Slashdot Mirror


WEP Broken Even Worse

collin.m writes in with news of results out of Darmstadt. Erik Tews and others there have demonstrated how to recover a 104-bit WEP key in under a minute, requiring the capture of fewer than 10% the number of packets the previous best method called for. The paper is here (PDF). Quoting: "We were able to extend Klein's attack and optimize it for usage against WEP. Using our version, it is possible to recover a 104 bit WEP key with probability 50% using just 40,000 captured packets... for 85,000 data packets [the success probability is] about 95%... 40,000 packets can be captured in less than one minute under good condition. The actual computation takes about 3 seconds and 3 MB main memory on a Pentium-M 1.7 GHz..."

7 of 393 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Does this still depend on weak IVs? by tbo · · Score: 4, Informative

    For some reason I can't get the paper to load, but anyway, does this still depend on weak initialization vectors?

    According to the article, the attack does not require weak IVs. They haven't actually tested against WEPplus, but expect the attack to still work against it. In other words, WEP in all its forms is now nothing more than an electronic "No trespassing sign" and 3-foot fence.

  2. Re:Can ARC4 be used properly at all? by stinerman · · Score: 5, Informative

    The problems with WEP have nothing to do with RC4. The problem is that the initialization vectors end up being reused because they are only 24 bits. Reusing IVs is a major no-no when dealing with a stream cipher. And to compound that, the implementation allows for a 50% chance to use the same IV after only 5000 packets. (see wikipedia)

    RC4 is still just as secure as it was before these WEP attacks.

  3. Re:What about 64 and 128 bit? by !ramirez · · Score: 4, Informative

    Because there's a 24-bit IV, or initialization vector, that is not strictly considered part of the keyspace.

  4. Re:Can ARC4 be used properly at all? by linuxmop · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wireless encryption is (often) implemented in hardware because encryption is expensive to perform. This is especially true on embedded platforms like the DS.

    However, you can apparently upgrade your DS to support WPA with a hacked firmware. It's not clear from the page, but I am fairly sure that it only supports TKIP encryption and not AES since, like WEP, TKIP uses RC4 so does not require a hardware upgrade. It does, however, solve the initialization vector problems of WEP that another poster mentioned; as far as I know, TKIP has not been broken.

    Moral? If you're still using WEP, update your drivers and firmware and you may be able to get TKIP WPA and get those pesky neighbors off of your connection.

  5. Corporate Greed by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 5, Informative

    My understanding is that it should be easy enough to implement WPA on older (.11a/b) hardware, but companies much rather sell end user new hardware (.11g etc.) than spending development time to upgrade old hardware (that does not generate additional revenue.) This is evident in that Apple's old AirPort (.11b) does support WPA but other venders' (that would include YOU, Linksys) old .11a/b products do not.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
  6. Re:Nice try but... by wolrahnaes · · Score: 4, Informative

    WPA "cracks" are all just brute force, which you could also do with WEP and any other encryption algorithm. It just takes fucking forever (assuming the user chose a key that was more than just a dictionary word). These WEP attacks are actually flaws in the design of the system which allow you to crack a key many times faster than brute force.

    Rainbow tables, dictionaries, and the like are all just variations on brute force. They accelerate the process, but either way you're not actually breaking the encryption but instead using a crapload of processor power to try one key after another until you hit the right one.

    Saying WPA is insecure because there is a brute force tool for it is like saying the a lock is insecure because I could go and start trying combinations. 1-1-1....1-1-2....1-1-3.........

    --
    I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
  7. Re:Can ARC4 be used properly at all? by dotgain · · Score: 4, Informative

    Ethernet max segment length is 100 metres, not feet.