Slashdot Mirror
IEEE Approves 802.11i
Dozix007 writes "IEEE has approved a
new wireless security protocol dubbed 802.11i, intended to finally
provide sufficient security for wireless connections that users don't
need to rely on alternate security layers. The new specification works
by using AES encryption
in the transceiver itself, encrypting data directly at the level just
above the actual radio pulses themselves. That makes it transparent for
applications sending data through the radio, so legacy programs running
on new 802.11i-compliant hardware will automatically get the benefits
of the new protocol without the need for modification."
Or can I do a firmware upgrade on my Linksys WRT54GS.
$$$$ Dude.
Oh no another wireless radio wave flying through the air! Oh well maybe I can pic up the internet if i tune my radio just right!
i am not buying or upgrading anymore 802***** equipment until someone comes out with a standard that allows me to broadcast to unused radio stations in my car stereo ;)
"sufficient" security- hahahahah history teaches us nothing apparently
I browse at +5 Flamebait- moderation for all or moderation for none.
I'll believe it when I see it... and after it's been out in the open for at least a year for the world to try to hack it to pieces first. Anytime you broadcast any signal into the airwaves, you're handing its content on a silver platter to anyone with the equipment and know-how to receive and decode it.
Even if I is going to be the new wireless standard, there is going to be many years until it becomes it. G was supposed to become the new standard, and I am rarely in a situation where my Powerbook picks up a G signal.
Does anyone have any figures on how long between products get rolled out until inception in the digital world? I would be curious to see the timeliens of some products such as: 3.0megapixel cameras, DSL/Cable, 802.11b/g, etc.
GroupShares Inc. - A Free and Interactive Investment Community
-------
artlu.net
Hardware enforced encryption? Now that's a good idea. Why not incorporate this into all networking technology at the hardware level. No risk of hack-arounds, seamless integration, automatic reaping of benefits.
Is there anything now to stand in the way of 802.11? It seems to me that it will become The one standard to comply to...
Hopefully the approval of the standard will reel in the multiple competing vendor solutions that have been out there. From Cisco's LEAP to TKIP (Aka WEP2), most still would not encrypt things like the MAC address or ESSID. For companies who are actually security-minded and wouldn't deploy wireless without a truely secure standard, this should be their open door to some real mobility.
:)
Now if only I can convince my employer so I can use Trillian to get me through those boring meetings.
What happened to 802.11h? Was it brushed under the rug by the NSA? The CIA? The Bush family?
Get out the tin foil hats boys, this is a big one.
Now try explainging to regular people the difference between a/b/i/g/x and which ones work together, which ones don't and why.
i hope the guys at best buy are up to speed to direct the consumers!
802.11i approves YOU!
(Come on folks, this really IS funny if you think about it)
I hope this means that everybody is respecting my patent for 802.11h--which is, of course, packet transmission by horsepack. We are also trying to teach dolphins... the squeaks are tough to error correct. :(
The i is for incryption! [groan]
Hey, if you don't think anyone makes that spelling mistake, check out this link!
Is there any news on if this will be available as a firmware update for existing equipment? Or will our access points not have the required processing power to handle it?
If thats the case, running a VPN over the wireless may still be the best option.
Douglas P. Price
IANA wireless expert, but isn't one of the annoying gotchas of 802.11g that the presence of a B client drops all connected nodes down to B speeds?
If I'm remembering that right, then what you're experiencing may not be a lack of standards uptake -- you could be connecting to a ton of 802.11g stations, but somebody's got a B card running.
I know some seemless intergrated security is better than having it tacked on afterward. I've always felt that if folks trusted a default security layer to be perfect, they will get burned when the defaul layer is broken. You should always have application encryption of important data. You shouldn't just trust that your pipe will be encrypted. Sometimes those pipes get used by unauthorized third parties that's when having everything else encrypted comes in handy. I'm just afraid folks will switch to the 802.11i and not bother to encrypt any of their data.
