Slashdot Mirror
Windows 7 Can Create Rogue Wi-Fi Access Point
alphadogg writes "Windows 7 contains a 'SoftAP' feature, also called 'virtual Wi-Fi,' that allows a PC to function simultaneously as a Wi-Fi client and as an access point to which other Wi-Fi-capable devices can connect. The capability is handy when users want to share music and play interactive games. But it also can allow on-site visitors and parking-lot hackers to piggyback onto the user's laptop and 'ghost ride' into a corporate network unnoticed."
While this means a bit more policing for networks meant to be locked down, it sounds like a good thing overall. Linux users, meanwhile, have had kernel support (since 2.6.26) for 802.11s mesh networking, as well as Host AP support for certain chipsets.
De-perimeterization (perimeter erosion) Explained
Distributed Firewalls
The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf
Microsoft Z has been found to contain feature X, which purports to do Y but used incorrectly could instead cause W! Linux has had feature X since 20VV, the 'Year of the Linux Desktop'.
Ghost ridin' the whip! No seriously, I've been wanting to use the Linux host AP features to bring up a mischievous AP that does man-in-the-middle attacks. I'd be connected to some open wifi somewhere, and someone would connect to my netbook and also see an open access point. I'd then give them the upside-downternet: http://www.ex-parrot.com/pete/upside-down-ternet.html
I don't participate much in the bore-a-thon dick-measuring contest called "Windows v Linux" on /. but for the record, its crap reporting to claim that Windows 7's "SoftAP" is a "rogue" which allows "ghostriding" while Linux's "802.11s mesh networking" is somehow better because it pre-dates Windows 7 when it allows the same problem which needs to be policed.
I have lots of criticisms of Windows generally and I run XP and Kubuntu, but SoftAP is a network management issue for corporate networks, not a "rogue".
Tubby or not tubby. Fat is the question
Any OS will have problems if used incorrectly. This biased reporting is BS. It needs to stop.
This doesn't seem like any more of a problem than someone jacking in to an empty ethernet port on your network, except that a) they can do it from outside the building wirelessly and b) any special software used by the 7 user to access the network could potentially helpfully forward packets from others, but that would probably be a fault of the software not checking the origin IP on packets...
Anyways the fix is simple. Require authentication for all network resources. Windows enterprise solutions are set up like this by default and do it transparently using Windows login credentials. An intruder on your network would be unable to access anything. There is the LITTLE issue of exploits, so you can either batten down the hatches as much as you can and continually scan for suspicious network traffic, or you can try an alternate solution which may work better (a combination of both would be best):
For complete security, IT could notify all employees that use of this feature is not permitted. On corporate machines it could be disabled or removed or steps taken to block access, but you must assume users are clever enough to get it working (not to mention booting from a LiveCD bypasses every protection known, except complete Windows software compatibility. Someone did mention Linux software that did this though, and my brother's WiFi card supposedly does it too with a special included application.). IT could also compromise and allow users to use it if it is properly configured, with clear steps outlining how to check if this is the case. However either way, severe penalties (starting with being kicked off the network until you have resolved the problem) would be issued for having an open access point. IT would have to periodically stage their own "attacks" to look for such hotspots and attempt to connect, and then lock the user out of the network if they are able to access the user's machine anonymously (ie folder shares with company files) or the network.
OK so it's a long winded solution but basically: The problem isn't new, lock down systems with authentication best you can, routinely scan for hotspots and penalize users that put them up.
Disclaimer: I am not a security expert but I like to think I've picked up a few things.
If you want easy-mode, check out Connectify. Timothy (the poster for this article) linked a story about Connectify back in November.
Yes, it's that simple... and for most people, they don't want to research all that.
And if Linux wants to be popular with those people, it's going to have to change a bit.
It's more than knowing how a computer works. The only thing you're talking about right now is software. You're not talking about having to know how a graphics card works in order to use it. You're talking about software configuration. But the problem I have with your simplistic explanation is this: for most people, a generic configuration does work nicely.
And allow me to say I'm glad "Linux" didn't make my digital camera. I'd hate to have to go research on forums just to figure out how to take a picture at a different resolution than it was set at ;) Joking aside, I'm somewhat serious. Most people want to research how to configure things they like working on. Most people don't like working on the computer... most people like working on something ELSE on the computer.
As I'm both a Windows XP and Linux user (and I like them both for their own reasons), let me explain this to you in more detail.
Any Linux application I use holds it configuration in a text-based file somewhere on the system - either in my home directory, or globally under /etc somewhere. Whenever I want to change the configuration of an app, I can back up the old configuration just by making a copy of a text file.
So if I'm messing about with the configuration of, say, Xorg (the modern implementation of the X-Windows GUI) to get a particular graphics card feature to work, it's quite possible I break Xorg and have to go scanning through log files to find out why what I did broke it. But I can also just copy back in the original /etc/X11/xorg.conf file and it will work again...
If I'm messing about with some new kernel features, then I can end up putting in place a kernel that panics when I try to boot. But it's very easy to configure the GRUB bootloader to give you the option of booting from the last working kernel that you always keep a copy of, so if my new kernel borks then I can always boot back on the old kernel and try compiling a new one again.
Yes, this stuff is all complicated, even to a Linux veteran like me, but as long as you act responsibly, think about the ramifications about what you are doing, and make sure you have a backout plan, it's not really a problem.
Now explain to me how this would work in Windows? Don't get me wrong, XP is a bloody reliable OS (I can't comment on Vista or 7 because I've never used either) and uninstalling an application usually works to get you out of any mess you're in.
But what about if that app trashes the registry, what do you do then?
And why is it such a big deal whenever I try to backup my "Documents and Settings" directory in Windows, that it won't let me backup a lot of the files unless I boot into safe mode? Or how about I want to take my app settings from one XP machine to another? Presumably I have to use some convoluted backup program, whereas in Linux I can just use "cp" or "scp" over the network to send my home directory and all it's config contents somewhere else.
I'm sorry, but if something happens on an OS that the user cannot prepare a reasonable backup plan for, then it's a flaw in the OS. No, it doesn't happen often in XP but even as recently as last week, there were reports of some automatic updates trashing users' PCs...
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
This is precisely the reason why I have a problem with so many people on here...
There is *NO*, repeat, *NO* war being waged by Linux to defeat Microsoft. If there was, then it would have already won several battles when it comes to its penetration into server space and into embedded devices - but in the case of servers, it has done far more damage to displacing Sun Solaris, AIX, HP-UX and other "paid for" UNIX implementations.
So there is no *desire* for Linux to be accepted, it's there as an alternative and some people who write apps or GUIs for it do look at how things are done in Windows and emulate it in Linux, because they assume that anyone who *chooses* to try it and is from a Windows background will at least have some familiarity.
If anything, the fact that Linux is there and, in many cases, now a viable alternative to Windows, it has given Microsoft a "kick up the backside" to focus more on giving Windows users a better experience - I seriously doubt a Windows OS as reliable and as liked as XP would have existed without Microsoft fearing the uptake of Linux...
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.