses who haven't already done it is to at least use 802.1x and for consumers to upgrade to the current WAP's etc which now use WPA or see if WPA updates are available for what they already own.

  9. 2003 was the start, and 2004 will be the explosion by freeweed · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Up here in central Canada, early 2003 showed a nice, gradual uptake in wireless equipment by the business sector, and a few tech-heads putting it in their houses. Now that xmas is over, and stores were selling APs for as little as $15 (cdn) after rebates, I'm seeing almost a 10-fold increase in the number of hotspots compared to June of this year.

    I see a couple of trends on the horizon:

    1. Just as you can no longer buy a 10mbit hub, because a 10/100 switch costs pennies more to make, soon all home cable/DSL routers will come with 802.11b at the very least. The "premium" models will include g for $5-10 more, to keep some price differentiation happening.

    2. Back when it was us geeks and businesses, the WEP/non-WEP ratio seemed to hover around 50-75%, depending on area. Driving around last night, it's below 10%. This could be an indication of new xmas presents that the owner hasn't had time to configure, but really: how many people actually change from the default settings? (On that note, thank you SMC for having a blank default password and an SSID of "SMC" :)

    Just the changes in the past 12 months have convinced me that 2004 will be the year wireless really takes off everywhere up here, and as long as it's still being shipped unsecured to the consumer, we're soon going to have a LOT more opportunity for this sort of thing.

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  10. You forgot a few things by mao+che+minh · · Score: 1

    You forgot about the token stored on a smart card, your biometric information via finger print reader, along with a plain old username and password (which only corresponds to that particular set of biometrics) that are needed to log in to the VPN. A tad bit more cumbersome, yes, but voila! Complete wireless security.

  11. My wireless network is now totally secure by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I made my wireless network secure this year. After a couple of years of use, my wireless adapters are now sitting in the bottom of a drawer, and I tacked a Cat5 ethernet cable to my ceiling and walls to replace them.

    No more worries about wireless security alerts, finicky configurations, key management, weird drivers, setting up VPNs within my own house, strange network freezeups or having to read articles to keep on top of it all.

    To me, keeping my mind uncluttered and free from all that minutia is worth the ugliness of a few network cables.

    1. Re:My wireless network is now totally secure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah. It sounds like your mind is pretty cluttered if you can't keep up with the minutia required to administrate a wireless network.

      You must not be running linux huh? ....

    2. Re:My wireless network is now totally secure by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1
      Yeah. It sounds like your mind is pretty cluttered if you can't keep up with the minutia required to administrate a wireless network.

      I can keep up with the minutia. I don't want to. I've got better things to do with my time.

      You must not be running linux huh? ....

      OS is irrelevant. Linux, Windows, OpenBSD... I've used wireless adapters on all of them and they all have configuration and security problems to worry about.

    3. Re:My wireless network is now totally secure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You did not make you wireless network more secure, you removed it.

      This is like saying killing off mankind is a cure for cancer.

  12. Re:2003 was the start, and 2004 will be the explos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    You have computers and networks in Canada?

    Do you install heaters in them or how do they survive the freezing temperatures and snow?

  13. Physical perimeter security on 802.11 by mkgray · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My company (Newbury Networks, Inc.) makes a product that provides physical perimeter security on 802.11. It uses our location-tracking technology to identify the location of all 802.11 traffic and can then both report and classify traffic as well as deny access to devices outside your physical perimeter. While some security problems remain, this largely mitigates the "attacker in the parking lot" scenarios.

    Most people assume that wireless security cannot be coupled to physical security. If you can keep people outside your building off your network, it's a whold different ball game. This essentially eliminates spoofing problems because it doesn't matter if you're spoofing if you're outside. Obivously, internal threats are still an issue and any security system should be multi-factor. Location is simply a key element that it's hard to provide for wireless.

    (I hope this isn't taken as inappropriate product pushing, but I believe it is a useful and relevant solution to many wireless security problems)

    1. Re:Physical perimeter security on 802.11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My company demoed your software for about a hot minute. Now we use Air Defense which is a superior product in every way. Your licensing scheme sucks and is pretty unrealistic for a real IT shop. Nothing to see here just another copycat software company with hooks into everything.

      Thanks for the spam though. I'll continue to keep your software and your gay licensing scheme in mind for the future when I want to spend a lot of money and time with minimal return.