Hopefully implementing encryption PROPERLY in the APIC layer will avoid all of the crap we had to put with regarding the mismatched client standards, chipsets, hacks and OS's It is about time wlan wasn't fscked for 50 quid MAC layer encryption is great until some smart person breaks it. Implement it correctly and you wont look like an arse. This is your last chance at getting 802.11 security correct!!!!! BS doesn't have a sig. But Apu asks you to come again
Does this mean I can take the tinfoil off my house if I upgrade???
That makes it transparent for applications sending data through the radio, so legacy programs running on new 802.11i-compliant hardware will automatically get the benefits of the new protocol without the need for modification.
And exactly 0% of the hardware will be backwards compatible. Who trusts data privacy flying across a network anyway? Isnt that what we have VPN, SSH, HTTPS, etc. for? IMHO we have more things to concern ourselves with, like interference countermeasures, signal efficiency, etc. Who is going to switch to a new hardware platform just because it offers a different (read: not necessarily better) encryption method?
More security and more awareness for security means that I won't be able to leach off my neighbor's wireless and in turn that means I will not be able to sit on the toilet with my PowerBook and in turn that means I will have to stretch Ethernet clear across into the bathroom and THAT can create a fire hazard.
Need I say more.
The next comment I write will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and see it early!
Can anyone tell me (us?) how key exchange is done in 802.11i? AES is very strong, but if the key is sent over the link in the clear it will obviously be bad news. So how does it do it? PKI? Something else? Any info would be appreciated.
...because once we get to 802.11l we're really going to be screwed and nevermind the marketing nightmares.
/."
Sample tech support eamil exchange
"I'm having problems with my 802.11l wireless router"
"Did you say 802.111?"
"No, 802.11l"
"That's what I said"
"No, you said 802.111, that's not due out til next month according to
"Sorry sir, so you have our 802.11/. router?"
"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
Now, let's put on our tinfoil hats and start waiting for a total break of AES, or faults in the implementation of AES in the devices (at least the major ones).
I do not moderate.
Why can't they just settle on one standard and go from there?
Candy-Coated Knowledge
Until recently, some people advocated IPSec over wi-fi as a stop-gap solution. But that's just that: A stop-gap. I for one am glad to see that the standard takes into consideration lower layer security (and tosses WEP out the window).
Definitive studies on the matter are as yet unavailable
As are definitive articles.
I tried for 5 years to come up with a clever sig...only to realize that I am not clever.
Isn't untappable wireless communication at least as much of a threat to homeland security as model rockets ?
What needs to be understood here is that this is a step in the right direction. It will be some time till it is mainstream(face it, everyone has b/g, and it costs money to upgrade), and while it is MORE secure, it's made by a human.
There will be another one who can bypass it. That's just how things work. If someone wants it bad enough, they'll get it.
What the hell am I supposed to do at starbucks now If I can't sit around and sniff wirelessness??. Read the newspaper?!?!?!
Did anyone else notice that there was no mention of key management? Who cares what algorithm it uses if there isn't secure key management. AES is a good choice for the encryption algorithm, but it might as well be plaintext if the key managment isn't handled properly.
Is they key negotiated as part of the protocol? How is that exchange authenticated? How is access control done? Can anyone enter the network?
Does it use a pre-placed key? How do you make sure the AP has every clients key? Can you access the AP without encryption? Do users have to type keys in?
My router claims to be firmware-upgradeable to 802.11i/AES 'when the time comes,' but what about other stuff? If given the option, I would a sufficiently upgradeable AP or wireless NIC. It seems that only routers have enough CPU horsepower to spare to do be indefinitely upgradeable, but could I be wrong?
You know, the one that makes it that anyone on the wifi network can see all the other traffic?
I personally think a HUB is still a bad idea, even if the main transports are encrypted to the outside. The insider doesn't need to be able to see anyones traffic unless it's repeated to the target. It would be great if it was encrypted and acted like a switch.
I would still use my VPN with this.
"Not my manner of thinking but the manner of thinking of others has been the source of my unhappiness." - M
You can't just say oh, it uses AES. AES is a symmetric cipher, which implies that there is a shared session key.
How do the nodes generate and exchange a shared session key? Or do you have to enter an AES key manually before you even hook up? That would certainly lock down the node!
