ie8 fix
madison

Zero Day

Ryan Naraine, Emil Protalinski and Dancho Danchev

Don't assume WPA2 is more secure than WPA

By | January 24, 2008, 5:03am PST

AirDefense recently did a Wireless LAN security survey of New York City retailers where they declared two thirds of retailers insecure according to John Cox’s story.  According to the AirDefense survey, a third used zero link layer wireless LAN security (explanation of link layer here) and a third used “weak security”.  AirDefense goes on to say that one third was secure using WPA2 which Cox described as a “quantum improvement” and said that it “brought 802.1x authentication down to every device”.

The first problem with this report is that AirDefense lumped WPA-PSK in with WEP which is ludicrous since there’s no comparison on the level of security.  WPA-PSK if deployed with a reasonably complex password of 10 or more random alphanumeric characters has never been broken whereas WEP can be broken in minutes.  The second problem is the implication that only WPA2 brings 802.1x authentication when in fact 802.1x has been used since 2000 with dynamic WEP mode or WPA (AKA 802.11i draft) mode.

WPA2 can just as easily be used in PSK (pre-shared key) authentication mode along with the weaker TKIP encryption mode.  WPA can just as easily be used in 802.1x authentication mode along with the strongest AES encryption mode.  So in this particular example, WPA can actually be deployed in a stronger authentication and encryption mode than WPA2.

WPA is an industry standard that is based on the IEEE draft 802.11i security standard whereas WPA2 is based on the ratified standard so they’re essentially the same thing.  Both WPA and WPA2 let you choose your authentication modes and both let you choose between TKIP and AES encryption mode.  A WPA compliant device however can implement AES optionally whereas WPA2 compliant devices must be capable of both though you’re not required to use AES.  The only other thing that WPA2 adds is pre-authentication and PMK (Pairwise Master Key) caching which improves seamless roaming of clients between access points but has nothing to do with security.

The other issue is that large chain stores often cannot avoid using WPA-PSK mode because of the reliability issues with remote RADIUS servers in 802.1x mode.  These stores often don’t have redundant WAN (Wide Area Network) connectivity and they can’t afford to have their wireless cash registers go down if the WAN goes down.  One vendor Ruckus actually came up with a unique Dynamic PSK scheme that allows you to have unique per-user per-device WPA-PSK passwords.  Since his solution can survive WAN failures, it may be just the right solution to avoid the shared key problems of WPA-PSK and the reliability problems of remote 802.1x authentication.  For your typical enterprise however, I still recommend doing it the right way with 802.1x.

So the lesson here is to never make kneejerk assumptions that WPA2 is automatically secure and WPA-PSK is just as bad as WEP.  This isn’t to say that WPA2 isn’t good because it is, but I’m surprised that AirDefense would lump WPA-PSK in with WEP.

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

Topics

24
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

I do live in the real world, and they all use wireless
georgeou 12th Aug 2009
I do live in the real world, and they all use
wireless. I used to design secure wireless
networks for national retail chains.
0 Votes
+ -
Whatever you do, don't use WEP!
CobraA1 24th Jan 2008
Just to re-iterate a point: Don't use WEP. It can be broken in about a minute, so it's basically as secure as having an open connection with no security.
0 Votes
+ -
If you live in an apartment, with lots of people in 802.11 range of your network, then, sure, be secure. If you don't live near anyone who is in range of your network... you know... whatever. I mean, be secure there, too, but the world won't actually end if you're not.
0 Votes
+ -
Why even take the chance?
Michael Kelly 24th Jan 2008
Unless your data isn't worth protecting, why take the chance? It's not like WPA is any more difficult to set up than WEP, in fact it's easier.
"In range" has different meaning to different people. I nice directional antenna can pick you off from more than a mile.
0 Votes
+ -
I use WEP
none none 27th Jan 2008
I see 3 or 4 open APs when I look at the wireless network list on my laptop. Sure, my WEP can be cracked but for someone looking for connectivity even WEP is a high enough hurdle to get them to glom onto someone else's open network.

I'm not advocating WEP - I've been using the same AP for a few years now and set it up with WEP from the get go, so I'm reluctant to reconfigure the network now - I'm just saying that if you use WEP it's not the end of the world.

You can't secure your home with a picket fence but it will keep neighbors off your lawn. I'm just worried about the neighbors on my lawn.







happy
0 Votes
+ -
Every verizon wireless router installed with FIOS or DSL comes setup as WEP and is left that way by the installers. When I go out to service clients with internet issues and see they have verizon I know to look at the side of the router where the ESSID and WEP key are at on a preprinted sticker.


They also have the router username and password there also. I've stopped trying to figure out why.
It's a great way to get free Internet if they leave it on. I don't even know why they provide wireless LAN access with public IP addresses. I recommend people turn it off.
0 Votes
+ -
Great advice, George...
SpikeyMike 25th Jan 2008
You are kidding, right?

http://www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/Article312.html

"Miami, FL - Earlier this week, police in St. Petersburg reported that a man who was arrested for stealing a wireless internet signal faces a pretrial this month..."

-Mike
0 Votes
+ -
I think this was a WEP network.
phatkat 25th Jan 2008
I think these cases are people who are warchalking the neighborhood to look for unsecured networks to use. These articles don't tell how they go on the the wireless network and the wireless was even secure in the first place. Even so most home networks use WEP for security because of Windows and so the owner doesn't have too much hassle with connecting to the wireless network. Most people don't want to hassle with security and they leave it open simplicity sake . Like a most thieves they look for simple targets first like the unlocked car to take stuff and mostly ignore the secure stuff. I use my wireless sparingly and turn it off when I'm not using it to minimize this exposure. Yes it is pain but I rather have this than a serious cracker take my personal information.
0 Votes
+ -
The name of a "closed network" is hidden. To join the network, a
user must know the name of the network.

