Slashdot Mirror
CNN Notices that WiFi is Insecure
josh3736 writes "From CNN comes an article that makes painstakingly obvious to the public what we already knew: 802.11 security is horrible. The article points out that nearly 40% of wireless network APs haven't even been changed from defaults and as many as 80% of home APs have encryption disabled. The article goes on to say that '[t]o make matters worse, users who don't secure their networks are often the very people who don't keep their computers up to date with the latest security patches and antivirus software.' It also accuses WiFi manufacturers of disabling security measures by default to make wireless easy to the lowest common denominator. My favorite quote? 'Experts say that while Wi-Fi hardware makers have made initial setup easy, the enabling of security is anything but. Meanwhile, average users are no longer tech savvy.' Which is to say that they at one point were?"
One major flaw I see in telling people to enable WEP on their WiFi is the first question I'm sure to get back is "How do I do that?" and, well, the instructions for doing that are different for each and every item on their network.
What's more annoying is that people think the "passphrase" they type into their router a the WiFi key rather than what it usually really is, the random seed from which their router generates the actual keys. They type their passphrase into their other devices when they're supposed to type a key value, and then they wonder why it doesn't work anymore when it was working just fine before they tried this security stuff.
I've had friends who I thought were tech savvy get tripped up over this stuff. I blame the router-makers for not providing software that makes this a whole lot more of a user-friendly experience. We as the IT industry are badly failing at this... and having a lot of open WiFi points will just make our other headaches such as spam and viruses worse in the end. This really needs to be addressed for the good of the Internet.
Of course they were. Around the time of the Apple I. Since then, the average cluefulness of computer users around the world has been plummeting because computers have been getting easier to use and the bar to entry has been lowered, with humorous results such as people using clueless people's WAPs.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The very reason that Wi-Fi networks exist is that they provide simple, easy-to-use network connectivity wherever you are. Security takes a backseat to ease of use. The equipment manufacturers don't want to have to deal with the support calls if they would enable security features, such as WEP, out of the box. Adding security to Wi-Fi networks makes them harder to use and less appealing to the average consumer. Thus, it's easier for manufacturers if consumers remain blissfully unaware of the huge backdoors into their networks. But then again, anonymous internet access from my neighbor isn't that bad.
Once the 'puter became a household appliance instead of a hacker's toy, that's when things started to go downhill.
Yeah, right.
Not only depressing: Despite your shiny new WEP key, if 'god' is smart enough to use google to find a WEP crack script, and to not announce his presence in future, he's probably *still* logged into your system. There is no WiFi security at present - do it all elsewhere (firewall, encrypted protocols, VPN).
I don't regularly wardrive, because I don't own a car; I use pubtrans. Anyways, in Houston, Texas, between Gessner and I-10 and Kirkwood and Memorial, I counted no fewer than ten open networks, all running Linksys G routers. All of them had their DHCP servers up and running, and all had the default admin passwords up.
Admittedly, it's nice to have open connections, but if people don't bother to secure them... well, people could do nasty things to the routers and screw with the connections.
Striking fear in the authors of godawful fanfiction, I am here, appearing in darkness, Tuxedo Jack!
... has the not surprising statistic that 90% of home users DONT GIVE A FLYING FUCK if the family PC (which they consider no more than an expensive Nintendo/source of free music) is hacked.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
WiFi without security "just works".
WiFi with security is a configuration nightmare.
So people keep things "just working". When this becomes a problem, we'll see things change. That's how it actually works in security -- be the problem dozens of open daemons on Unix hosts, canary-less stacks in executable code, or a lack of significant checking for airline contraband, the problem is not addressed until it's exploited. When people start getting hacked through their open wireless, we'll see open wireless shut down. For the moment, they'll worry about real problems, like worms and spyware (aka corporate virii).
Ironically enough, it was bluetooth's security model that made it such a nightmare to work with -- the whole pairing process increased the setup load by several orders of magnitude. They're finally going to fix this with Near Field, but it'll take a while for them to get it out (have they even admitted it's for secure key exchange yet?).
Note, I've never said this is how things should be. Ought is not is.
--Dan
I agree with some of the other posts on the main thread, I don't so much care about people trying to see what I'm doing, I have SSH, VPNs, PGP, and other mechanisms that can do that for me when I really need to send passwords and other sensitive information over the internet. My main insentive for securing my wireless AP is so that people can't use my connection for illegal purposes.