It would be nice if someone posted a link explaining at a medium level how it actually works. I don't want to just go read a draft of the standard, but I wouldn't mind reading a few of the important details.
MM
--
By including this sig, the copyright holders of this work or collection unreservedly place it in the public domain.
so you wanna turn your rap up loud eh? take this!
Apple anounced it's own version, called i802.11
So does this mean the end of wardriving?
----
Ground Control to Major Tom...
Ron Popeil has "invented" a lot of shit for your kitchen. His company markets a small rotisserie oven for that white trash buffet taste in your very own home. He sells a dehydrator for ridding food of that pesky moisture and a sausage maker for people with their own ... I don't know, pigs? Popeil has cured baldness with hair in a spray can. And in 1979, he cured the common zit.
As part of a program to teach mathematics, science and grammar, we were forced to take health class in high school. Part of that instruction concerned skin care. Rather than bore you with detail, I'll summarize the conclusion. I quote, "Douche bag, you're NEVER gonna get laid with a zit on your face." This was not well recieved as I was the Fry Guy at Wendy's Old Fashioned Hamburgers. Enter Ron Popeil.
In 1979, Popeil's company, Ronco, marketed a product named Mr. Microphone. This name was chosen over Mr. Douchebag, since it was a microphone and not a feminine hygiene system. Mr. Microphone plugged into a common radio and turned a common schmo into a sex magnate. As the commercial demonstrated, getting laid was as simple as cruising the street and dictating your intentions to hapless pedestrians. "Hey, good-looking, we'll be back to pick you up later!" Ah, yeah. Chicks dig assertiveness. Zit, schmit. Mr. Microphone was the ticket to a bedroom full of many beautiful ladies.
Skeptics may doubt the effectiveness of Mr. Microphone as a cure for common acne. But I can attest to the fact that I never had a Mr. Microphone yet my bedroom was never filled with many beautiful ladies. Coincidence?
I don't think so.
Maybe I do not have enough knowledge to know shit about this, but it looks to me that this is a standard for encryption, and it obviously would be public key encryption, and transceivers would exchange public keys to talk.
While this clearly means that now no one can sniff the SSID, is this going to be any better for those who leave it at the default? And without any kind of MAC authentication or network protection at upper levels, would knowing the SSID the only difficult imposed against abuse of the network?
Not trolling, I just want to know if stupid admins can still mess this one up.
AES, like DES and 3DES is a public algorithm and was subject to extensive peer review prior to adoption by the US government. (It's not a US algorithm; the original name was Rijndael). It was chosen for key length, security and efficiency of the algorithm and memory footprint among other things.
While this doesn't guarantee the security, it certainly improves the chances of it being as secure as possible. AFAIK, DES/3DES, a 20+ year old algorithm is still only vulnerable to brute force attacks.
The real fear here -- as in any encrytion system -- is the security of the key handling protocol. It's TKIP not AES that'll be the key to the security of 802.11i.
I am all for encryption. In fact I have sent a few letters to my congressmen about the issues surrounding it; However, some things just don't need to be secure. Encryption takes time and to be quite honest If I am downloading, say, the Slackware-10 distribution the last thing I want to have to wait for is each of a bajillion packets to be encoded and then decoded. Especially when I couldn't care less who gets a hold of said packets.
In most cases only specific sensitive pieces of information need to be encrypted.
100% Crunchier
I have a netgear wireless router that does G and B. It can handle both at the same time just fine, and does not drop the G down to B speeds if there is a B client. :)
Maybe some routers do this, honestly I wouldnt be surprised, but I'm just letting you know that mine doesn't.
Joseph?
of course the Defcon Forums - need help would be the 2nd and 3rd hits...
Hi, did you read the article or comments posted chronologically before yours?
I'm going to guess no, but the article explictly states that all that will be required for many routers (and I believe all Cisco routers) is a software (firmware) update.
Thanks! : p
I assert that my comment is only my opinion, not that of any employer, past, present or future.
1. Most of your newer products should be upgradeable to 802.11 via SOFTWARE.
2. 802.11 includes both security for your data (AES) and authentication (using a RADIUS server approach)
3. If you wanted to fully utilize it at home on a server then you would need to run a server that could manage the keys
4. It is not another Radio standard, it is separate from 802.11b,g,a etc.....
5. My guess is home users will just use the AES part of it which will help things and that corporations will use the whole Auth and AES solution that will make it pretty dang secure.
