Exploiting and Protecting 802.11b Networks 168
iforgotmyfirstlogon writes: "A couple of guys from Extreme Tech drove around New York, New Jersey, Boston, and Silicon Valley with a high gain antenna to see how many (secure and) unsecure wireless networks they could tap into. They used NetStumbler and Linux AirSnort to help them search. Results? They came across over 800 networks and less than 40% had any sort of security."
Networks for and by the people... (Score:2, Interesting)
Long distance 802.11b (Score:2, Interesting)
Linuxworld APs (Score:2, Interesting)
The OSDN booth had a wide open AP that I was able to use to get net access while I was hanging around nearby.
I was checking Slashdot, almost caught a breaking story for First Post, while I was in the audience listening to CmdrTaco's Q&A session.
Hopefully, from now on there will be more and more open APs at conventions so I can get net access at random places on the floor.
(Im)practical applications of this fact (Score:2, Interesting)
Traceable? (Score:4, Interesting)
But seriously, with wireless it seems like it would be incredibly difficult to trace the unauthorized user. Land based hacks are usually done over the internet rather than by physically connecting to their network. As a result, there's usually logs to help track down the person(s) using the network.
But this seems incredibly tough... if the cracker didn't go anywhere on the network that would give themselves away (such as logging into hotmail to check their mail), I would guess that it would damn near impossible to find out who was sneaking into the network... even if/when they were actually connected. I would guess that the wireless network might get the MAC address of the card being used to get into the network, but even that likely wouldn't get you anywhere.
Is that true, or am I missing something here?
-S
Question on home security (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm assuming most home users don't have the equipment/skills to set up the access point outside of a firewall and use VPN/SSH. Given that, how risky is the following:
1) Consumer base station (Airport)
2) WEP password enabled
3) Access restricted to specific MAC addresses (not possible w/Apple's configurator, but doable with the 3rd party Java version)
4) Airport plugged into home LAN, no other machines running any servers or file sharing (none are Windows boxes, 2 OS X, 2 OS 9.2)
I understand all the actual 802.11 traffic is basically open. I assume if the web site I'm using has effective encryption then that data is safe, but my POP3 password could be grabbed assuming it isn't encrypted by something other than WEP.
What I'm wondering is would this setup effectively prevent someone from setting up a laptop outside my house and getting at the files on my LAN.
This seems to me a reasonable set up for a home user, but if it leaves the family Quicken file vulnerable to any kid on the block then 802.11 seems to be destined to never be mainstream. If on the other hand a home user can put at least basic security in place (e.g. they can see your web pages but they can't trash your entire drive) then it has a chance.
Thanks.
New Zealand (Score:5, Interesting)
Securing wireless networks with IPSec (Score:1, Interesting)
This protects your network, your traffic and if the hosts are configured properly... your clients. Way better than the mess that Nasa came up with.
I am currently setting up a Linux/FreeSwan device for my employer's wireless and I have a similar OpenBSD IPSec setup at home.
I also have a floppy-based Linux "access-point" that I'm trying to integrate FreeSwan with that will offer the same thing for anyone.
Anyone interested?