      And thank you for finally giving me the opportunity to talk about what a piece of SH** you product is.

      That felt good.

      Bye Loser.

    2. Re:Physical perimeter security on 802.11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't mean to troll, but two issues bother me;

      a) Is triangulation really fool proof enough to provide a layer of authentication?
      b) What about encyption of traffic? Preventing kids in the car park from jumping on your network is good, but that's only half my battle.

    3. Re:Physical perimeter security on 802.11 by mkgray · · Score: 1

      Good questions:

      a) It's not triangulation, because as you might guess, triangulation on 802.11 is extremely problematic because of occlusion, reflection and multi-path issues. That said, thinking of it in terms of triangulation isn't way off. It is definitely reliable enough to use as a layer of authentication. Depending on the deployment, the accuracy and precision can be quite high (sub-meter). Of course, even in those cases, we always recommend the use of other authentication mechanisms as well. Security is about multiple factors. Location is only one.

      b) On a wireless network, because of purely passive sniffing, you also want encryption in addition to access control. WEP is a good first step, but it is obviously reasonably easily crackable. A variety of other options are coming soon (WPA, RSN, etc.)

      In addition to these two sides (access control and encryption), there's a whole bunch of other security issues you need to worry about: ad-hoc networks, accidental outside associations, AP spoofing, and a number of others. We (Newbury Networks) provide location based monitoring of all of these attacks. There are a number of other good monitoring products out there including free ones like Kismet and other commercial ones like AirMagnet, AirDefense, NetworkChemistry and a handful of others. Naturally, I think our product is the best, but our product is a bit different.

  14. Re:2003 was the start, and 2004 will be the explos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    WEP doesn't really work - so why the fschk turn it on? See airsnort, airjack, kismet, wellenreiter etc. These tools are very easy to use and you have to assume that all crooks have them all.

    My WiFi access point sits by its lonely self on the high speed modem, with its own IP address, next to my firewall. I use plain text when surfing the internet and ssh to my own servers.

    If a neighbour wants to use the network at 1Mbps or whatever lousy data rate he would get from over yonder - be my guest - won't bother me...

  15. coffee shop wi-fi by 3dvideo · · Score: 0

    How secure are wifi lans at starbucks etc??? Are all email passwords etc at risk? sci-fi/horror fanfiction

    --
    stereoscopic multimedia pioneer view3d.tv
  16. WEP has its uses by freeweed · · Score: 2, Insightful

    WEP works just fine for certain things. For example, keeping people from abusing my internet connection, downloading child pornography, etc. In order to crack a 128-bit WEP key, last I checked, you need something like 5-10 GIGABYTES of traffic to analyze. I don't use that much bandwidth in a year over wireless - it's just to be able to surf from the living room, etc.

    I've checked out the range on my AP using some nice high-gain antennas, and seeing as it's in the basement, someone would have to be within 3 or 4 houses of me. That's a pretty limited range, so I can narrow it down to say 100 of my neighbours. And one of them would have to sit and passively sniff my traffic for an ENTIRE YEAR. Answer: change my WEP key every few months, and unless I'm not up to date with the latest security issues, I'm virtually immune. Sure, they can sniff my SSID. Big whoop if they can't get on it.

    Disclaimer: I haven't played with Kismet in over 6 months, so if there's some new "grab 10 packets and crack the WEP key" setting that I haven't heard about, please correct me :)

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    1. Re:WEP has its uses by loraksus · · Score: 1

      consider yourself corrected. nowhere near a year.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  17. China to Split Wi-Fi Security Standards by mesocyclone · · Score: 2, Informative

    probably the most important news is that China will disallow standard 802.11 WEP security and mandate its own standard - WAPI for all Wi-Fi in the country. This could have wide ranging implications, from splitting the market to leading to a possibly improved system (on first glance, WAPI beats WEP hands down, except for privacy implications - big surprise) for the world.

    In any case, it is a dramatic development.

    --

    The only good weather is bad weather.

  18. Access control by jheiss · · Score: 1

    Working at a .edu we don't particularly trust our wired networks either, so pretty much all of our services (HTTP, IMAP, LDAP, etc.) require encryption (SSL or SSH). So the only thing special about wireless is that someone doesn't have to walk into the building to get on the network.