You could get perfect security if you did quantum encryption. (The eavesdropper modifies the signal by listening.) Of course, the technology is theoretical, and not likely to be found in a laptop soon. Still, though, interesting that perfect security is possible, even in principle...
From what I can read on the NIST 802.11 overview it's still not designed to protect identity.
Thus it will still not encrypt ESSID (used as a clue for what encryption credentials you need, NOT as a security measure) or the MAC address of the systems using it. (Page 29 of the above referenced article).
It's designed to address two of the three of the CIA principles, those being confidentiality and integrity of your data. Not to hide who is on the wireless network.
Even when the content encryption is useless to you, 802.11i will be good for keeping the child molestor down the block from associating with your network and using your IP address to trade illegal pictures.
AES won't do much if they use only less than 128 bits...
so, how exactly do you propose we do a separate physical wire over radio? and don't give me a set-frequency-per-endpoint response, because that doesn't address the scan-all-frequencies-and-listen approach.
i'm not trolling here, i'm really wondering.
09
The summary information was vauge, and I have yet to read the entire documentation from the IEEE. What I know is that it has been described as an 'encryption system working in hardware just above the transciever'. Good for cisco that their hardware supports recoding the signal layer, but how many other vendors do you suppose can/will do the same?
One standard to rule them all
One wireless card to find them
Many geeks that bring them all
And with their laptops bind them
... wrote the RFC using IPv5.
To utilize the (perhaps overused) broadcasting <-> speaking metaphor, assume that you have four people standing an equal distance apart from each other. If you say something to one, the others are going to hear it. Not much you can do about that. However, you can speak in code.
Freedom is the freedom to say that 2 + 2 = 4
The hard part in practical cryptography is not the block ciphers (there are plenty of those to choose from, off the shelf, that are good--AES, RC4, Twofish, Serpent, triple DES, etc). The hard part is using them properly--picking an appropriate mode, key management, padding, and stuff like that.
Anyone ever heard of the end-to-end argument?
Putting encryption at this level is useless because secure communication with e.g. a webserver still requires that I encrypt over HTTPS, since my link to the server goes over more than just the wireless link. Thus, hardware AES only duplicates functionality. This is one of the premises of the end-to-end argument: put functionality at the highest layer possible to avoid duplication.
The argument that this is useful to keep "baddies" out of your network is weak, too. If you want to keep your wireless network secure, tie MAC addresses to IP addresses, and presto! no one can wardrive your wireless network. No, this is not perfectly secure, but you can secure yourself against a better-than-casual attacker by pushing the necessary authentication up to a higher layer. This approach is more flexible and doesn't require specialized hardware. Plus, when it's shown in five years that AES is breakable in faster than brute-force time, we don't need massive hardware (or firmware) upgrades; just apt-get install openswan.
802.11b should be a standard with the same scope as 802.3 (ethernet)---define the hardware link level and be done with it. Security at the link layer has been shown time and again to be worthless in even the best of cases. Rolling AES into the hardware spec of 802.11i is just window-dressing. The people who decided to do it should be beaten with a stick and forced to read the Saltzer paper until they recite it in their sleep.
(If you haven't read Saltzer's paper on the end-to-end argument, google should provide ample background.)
And oh yeah, the line I quoted said exactly 'NEW HARDWARE'. thanks.
Although it is correct that it was not invented by Americans, the term "Rijndael" is not a foreign word. It is simply a contraction of the names of the two inventors: Vincent Rijmen and Joan Daemen.
One, I like the encryption at the Link Layer because no software needs to be patched or re-written at other layers. However, since this is a new spec, I bet at first various vendors devices will be incompatible, and no doubt someone will hose up the encryption on a production build. So..HOPEFULLY - the encryption algorithims will be in EEPROM so they can be patched at a later date. Hopefully.
Yes, it does solve this problem. Since every wireless client (insider as you call it) is using a different key, one client can't decrypt another's traffic.
