Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? in Wireless Security http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20948696 en Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:56:56 EDT Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:56:56 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21035655 Anav : Arggggg Relapse!!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21035655 Sun, 31 Aug 2008 12:42:59 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21033350 KWIKY :
said by SoonerAl See Profile :

said by Anav See Profile :

Glad to see the brainwashing did not work. You may need post-penguin counselling though!!
LOL... ;)
Hehe, Don't get me wrong guys I really do like linux and have ran many distributions. I really liked my ubuntu load on 7.03 and 7.10 while I had WEP working. Everything worked great on it including printing,filesharing and just about everything else I wanted to do on it. Unlike my other linux loads things like CUPS printing and filesharing didn't end up dead in the water every other day. It just worked! And worked good without constantly fiddling with settings and services! However, I thought I'd step up and get WPA working since I don't like running a WEP network. Well, that was when things went bad and I was stuck in wireless HELL causing me to bang head into wall. I tried all sorts of configs but ran out of steam. Either way, I'll still have my Yellow Dog Linux on my PS3 for now. Gotta like VNC over SSH for remote connections. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21033350 Sat, 30 Aug 2008 19:51:10 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21021055 docrice : This is getting a bit off-topic, but 802.11 driver support for some cards in the Linux world can be very tricky, at least with older Linux versions. Some distros are better than others. If you have a card that's actually supported (that is, someone reliably reverse-engineered from a Windows driver or whatever) or the vendor actually opened the source code, then it can work just fine. I run Linux in certain situations using an Intel PRO chipset for Wi-Fi monitoring and it's a breeze.

On top of that, if you ever want to set your card into RFMON mode, then driver support may even be more limited.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21021055 Thu, 28 Aug 2008 14:35:14 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21018834 SoonerAl :
said by Anav See Profile :

Glad to see the brainwashing did not work. You may need post-penguin counselling though!!
LOL... ;)
--
"When all else fails, read the instructions..."
MS-MVP Windows – Desktop User Experience]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21018834 Thu, 28 Aug 2008 07:29:20 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21018807 Anav : Glad to see the brainwashing did not work. You may need post-penguin counselling though!!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21018807 Thu, 28 Aug 2008 07:12:42 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21017627 KWIKY : Hi SoonerAl, I spent days messing with trying to get the wireless adapter working. I appreciate the links but I've since removed all traces of linux and will not be going back. I love MS. :huh: Uhh, because it works and I don't need a CS degree to get my wireless adapter working. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21017627 Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:10:30 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20995288 SoonerAl : Also this thread...

»ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=···tcount=1]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20995288 Sat, 23 Aug 2008 12:54:53 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20995051 SoonerAl : You also might check out this reply to a recent thread concerning WPA2. Perhaps the advice to update the Network Manager will help...

»ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=···tcount=4
--
"When all else fails, read the instructions..."
MS-MVP Windows – Desktop User Experience]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20995051 Sat, 23 Aug 2008 11:40:12 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20994358 SoonerAl : Interesting...

I recently did an Ubuntu 8.04 install and WPA-PSK [AES] worked right out of the box so to speak with my old Belkin F5D7010 wireless card. It uses a broadcom driver and I did not even mess with ndiswrapper/etc.

Have you posted your problem to the Ubuntu networking and wireless forum?

»ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=336
--
"When all else fails, read the instructions..."
MS-MVP Windows – Desktop User Experience]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20994358 Sat, 23 Aug 2008 06:20:25 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20992930 KWIKY : Hey guys, thanks for all the good replies and information. The only reason I was using WEP is because WPA on Ubuntu is INSANE to configure!! In windows it's piece of cake. I've now spent 3+ days trying to get WPA1 working in Ubuntu 8.04!! ndiswrapper/wpasupplicant iwlist/// insanity!! I'm going to just try and switch back to WEP but now that I'm on 8.04 from 7.10 I can't even get WEP working. This sucks. Either way, good to know more about WEP from the good folks on reports! Those auto key generators are pretty helpful if I ever happen to get this WPA crap working in Ubuntu.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20992930 Fri, 22 Aug 2008 20:58:51 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20992589 anon :
quote:
brute force key recovery attacks are usually succesful.
Actually no-one does a brute force attack on WEP. There are problems in the algorithm, specifically the RC4 key scheduling, which make the attacks much quicker then brute force. Look for Fluhrer, Mantin, and Shamir's original paper plus additional, more recent papers to get an idea of what is wrong with WEP.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20992589 Fri, 22 Aug 2008 19:44:59 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20991329 Wolf Fu : The reason that WEP is insecure is that transmission are secured using two keys...one is the actual WEP key you would enter, and another is known as a 24-bit IV or Initialization Vector. Both these then combine to create a RC4 cipher. This cipher is then applied to the data (or text...) you want to transmit to create "Cipher Text" or encrypted traffic/data.