    The most common solution to this for now seems to be to do some magic with DHCP, iptables, etc. to force the user to a web page where they authenticate themselves before giving them normal network access. I'd prefer we could negotiate an IPSec tunnel, but all the attempts I've seen so far were a bit of a hack. Most Linux distros don't even come with FreeS/WAN, and configuring the Windows IPSec client to talk to a non-Windows IPSec server is a nightmore.

  19. Some Physical Step should be required by PetoskeyGuy · · Score: 1

    Personally I like the way my garage door open works. The only way to add a remote to the system is to open the box and push a few buttons to tell the system get ready for a new remote. Then you push the button on the remote and verify that the new remote was added.

    Networking devices should create and change their own WEP keys automatically. I know my mother certainly isn't going to change it frequently if at all, and if so it will be her kids names or something.

    The device would have MAC Address filtering on by default and would only be able to add devices by pushing a certain button on the device and putting it into "Add Network Device" mode. Then your new WiFi card would work on the system.

    I think adding some physical requirement to the mix is the only way to have real security that's relatively easy to use.

    As with most software or hardware, making it secure by default raises the bar required to use it. The company ends up fielding thousands of support calls from people who don't RTFM. Security out of the box is expensive to handle for general users. So everyone else ends up paying for it instead of the creators.

    That's why windows has viruses, wifi is insecure and linux is "hard to use".

  20. anyone have experience with colubris? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.colubris.net/en/products/enterprise/CN1 050/

    i've been looking at these guys for a project. it's an integrated vpn/wap. has anyone had any experience with this vendor they could share?

    FYI:the slashdot gayness filter has added the customary erroneous space into the url.

  21. Confused by ziggy_zero · · Score: 1

    Are we even at the "wireless" step yet? I've had nothing but trouble with wireless networks...even ones where everything I bought was from the same vendor. Eventually one of my cards broke - I'm not trying wireless again until it becomes more reliable, less expensive, and there is more support for cards in Linux.

    --
    I belong to the ______ generation.
  22. Re:SHUT THE FUCK UP GHANDI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First time i have seem a Vulcan modded as flaimbait!

  23. Re:RASPBERRY CHOCOLATE-CHIP PANCAKES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    roflmao, my 2nd favorite troll :)

  24. Rely on software not the hardware: always use VPN. by openmtl · · Score: 1
    Give that WiFI was crippled from birth I assume its clear even if its WEP-64. It would have been so easy to add DH key exchange plus strong crypto or use the SSL style encryption handshakes but no they invent their own. OK maybe I missed the fine technical details on WEP but its not exactly trused is it whereas SSLv3 (of a suitable key length and algorithm) is trusted.

    So yes I have WEP and MAC filters turned on my Home Wireless but the Access Point (infrastructure mode) is on its own DMZ LAN and plugged into a Linux box. This Linux box has 3 Ethernets - the ADSL router and trusted LAN connections plus the Wireless LAN. The firewalling is all done via iptables configured using FWBuilder on a different Linux machine-I really recommend FWBuilder once you get into it.

    The firewalling ONLY allows PPTP tunnels to be setup from WiFI clients. The Linux PPTP server is PoPToP on Linux side and standard PPTP client with WinXP on Laptop side. The laptop thus gets allocated a new IP address for the tunnel from within my trusted address space (so as to thus get through iptable filters OK) on the PPTP link and the laptop also uses this as its default gateway. BTW: Counterpane found flaws in how MS implemented PPTP not PPTP itself so I'm happy with PPTP for the moment and I use a separate (non-easy) password for the PPTP tunnel.

    Wokflow is thus...powerup Laptop. Double-click Connect To Homelan (password is cached in dialog box on WinXP). Wait for handshacking and authentication and tunnel setup. Surf.

    My next move has to be IPSec with FreeS/WAN but ideally certificate based. So for me WiFi security is just not relevant anymore because it'll always be more flexible to place the crypto burden inside software as opposed to using hardware devices.

    --

  25. Hm, Needs More Testicles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Hm,

    Needs More Testicles

    Lunchlady Doris
  26. Re:THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING! by nitrocloud · · Score: 1

    Sucking such a large bumppy penis would cause shellshock to him from the tremors of it going through his skull...

    --
    Karma: Good, or bust!