ie8 fix
madison

A secure Wireless LAN hotspot for anonymous users

By | July 18, 2007, 1:50pm PDT

Summary:  This information is also available as a TechRepublic PDF download. As ubiquitous and convenient as Wireless LAN Hotspots are, it is probably the single most dangerous technology to the mobile computer user. From a security standpoint it is an absolute nightmare because of multiple inadequacies. The two biggest issues with Hotspots is that you have no [...]

 This information is also available as a TechRepublic PDF download.

As ubiquitous and convenient as Wireless LAN Hotspots are, it is probably the single most dangerous technology to the mobile computer user. From a security standpoint it is an absolute nightmare because of multiple inadequacies. The two biggest issues with Hotspots is that you have no idea if you’re connecting to a legitimate Access Point or if you’re connecting to a hacker’s fake Access Point and everything you send and receive is transmitted in clear text with no encryption.

Anyone who doubts that this is a problem should ask themselves if they would post their email account passwords in my talkback section at the bottom of this blog or go in to an airport and yell out their user account names and passwords as loud as they can. If the answer is no then they should be concerned with Hotspot security. If we look at Defcon’s Wall of Sheep every year, a sucker is literally born every minute and this isn’t because there were hard-core hackers breaking in to people’s Wireless LAN connections. In fact the only thing there were doing was passively listen as users sent out their usernames and passwords in clear text over the radio waves and posted the results on the Wall of Sheep. Of course we can always expect users to use some form of a VPN solution and encrypt everything going over the air but the vast majority of hotspot users don’t do that and even when they do use VPN it doesn’t necessarily encrypt all traffic.

Hotspots face the classic convenience and usability versus security tradeoff and 999 out of 1000 times the Hotspot will choose convenience and usability. The last time I used a secure Wireless LAN hotspot was at RSA 2007 and they proved why the security without the convenience is utterly unusable. This year at least they tried to make it a little easier than RSA 2006 by giving out anonymous usernames and passwords (instead of personalized accounts) but they still up running a line 20 people deep with a three-man helpdesk helping people set up their secure Hotspot access at the RSA conference. It must have wasted a thousand man-hours between the helpdesk and the users that had to wait in line. For this reason, no one bothers setting up a secured Hotspot and users won’t use it even if they did because it would be too much trouble acquiring a username and password. But does it really have to be this way?

I have seen hotspots that use WPA-PSK (Wi-Fi Protected mode using Pre-Shared Key) to offer some level of privacy, but that’s only private against people who don’t have access to the PSK. Microsoft for example hosts conferences using WPA-PSK by handing out USB keys with automatic client configuration and a complicated random string used for the PSK. Even ignoring the fact that you need to physically give something to each guest for them to be able to make the connection, this mode of security can be snooped by anyone with access to the PSK because they can sniff and decode the decryption key during the initial setup of a WPA-PSK connection.

But there is actually a better and easier way to set up a secure Wireless LAN hotspot for an anonymous user using a single generic and common username and password that anyone can remember. An interesting property of PKI is that it allows us to do a secure key exchange without any usernames or passwords so long as one side has a trusted digital certificate. This concept is used millions of times a day by ordinary users anytime someone goes to an SSL-secured webpage and the secure authentication channel is set up before the user enters a username and password. The same general concept could be applied to the Wireless LAN world with a slight twist in the implementation.

An interesting feature of Wireless LAN security using 802.1x and PEAP mode is that it is possible to log in with the same anonymous guest account with a publicly known password for any number of people and still provide each user with a secure point-to-point link-layer encryption. That means that someone with full knowledge of the anonymous guest user account and password will not be able to eavesdrop on any user that uses this hotspot system. So even if everyone in the world knows the username is “guest” and the password is “guest”, they’ll have connectivity to the network with more privacy than a typically unencrypted wire connection.

To implement this solution, we can do this with any typical Wireless LAN Access Point and a RADIUS server (how to set one up). So long as the connection between the Access Point and RADIUS server is secure or there is a sufficiently complex RADIUS secret, each wireless client has complete privacy. In this case since it’s such a simple implementation, the RADIUS server could be embedded in to the Access Point itself which means you don’t even have to worry about the RADIUS secret strength. The RADIUS server does however need a publicly trusted Digital Certificate (how-to guide here) which you can purchase for $20 at places like GoDaddy.com and there’s literally zero difference between that and the $200 Certificates from other Certificate Authorities. Going with an in-house or self-signed Digital Certificate for this particular application isn’t appropriate because external users have no trust relationship with your in-house Certificate Authority or your self-signed Digital Certificate and there is no easy way to automate that trust relationship like you can for internal users.