The problem is that this IV very rarely changes, and the key you enter very rarely changes, which means that all brute force key recovery attacks are usually succesful. If you change the IV or the WEP key, or both regularly you can eliminate most key recovery attacks.

WPA is an upgrade to WEP and improves upon this because it upgrades the IV to 48-bits, as well as uses Temporal Key Integrity Protocol (TKIP) to change the keys used to create the ciphertext.

WPA2 replaces TKIP with AES encryption.

The only way to secure WEP is to use 802.1x...which requires the installation of a RADIUS or IAS server, a Certificate Authority, and support for WEP on the wireless router. This provides for secured Authentication and secure communications, because the system can simply poll for new keys and verify the devices identity (and validity of the key) with certificates. Properly implemented all clients are updated automatically on a pre-determined schedule. 802.1x is usually only used on Corporate networks, however with a little savvy you could install it at home as well...

...but it's usually easier to just enable WPA/WPA2. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20991329 Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:33:48 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20958326 peter_m : »https://www.grc.com/passwords.htm]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20958326 Fri, 15 Aug 2008 23:15:56 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20954324 jbibe :
said by KWIKY See Profile :

I'm now going to make the change to WPA-PSK using TKIP encryption using a 63 character ASCII key as suggested.
If all of your devices support AES, select AES over TKIP.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20954324 Fri, 15 Aug 2008 08:19:54 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20954087 KWIKY : Hey guys, thanks for pointing out that this isn't a secure way to do wireless computing. I haven't really had any reason to switch to WPA since I used to have a wireless device that could only use WEP so that's why I never changed. I'm now going to make the change to WPA-PSK using TKIP encryption using a 63 character ASCII key as suggested. And, I'm not pretending to act like I'm mr know it all wireless security-thus, the reason I'm asking. I was just being naive thinking I was secure using MAC address filtering. I haven't seen my wireless light on my router ever going unless I'm using it so I don't think I've been compromised. What prompts me to do this is the fact I'm seeing a lot more wireless devices in my apt complex.

Also, I'm sure I could become more knowledgeable if I used a few tools to see how things communicate on wireless networks. Such as netstumbler or something. I'll read some of your articles now. Regards]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20954087 Fri, 15 Aug 2008 04:41:36 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20951656 Nerdtalker : The consensus here is that WEP is a feeble deterrent at best, and I've advocated time and time over that MAC filtering is both pointless, frustrating, and contributes nothing to security at all.

Search around and you'll see countless posts to that effect.

Getting your wireless network all secured is trivial now, it simply involves using WPA-PSK TKIP or AES if you want a bit more security, or WPA2-PSK if your equipment supports it. Boom, and you're secure.
--
"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn

I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com
Spam: 12900+ messages currently using 406 MB.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20951656 Thu, 14 Aug 2008 17:12:03 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20951523 docrice : May I point you to an article I wrote:

»wicked-styles.com/bitsandpieces/···ecurity/

Besides, I generated a random 104-bit WEP key value before (+24-bit IV) on my own network and attempted to break it. In ideal cracking conditions where there was a constant flow of traffic, namely downloading a large file off the Internet, I was able to sniff the wireless connection from a separate station, collect all the "interesting" IVs, and break the key within 8 minutes.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20951523 Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:44:27 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20948974 Anav : Use WPA2 and dont pretend you know squat about wifi security. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20948974 Thu, 14 Aug 2008 08:07:45 EDT Re: Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20948772 SoonerAl : WEP is NOT secure. MAC addresses can be easily spoofed. Switch to WPA or WPA2 (whatever your clients support) with a long random key. I use a 63-character random ASCII key and WPA-PSK [AES] to secure my home wireless network.

Here are my wireless network guidelines...

»theillustratednetwork.mvps.org/L···ity.html
--
"When all else fails, read the instructions..."
MS-MVP Windows – Desktop User Experience]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20948772 Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:24:48 EDT Is a 128 bit WEP key secure? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20948696 KWIKY : Hi, I'm just wondering how secure this key is? It would appear to not be very secure based of the video this website.

»www.shawnhogan.com/2006/08/how-t···rks.html

I could switch to WPA-PSK since my router supports it. I'm just under the assumption that my wireless router would have to be accessed in order to gain access to my network since I also use MAC address filtering. If I'm using the 128 bit WEP key with mac address filtering I should be pretty secure. Correct? I haven't messed with many wifi tools to test my network. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20948696 Thu, 14 Aug 2008 05:23:23 EDT