It's a liability issues, and it doesn't seem like a big deal until one day you have to find a way to prove to the Feds and your ISP that it wasn't you sending kiddie porn to some offshore server in Eastern Europe. If your name is on the bill for that connection, I'm sure you signed a contract somewhere that states you are responsible for not allowing illegal activity on your connection.
ce n'est pas un Sig.
so what about all the non SSL sites you visit which "need" passwords.
Most of these are not encrypted, and ask for the password in plaintext - are you happy to have this information public?
It may not sound important (due to the stupidly high number of websites which need membership to see some lame front page), but if you ever reuse a password [like I do - and most others do, come on... admit it], you could be cracked quite easily.
You can't expect to wield supreme executive power, just because some watery tart threw a sword at you
I live in an apartment complex, and I was stunned to see not only how many people had wireless, but how many ran w/o WEP and w/o changing defaults-last count in my largish apartment complex, better than 20 visible from street level (i.e. not right under their bedroom windows) and a good 40-50% of those completely unprotected. I use WEP and I changed the defaults but I'm under no illusions that this makes me safe. What I think helps, though, is that in my case there are at least 4 other WiFi users in my apartment building alone that are wide open. So as long as there are easier targets, I think WEP's done its job as well.
I have two WiFi APs at home. One of these has a WEP key, and is the one all of my devices use. It bridges directly to my "real" network. The other one I leave open just out of the goodness of my heart. I have a dedicated NAT router behind it, and connections coming in on the open access point are the only things that use that router.
So far, no problems, and people have thanked me heartily for giving them internet access in a pinch.
Given this setup, what risks do I run? The only one I can think of is that someone has a bunch of kiddie porn torrents just waiting to start up in a server in a van somewhere. Does that really happen? If Osama Bin Laden walks down my street (he'd probably strut, actually), and uses my "free" WiFi to send threatening emails to major governments, do I go to Guantanamo Bay?
How is this different from NYC offering free WiFi access in Bryant Park?
Now, I might be wrong about this, but I am willing to bet that all access points, WNIC's and other accessories come with something called a "manual"! If you were to actually *read* one of those, by accident or intent, you might discover how to acutally use your newly accuired product!
That is so very true. The average person (not just computer user, I'm talking average PERSON) is horrified at the thought of having to read a manual in order to understand how to use a gadget. When I'm working in someone's house, I am often asked silly questions like how to hook up a stereo or how to set the time on a desk clock, or how to get picture-in-picture on their snazzy new HDTV. I like to suggest that they check the manual that came with their device, because it will certainly be in there, and then watch the look of horror on their face as they realize they have to learn something now. It's really quite amusing.
And if they're a computer user, they're no different. They can have a nice big fold-out diagram of their new HP PC with color-coded connectors and nice pretty pictures and they still don't want to read that, they want a person who already knows how, to set it up for them. The average person wants to do the least amount of work to be able to use their tools, that's the bottom line.
Which is to say that they at one point were?
The average computer user in 1970 could probably figure out how to turn on WEP, were he/she transported to the present day. This is the same thing that happened with automobiles. In the early days, automobile owners had to be adept at mechanical repairs. If you read "The Grapes of Wrath" , at one point one of the characters is honing the valve seats on his truck in a campground. That was the 30's. By 1960 you'd be hard pressed to find a car owner that could do a valve job on his car. Computers have become a commodity item, just as cars did.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Technology used to be the domain of technologists.. then it became popular and that's when "Joe Sixpack" got online.
Nothing wrong with Joe Sixpack, per se, he's a good guy but he doesn't know the first thing about his car, except where to put the gas, and he doesn't know the first thing about his computer, except how to surf the net. And the scary part is that he doesn't *want* to know anything more.
When things go wrong, he hasn't the first clue of what to do, with the car or the comptuer. All he knows is that he wanted to surf the net at high speed from his Lay-Z-Boy. Ever since he and his cronies got on board, the technological per capita IQ on the internet plummeted.
There has been a long standing computer security axiom that states: "There is no such thing as absolute anonymity, in real life, or on the web."
Well, now there's a caveat to that axiom that I have coined, that states: "Unless you use someone else's unsecured wireless network."
Joe Sixpack is not only providing the foothold that spammers need to purvey their ilk, but also the perfect foundation from which criminals can perpetrate fraud and theft.
Good security is based upon reality and common sense. Common sense is a function of having common knowledge.
So why is it so bad if my network is not secured? I leave it open on purpose.
One Word: Spammer.
You really want someone from the street to use your open net connection to send 10 gig of spam? It's your bandwith, not mine...
Of course, if you live on the 14th floor, then it's a VERY slim possibility, so you're mostly OK...
I live in Soviet Canuckistan you insensitive clod!