A RADIUS server is typically connected to a backend user directory such as Microsoft Active Directory, Novell, or LDAP but this particular application doesn’t require that since we only need a single user account. We can set up a local user in the RADIUS server named “guest” with the password also set to “guest” which is extremely generic and easy to remember. That means when the user connects to this secured Hotspot, they will have to do an initial 802.1x/PEAP setup where they enter in the username and password. Since the credentials are so easy to remember, it’s possible to do a quick-and-dirty setup guide for Windows and Mac with no complicated keys to remember or personalized user credentials. Fortunately, the guest credentials and the entire setup process can be saved for future use and the fact that it’s so generic means that it can be applied consistently on a very large scale. Anyone looking to implement an easy to use and secure Wireless LAN Hotspot should seriously consider this solution.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Disclosure

George Ou

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?page_id=557

Biography

George Ou

George Ou, a former ZDNet blogger, is an IT consultant specializing in Servers, Microsoft, Cisco, Switches, Routers, Firewalls, IDS, VPN, Wireless LAN, Security, and IT infrastructure and architecture.

58
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

802.1x/PEAP method compared to WPA2 with commonly known PSK?
mtnbrit Updated - 5 hrs ago
I found the below quote, is it true that WPA(2) will hand out unique keys to every client? I understand its not hard to crack if the key is known, but at least the session is obscured. how is PEAP better than WPA2 with a PSK in this case?


"Here's what you should do: put in an WPA password that's very easy to communicate to your users like "password" or "wifi." This will give everyone a WPA encrypted tunnel and make things like firesheep not work and make sniffing difficult or impossible. WPA will hand out unique keys to every client after authentication."
0 Votes
+ -
Great Article
D T Schmitz 18th Jul 2007
A very important topic--thanks George.

Linux users may want to read here about setting up a Layer 3 dynamic tunneling vpn with ssh (version 4.3 or greater) here.

The set up can include creation of a rsa key pair for automated login and automated ifup/ifdown to a start-up icon.

That sets up a true VPN.

For the occasional 'hotspot' wireless access, I use ssh to local port forward to my home subnet using ddns (enable ssh port forwarding in your router):

ssh -D 8000 username@hostname_or_ip

Then, open your Firefox preferences, and let the browser use proxy ip address 127.0.0.1 and port 8000 and enable SOCKS5, which supports forwarding DNS requests.

That way your DNS requests and browser requests are both tunneled to your home pc and then onto the net.

Again, great article George.
Safe surfing Folks!!
0 Votes
+ -
For experts like you, I'm not worried. The problem is the masses and the problem is people who have VPN split-tunneling enabled. This solution would make it easy to create a secure link layer for anonymous guests and protect everyone and not just the Linux gurus who can figure out how to do SSH tunnels.

The problem with this approach is that the client configuration is still too complicated and the masses will be put off by it. Then again I may be underestimating people's desire for private web surfing. I wish there was a wall of sheep placed in more hotspots and airports so that we can educate people about the dangers of Wi-Fi Hotspots.
0 Votes
+ -
Unfortunately...
D T Schmitz 18th Jul 2007
...security is necessarily complicated regardless of the method employed.

Hats off to Prof. George Ou for 'educating' on the dangers of Wi-Fi Hotspots! happy
0 Votes
+ -
Ah but it can be made easier
georgeou 18th Jul 2007
Ah but it can be made easier as this blog illustrates. I'm really hoping RSA takes my advice for their conference next year. Maybe Microsoft will employ this instead of using WPA-PSK with a USB key.
0 Votes
+ -
What we really need to hope
Azriphale 19th Jul 2007
is that its not only RSA and Microsoft that note your suggestions here. This is a huge issue, as you have made clear on a number of occaisions, and a very large number of Wireless LANs are running no security, or WEP, not even WPA-PSK.
Oh for sure, I'm just hoping RSA and Microsoft will start the trend. I would love it if every hotspot provided this service.
0 Votes
+ -
nice idea dood... niiiiiiice!!!!!!
pcguy777 19th Jul 2007
why didnt i think of that...