The key is negotiated at authentication time and is valid only for the given client and sesion. Without the client's authentication credential (certificate or otherwise), you can't get a hold of the key.
I saw it on maximumpc, it's going to be introduced and it will be efficient at compression, making the real transportation faster than 100MBytes even at further distance. :D
How long do you think it will be until retail-ready devices support .11i out of the box?
How long until the AP is $80 at Fry's (like current models), and cards are also cheap?
There's an entire universe of devices to wardrive, and locate. This is only the beginning -- or rather a continuation.
Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
best buy doesn't support end users
it'll be you explaining the differences and doing the troubleshooting
enjoy
Hopefully this won't have the same packet corruption issues your current protocol seems to have.
Otherwise: +1, Chuckle
The HostAP driver does encryption in software.
My home server is (among other things) a wireless access point. The card I have is a few years old and doesn't support WEP at all, but thanks to this driver it does! In fact it also supports a bunch of other security features for encryption and authentication, which I have not delved into.
That said, it sounds like this new encryption may be at a lower level, which for all I know may necessitate new firmware.
I wouldn't really count Linksys on that bandwagon yet. They've been really good about keeping their firmware up to date even on old devices. If you have any of their "G" products and even some of the not-too-old 802.11b ones, they've provided updates that now include WPA instead of just WEP.
Linksys usually keeps their products updated to the latest capabilities within two years, and past that they still provide bug fixes.
This new encryption thing might be different and/or it might require new hardware or faster processors. Who knows. But if they can do it in software, you'll probably get it for nothing on your existing Linksys product.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
It's iFi. Get it right.
to finally provide sufficient security for wireless connections
There are two kinds of people working in these IEEE groups.
1. Seasoned engineers; and
2. Twits.
The former have from the beginning been clamouring for security. They were literally brushed off by the latter. The former will roll their eyes and tell you of how these twits use Windoze and LookOut and get infected all over the place and literally have no clue - and this is years ago, before Sasser and Blaster and Donner and Blixen...
How did they get in? Good question, next question. All security issues were shelved for the first standard...
And now? Now they're talking about 'finally' having security? These same morons?
Sorry - I have friends who've worked on all these standards and pulled their hair out all along, and I just don't trust the IEEE anymore if the pros are tired of trying. Make it secure? I won't believe it. I don't care enough to even try.
Who trusts data privacy flying across a network anyway? ...SSH...
Link-layer encryption and end-to-end encryption serve different purposes. Link-layer encryption encrypts things like IP addresses and DNS traffic, which I don't want my neighbours to sniff. End-to-end encryption is, well, end-to-end, and protects me from people who control the lower layers such as my ISP and my boss.
I think he means it should encrypt with different keys for each user.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Montgomery Scott would like to know.
It's the greek alphabet:
802.11a(lpha) (ie. the *first* letter of the greek alphabet)
802.11b(eta)
802.11g(amma)
The next of course is 802.11d(elta) but having a "d" building on a "g" would never work for marketing, huh.
#define ROSE any_other_name
Unfortunately 802.11i isn't listed here yet, but here is a link to the full text of the other 802.11 standards. (Free, no registration required)
AFAIK, DES/3DES, a 20+ year old algorithm is still only vulnerable to brute force attacks.
Actually, DES is vulnerable to some attacks (differential, linear) which have a smaller workload than using brute force, but they're quite not as practical and straightforward. And much depends on the implementation. If improperly done, you can extract some key bits with cleverly examining the device while it works.
As for AES, once you come up with a system of efficiently solving "an overdefined system of multivariate quadratic equations", you can recover the key. I think nobody has come up with such a method, at least in public.
I do not moderate.
802.11i? Ohh wow. I think the title is correct.. News for nerds.
Webmaster of Infoweb
Is it really time to start using such a new cipher like AES yet?
Yes, I know how expensive Triple DES is to compute, but nobody said encryption is free.
Informative
You could use frequency jumping - with one pattern per client.