This is especially valuable to home users who wish to remain anonymous to "drive by" hackers.
0 Votes
+ -
You mean False Sense of Security.
woot@... 24th Jan 2008
Obtaining the SSID of such a network is fairly trivial using Kismet. The moral of the story? If someone wants to infiltrate your network, a hidden SSID is of no real help, unless your attacker is a complete amateur.

The real answer is the use WPA2 with AES, preferably using RADIUS on the backend.

Personally, I'm currently using WPA2 with AES, broadcasting my SSID (which doesn't contain any personally identifying info) with a long PSK (30+ characters). I'm working on migrating to WPA2 "Enterprise", using PEAP, but I'm having trouble getting it working with Windows XP. Remarkable, since after all, it IS a Microsoft drafted standard, and it works fine with Mac OS X and Linux.
0 Votes
+ -
No, I Mean Add One More Step
msackett 24th Jan 2008
NT
0 Votes
+ -
It's not an extra step at all
Michael Kelly 24th Jan 2008
The same sniffer that cracks a WEP password searches the area for wireless signals (a part of the first step in the process) and will show the SSID, hidden or not.

The other problem with hidden SSIDs is that not only is the router broadcasting the SSID, but the computer is too. So if you use a laptop to connect, you're broadcasting that hidden SSID everywhere you take that laptop.
0 Votes
+ -
Microsoft supported WPA2 long before Mac and Linux. As the other gentleman noted, there was a patch for it. FYI, WPA2 based on 802.11i was ratified years ago.
0 Votes
+ -
Wireless and Retail don't mix
SpikeyMike 24th Jan 2008
"Wireless LAN security survey of New York City retailers where they declared two thirds of retailers insecure according to John Cox???s story. According to the AirDefense survey, a third used zero link layer wireless LAN security (explanation of link layer here) and a third used ???weak security???."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/27/AR2007062700062.html

According to a June '07 article in the Washington Post: "Insecure networks and point-of-sale terminals are riskier than online shopping, Gartner charges."


In my considerable experience servicing the retail sector, retailers want wireless, but don't understand the security implications. I never recommend or support wireless networking for the simple fact that there is credit card information flying around on the LAN. (Visa is nervous enough!)
http://usa.visa.com/merchants/risk_management/cisp.html

Sure, *we* could secure it, and monitor it, and react to new threats. A retailer will not.

Retailers need to quit deploying wireless. Consumers should be wary of doing business (at least WRT electronic payment) with merchants who deploy wireless networks.

-Mike
0 Votes
+ -
Don't use a broad paint brush
georgeou 24th Jan 2008
There is nothing wrong with using a secured wireless LAN using the methods I mentioned.
0 Votes
+ -
In the real world
SpikeyMike 25th Jan 2008
Whatever George... So much for 'Real World' computing.

In the real world, wireless and retail don't go together.

http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Retail/PCI-The-Panacea-For-Everything-Other-Than-Security/

"The truth is that the next wave of retail applications?with their heavy emphasis on wireless capabilities of all sorts?will bring with them an ocean of new security problems. Ostensibly, they'll be addressed by the next wave of PCI requirements, which will free up more dollars for investment."

Smart money says don't use wireless in a retail environment. What does your money say?

-Mike
I do live in the real world, and they all use
wireless. I used to design secure wireless
networks for national retail chains.
0 Votes
+ -
Fact: loads of people still use WEP.
kraterz 24th Jan 2008
It's a fact that a huge number of people still use WEP, and many do that because their devices don't work well with WPA/WPA2. I've seen this personally, with many older Wlan devices not supporting hardware WPA.

This is not going to change any time soon. As for the Linux users, try getting WPA2 set up using a GUI. God help you if you are not using one of the latest distros with KDE's network manager's support for WPA2.
0 Votes
+ -
I know it's a fact, and it's a shame
georgeou 24th Jan 2008
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=56
Sony PSP started off not support WPA and forces your home network on to WEP. Nintendo DS still doesn't support WPA.

The OLPC XO doesn't support WPA configuration in the GUI which forces most people to use WEP.

It is a shame.
0 Votes
+ -
Any form of broadcast wireless network that can intercepted is insecure. If you have correct equipment and plenty of time you can crack a non-changing wireless network. The ones who properly secure their wireless networks and regularly change their passwords will have a extremely difficult time to break into.
0 Votes
+ -
That is just plain wrong.
georgeou 25th Jan 2008
"Any form of broadcast wireless network that can intercepted is insecure."

That is just plain wrong and it's a typical kneejerk response we unfortunately have to hear so often. Show me a single case of someone breaking strong encryption such as AES, 3DES, TKIP. As a matter of fact, DES has never been broken in more than 3 decades other than the fact that the key was deliberately set too short to survive the 1990s.

"The ones who properly secure their wireless networks and regularly change their passwords will have a extremely difficult time to break into."

Changing your password is actually a very bad practice and it forces people to not memorize a strong password. Augmenting your passwords with a digital certificate is what makes you resistant to password theft or cracking. Placing your digital certificate in a physical token makes it that much harder to steal and if it stolen or lost, it can be voided and replaced quickly.

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