thanks!!!!! i use ddns for servin up a web page or two and to throw up an ftp server to share files with friends...

filezilla ftp server is free
0 Votes
+ -
security concern
leomezza 19th Jul 2007
Great article, but as windows per default tries to do the PEAP login with the user/password of the person logged in (and not guest/guest), do you think that it can be stolen?
0 Votes
+ -
You would give up the hashed credentials if you made the mistake of typing in your corporate username/password. Then they could perform a dictionary attack. However, the same danger happens everyday when most users use the same username passwords for all their generic web accounts.
0 Votes
+ -
re:
pcguy777 19th Jul 2007
How is this a concern when trying to break someone elses enctypted transmission? you would need both public and private key for that.

right?
0 Votes
+ -
I Fail To See...
wolf_z 19th Jul 2007
...how this prevents a hacker from setting up a bogus hotspot. After all, all they need is a digital certificate, right? Steal one and you suddenly have no security...
0 Votes
+ -
but the cert has to be trusted
pcguy777 19th Jul 2007
or rather from a trusted source... and can only be purchased via bank card right... thats a requirement of purchasing a real trusted cert. The money trail.
0 Votes
+ -
The publicly trusted certificate
georgeou 19th Jul 2007
The publicly trusted certificate that's been signed by Verisign, Thawte, Entrust, Geotrust, or GoDaddy will make this work because they're the trusted third party. It's exactly how secure webpages work.
0 Votes
+ -
And if it's *stolen*?
wolf_z 20th Jul 2007
George, you miss my point.

If I'm a bad guy and I steal someone *else's* genuine cerfiticate, it's suddenly worth nothing, because my PC will trust it. Unless you're telling me a secure certificate encodes the IP address?

Otherwise, nothing stops an insider attack.
If you want to make that argument, then let's just give up everything. Why bother because some inside administrator will always betray us.
0 Votes
+ -
It's not an argument - it's a flaw.
braithwaiteinbritain 23rd Jul 2007
There's nothing to stop a Rogue from attending the same event, and setting up their own Rogue-Hotspot from there own wireless router, such as a WRT54 with their own custom firmware. It would be easy to impersonate the Genuine WiFi network by broadcasting an identical SSID, perhaps on a different channel - perhaps the same. By impersonating the "Trusted 3rd Party" who validates the DigitalSignature, the end-user of Rogue-Hotspot has no way of proving this DigitalSignature to be true, if the only way to verify that chain-of-trust comes from the communication channel provided by the Hotspot provider.

So. Two-Factor Authentication is the only workable model for this.
0 Votes
+ -
"By impersonating the "Trusted 3rd Party" who validates the DigitalSignature, the end-user of Rogue-Hotspot has no way of proving this DigitalSignature to be true, if the only way to verify that chain-of-trust comes from the communication channel provided by the Hotspot provider."

You can't impersonate a GoDaddy or Verisign signature unless you already hacked the client machine and altered their Certificate Trust List which contains a list of Root Certificates.
0 Votes
+ -
Interesting... but
fspevak@... 19th Jul 2007
Great info if I were the one who was setting up an access point. This puts the work on the access point provider.

How does this help me the traveller when I want to hook up? A few of these may be around the country. How do I secure my laptop connection to any wireless access point?
0 Votes
+ -
Unfortunately
Azriphale 19th Jul 2007
for your to be able to connect securely to a wireless network, the access point needs to have some sort of security enabled. So, if the network has not implemented any security, you can't connect to it securely. In that case, you have to use secure protocols only, which, as George mentioned, secure protocols are the exception, not the rule. You can do what _dietrich mentioned, and use SSH to create a secure tunnel to another location (such as your secure home network), but as George points out, this is not for eveybody.
0 Votes
+ -
Dynamic Forward/SOCKS
D T Schmitz 19th Jul 2007
My suggestion for the 'traveller' is to set up an ssh port forward tunnel to your home router to a pc on the home subnet to act as a proxy for dns/http requests.

If you set up ssh with a login/password rsa key pair everything is encrypted to your home, including the authentication process which occurs automatically.

See my thread here.

(ssh -D local_port_number username@host_ip)

Safe Surfing from a hotspot guaranteed!!
0 Votes
+ -
https proxy servers
pcguy777 19th Jul 2007
the only down side is...

you usually have to pay for theses services.
Yes you're on your own unless the Hotspot provider is willing to provide these services. The best scheme I've seen is the deal between the Universities where they proxy authentication to each other and allow each other's users to securely log in. I won't hold my breath on that happening any time soon so this is the next best thing and it's by far the perfect solution.