Bullshit. They drop support just about as soon as they can. I've got a first-gen WPA11 for which linksys never released a single firmware update and which never had a reliable driver. I've also got a WAP11 that's in the same boat. You may be confused by the fact that linksys generally keeps the same name when they change the chipset on their products. So they have updates for WAP11's, but only the very latest hardware rev of it. If you buy a linksys product consider it to be disposable.
Mine has paid for itself over and over again. For years I used it as both a daily driver and in my side jobs of remodeling and landscaping. I only drive it a short distance now like to town once or twice a month because it has so many miles on it, but it's still nice to climb in it and have an "enterprise" class cockpit. It's just fun, and comfortable. Taken it all over so many places, done so much stuff with it I'll never get rid of it. One of these days I'll rebuild the engine or replace it. I'd like to make it a 4wd some time too, I've looked into it and it's doable for around 3 grand. The one I have is also a factory high top mini camper. I tore out the sink and water tank though, but I left in the furnace, stove, and refrigerator that are all propane powered with an onboard tank welded/bolted on up under the frame. Just had too many cool times with it. I want to make it 4wd so I can get back into amateur prospecting. Living in north georgia I am reasonable driving distance to places you can still get some good dust. We have a jeep, a cj7, that can get back in most anywhere, but it has severely limited cargo capacity. Probably in the meantime I might just get a towbar for the jeep and haul it with the van to the nearest campground, then use the jeep to get back into the good areas. Maybe, right now I'm busy as heck with this job and the new garden, finishing it off, and I got too many other infernal combustion devices to work on and fix..
I had a couple old ratty sportscars before, both "fix it again tony's". My fav was the 69 spyder with the tiny rear engine. Man that thing was fun and got decent mileage and the easiest car I ever owned to work on, bar none. It had around a 960 cc engine after I built it, went maybe 70 top speed, but got 50 MPG. I had both tops too, a removable fiberglass hardtop and the rag top. Big fun even though it was in no way a "performance" car. And I'm not really sure why but it was a for-real babe magnet for some reason. They thought it was "cute". That part didn't bother me one bit...
%^)
Most USRobotics products claim to support WPA in big letters, then a nasty footnote says that "WPA will be supported upon ratification".
I hope that now that 802.11i has been finally ratified, my USR5410 Wireless PC card will be blessed by WPA...
Well, I don't know what to tell you man.
I am forced to work with these things a lot, and every time I've been able to get a firmware update for them. Be they the wireless routers or the wireless access points.
I guess you got unlucky. But in my case, I've handled a lot of these things, from old to new, and I've always found there to be a fairly recent update for them. If the device is new enough (anything in the G family) then the updates add WPA and other nice functionality.
The idea was, if this new encryption can be done in firmware, then I'm willing to bet that you'll be able to get the added features from Linksys without extra cost, assuming your device isn't two years old.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
I think that's what I said--they'll support their latest, but when their next model comes out you're screwed. I'm sure they'll be revving soon to provide a new model that says "802.11i" on the box, at which point you'll never see another update again. Hope they get it right the first time...
I can't help but think that you don't know what you're talking about.
Well then that would be your problem, no?
It's not impossible to build a radio system where each person has entirely different encrypted stream of data sent to them. Much like CSMA/CD only with some sort of encryption where if it's not decrypting, it's not for you and it should be ignored.
I am just tossing it out there off the top of my head.
If it uses different keys for each user, it would be solved. No complicated radio hopping needed (nor would that be useful as an attacker can always program the card to hop).
"Not my manner of thinking but the manner of thinking of others has been the source of my unhappiness." - M
That sounds really great. How does the traffic between all the hosts reach each other?
If you have a give host on the wifi and you attempt to ping it from another wireless host, what happens?
What's the process?
Also is the encryption going to be done in firmware of the card? For the client, will all the traffic that reaches it will be decrypted before the host operating system knows it?
Will it drop all data that isn't able to be decrypted?
"Not my manner of thinking but the manner of thinking of others has been the source of my unhappiness." - M
Yeah, but all the stations could still receive each of the encrypted streams if they simply willed to tune it in. Granted, they wouldn't necessarily be able to decrypt it, which perhaps is what the original poster meant. However, you can't block them from receiving the encrypted signal.
Freedom is the freedom to say that 2 + 2 = 4