The purpose of this blog is to get people to think about the problem. For the time being you're on your own and you'll have to resort to VPN and SSH tunneling technology.
0 Votes
+ -
Secure Wireless Traveling
atarentus 21st Jul 2007
I always assume whenever I'm not connected to a wireless network that I don't administer that someone else is listening. There are many ways to secure your connection when traveling, but the simplest is to use Hamachi to VPN to a computer on a secure network and then use that computer to connect out. Hamachi is free (www.hamachi.cc), easy to set up, and in conjunction with UltraVNC (www.uvnc.com) is an easy way to have a secure connection from almost anywhere.
0 Votes
+ -
UltraVNC with DSM encryption plugin?
thelemite 23rd Jul 2007
Wouldn't that work just as well?
0 Votes
+ -
SSH SSL & HTPS
clareJ 19th Jul 2007
I retrieve my email and work at the office all the time over wireless in public. I use a SSH client. All traffic is encrypted. The negotiation of the original login is encrypted.

If you cannot set up SSH server at your office then move your webmail server into the HTTPS portion of your webserver. Then at least you have your email application protected.
Again, that level of diligence is the rare exception and the vast majority of people never bother to do that.
0 Votes
+ -
Can anyone explain to me
sduraybito 19th Jul 2007
how your average unsecured Wifi hotspot is any less secure than your generic DSL or cable modem connection?
0 Votes
+ -
Cble and DSL security
cchamb2 19th Jul 2007
Because the average DSL or cable modem connection employs physical security - you need to run network cable to connect to it.

However, if the cable or DSL modem has wireless, and if the wireless is enabled by default, then generally the SSID is set to the manufacturer, with no WEP/WPA key, and anyone within range can connect and use your Internet/LAN services.
0 Votes
+ -
Network cable?
sduraybito 19th Jul 2007
How is network cable security? If I have an Ethernet cable running from my computer to the cable or DSL modem, where's the security? I don't see how it's any different than unsecured wireless.
Tapping a DSL line is possible but requires physical access and specialized equipment. Tapping an unencrypted Wireless LAN basically requires no physical access and almost no risk or effort. The hacker only needs to be within radio range.
0 Votes
+ -
Snooping a cable modem network is not hard. I have been to many locations with people hooked directly to a cable modem and you can see inside their shares without being a hacker. It is just there and browsable.

I never go in the shares because that would be illegal, but the shares advertise themselves.
0 Votes
+ -
The requirement for a physical tap is much harder than snooping on an unencrypted Hotspot. It's near impossible to get caught snooping on a Hotspot but it's easy to get caught trying to physically tap someone's connection. Of course people should always be aware of physical security.
0 Votes
+ -
The pdf is damaged and undownloadable
jonsaint@... 19th Jul 2007
EOM
0 Votes
+ -
Getting same error
null.corey@... 23rd Jul 2007
EOM
0 Votes
+ -
PDF is still damaged
balford@... 25th Jul 2007
Important read! Please fix the document...
0 Votes
+ -
Re: Wireless security
yesigotfaith 19th Jul 2007
I think your article is great, I never wondered if a wireless connection was secure or not before now, I always assumed that it was. Your article has shed a new light on this issue for me, thanks a lot.
0 Votes
+ -
Always glad to be of help
georgeou 19th Jul 2007
nt
0 Votes
+ -
End to end encryption
JDThompson 19th Jul 2007
That's why we have TLS/SSL for email exchange, tor for web browsing and VPNs for everything else, isn't it?
0 Votes
+ -
Sure, but 9 out of 10 times it isn't used. What do we do for those applications that aren't set up for end-to-end encryption? Well that's what this is trying to address.
0 Votes
+ -
WPA guests and captive portal
memcorruption 19th Jul 2007
Great article. It's time users started getting more comfortable using 802.1x and for
supplicants to make it easier too. Your idea of having a guest login is easy to
configure with just about any RADIUS server. With a bit more work, you can also
make it such that any username or password will work. I wrote an article on the topic
- which also describes how you might require a captive portal for 'unknown' guest
users:

http://coova.org/wiki/index.php/CoovaChilli/WithWPACaptivePortal
Hey that's cool! What I really want is someone to implement this on a Linksys router running Linux.
I mean I want the actual RADIUS server running on the router so that it's all self contained.
0 Votes
+ -
... according to the guys at pauldotcom.com they've done exactly that and they claim to have described how to do it in their book (ISBN 1597491667). I can't confirm but it sounds believable.
0 Votes
+ -
Excellent article
SoberDub 24th Jul 2007
An excellent solution to the problem of wireless (in)security. Thanks George!
0 Votes
+ -
Perhaps too many steps for mere mortal users?
tom-morris@... 26th Jul 2007
George, thank you for a good article, but I have concerns that the process (while simple enough to a seasoned security professional) might be too complex for casual use by mere mortals.

We have enough problems just trying to walk users through fairly simple methods of connecting to intranet secured, and public unsecured wifi, at our site.

Our network folks have settled on using a cisco-internal WAP function (as I understand it), and put the public wifi onto a private address range, VLAN, and specific firewall, port, and routing rules. Unfortunately, they can only do this with an unsecured WAP/SSID that works similarly to many open public wifi hotspots. Client connects to the unsecured SSID, then has to go to any web site, gets redirected to Acceptable Use Policy, accepts, gets assigned a private net address and assigned to the firewalled VLAN. But none of the wireless traffic is being protected.

Intellectually, your solution looks greatly superior, for the average user, has too many steps. Is there any way anyone can think of to simplify this or automate this at the end-user side of things? Oh, and of course, how can we automate this and still provide some semblance of security that cannot be easily spoofed or used for phishing?
0 Votes
+ -
The user only has two steps
n.stockwell@... 26th Jul 2007
Step number one: Select a WiFi connection and hit the button labeled "Connect"

Step number two: Type in the username "guest" and the password "guest"

Is this what your question is referencing? Or are you talking about the rest of the article? Your question is too vague to know which part you find to complex for the user.

If your comments are about the first question I would agree if the username and password was unique, but it is not unique to each user. You can let everyone know what they are and it's not going to compromise your security. This is a lot like what they already know when they have to login to their machine every morning, but the password doesn't need to be guarded because of the 802.1x connection.

If your comments are directed at the rest of the article then you need to understand that George is talking about why and how an administrator would set up a hotspot this way. The end user does not do most of the steps in this article.

I think it's both an easy solution and a brilliant. The price tag might be a bit more than I want to charge a client who is not using and not intending to use Server 2003, but it's good if you can meet the requirements.
0 Votes
+ -
What about setting up the WiFi client?
tom-morris@... 27th Jul 2007
What I was referring to, unless I've completely misunderstood the information in link http://articles.techrepublic.com.com/5100-1035-6148574.html for the Manual Deployment of PEAP --- does the client not have to do this him or herself, if they are truly a guest?

See figures Z through AA, BB, and CC --- I would truly despair of having to (quickly and briefly) show a casual WiFi client/guest how to do this.

And those instructions are only good on Windows. Then we have to consider OSX, handhelds, etc.
0 Votes
+ -
You should look at George's next post
n.stockwell@... 27th Jul 2007
How to implement SSL or TLS secure communications (http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=608). You do not need to do manual deployment of PEAP. As George explained the next day,

"The Digital Certificate is usually installed at the Server end because it makes it simple for any end user to make a secure SSL or TLS connection to the server without a Digital Certificate on the client end. A trusted third party called a CA (Certificate Authority) like VeriSign, Entrust, GeoTrust, or GoDaddy asserts the authenticity of the Digital Certificate with a Digital Signature so that the client knows that the Server isn?t fake. This trust comes from the fact that these Certificate Authorities have their Root Certificates with Public Keys pre-installed in every nearly every Operating System and Application on the market."

So you don't really need to worry about the client O.S. I would also recommend looking at the discussion that goes along with the post if your server is not Windows.
I found the below quote, is it true that WPA(2) will hand out unique keys to every client? I understand its not hard to crack if the key is known, but at least the session is obscured. how is PEAP better than WPA2 with a PSK in this case?


"Here's what you should do: put in an WPA password that's very easy to communicate to your users like "password" or "wifi." This will give everyone a WPA encrypted tunnel and make things like firesheep not work and make sniffing difficult or impossible. WPA will hand out unique keys to every client after authentication."

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
Click Here
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix