4 ms·

One feature I wish to see is some form of AP authentication, maybe with TOFU and some PK pinning. That is currently, name an AP the same as another and a machin

by lloeki 9y ago

One feature I wish to see is some form of AP authentication, maybe with TOFU and some PK pinning. That is currently, name an AP the same as another and a machine that had the AP name saved will try to connect to it. If you name an AP "Apple Store" or "Starbucks" you can watch devices connect (with their real MAC even, defeating MAC randomization used when scanning for APs), and if it's an open AP or you got hold of the passphrase, monitor and possibly MITM connections.

KozmoNau7 9y ago
We definitely need some kind of mechanism to authenticate APs, right now we only have the SSID and MAC, both of which are trivial to spoof. There isn't even any collision detection, nothing stopping you from giving your AP the same SSID as an already present AP, and clients will helpfully connect to whichever one has the strongest signal, which is probably going to be the rogue AP right next to you, rather than the actual Starbucks AP at the other end of the store. According to 802.11, APs with identical names are considered to be part of the same network, no questions asked. I consider it a fundamental flaw of wifi, alongside the boneheadedness of WEP ("wired equivalent protection"... Yeah right, pull the other one), and the idiotic layout of channels in the 2.4GHz spectrum. The only way to use wifi as a consumer is with WPA2 (AES only, no TKIP) a randomly generated strong passkey, and all smart features turned way off (security holes such as WPS). For any AP that you haven't personally set up and vetted, and especially open public APs, a VPN connection is absolutely mandatory. And I still wouldn't trust it 100%.
- leni536 9y ago
  There have been proposals to use IEEE 802.11u for access points to signal that they allow EAP-TLS using only server-side authentication. [1] It's more of an implementation and UI problem. The required standards already exist, no need to wait for WPA3. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11u#EAP-TLS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11u#EAP-TLS [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20131126183610/http://riosec.com/open-secure-wireless-2.0 https://web.archive.org/web/20131126183610/http://riosec.com...
cesarb 9y ago
> That is currently, name an AP the same as another and a machine that had the AP name saved will try to connect to it. That's on purpose. At work, for instance, we have two APs with the same name, connected to the same wired network. A machine which originally was connected to one of them is supposed to try to connect to the other one when its signal is stronger. Break that mechanism, and you'll break all wifi networks larger than a few rooms.
- lloeki 9y ago
  I know this is on purpose and I use it myself to great extent, but provisioning each legit AP with an asymmetric key pair to be checked by the client proves this is one of the APs you intend to connect to, while still allowing for the roaming functionality. Public areas could even physically display the AP's key fingerprint alongside the SSID (+ WPA key when not open).

by lloeki 9y ago

KozmoNau7 9y ago

We definitely need some kind of mechanism to authenticate APs, right now we only have the SSID and MAC, both of which are trivial to spoof. There isn't even any collision detection, nothing stopping you from giving your AP the same SSID as an already present AP, and clients will helpfully connect to whichever one has the strongest signal, which is probably going to be the rogue AP right next to you, rather than the actual Starbucks AP at the other end of the store. According to 802.11, APs with identical names are considered to be part of the same network, no questions asked. I consider it a fundamental flaw of wifi, alongside the boneheadedness of WEP ("wired equivalent protection"... Yeah right, pull the other one), and the idiotic layout of channels in the 2.4GHz spectrum. The only way to use wifi as a consumer is with WPA2 (AES only, no TKIP) a randomly generated strong passkey, and all smart features turned way off (security holes such as WPS). For any AP that you haven't personally set up and vetted, and especially open public APs, a VPN connection is absolutely mandatory. And I still wouldn't trust it 100%.

leni536 9y ago
There have been proposals to use IEEE 802.11u for access points to signal that they allow EAP-TLS using only server-side authentication. [1] It's more of an implementation and UI problem. The required standards already exist, no need to wait for WPA3. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11u#EAP-TLS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11u#EAP-TLS [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20131126183610/http://riosec.com/open-secure-wireless-2.0 https://web.archive.org/web/20131126183610/http://riosec.com...

cesarb 9y ago

> That is currently, name an AP the same as another and a machine that had the AP name saved will try to connect to it. That's on purpose. At work, for instance, we have two APs with the same name, connected to the same wired network. A machine which originally was connected to one of them is supposed to try to connect to the other one when its signal is stronger. Break that mechanism, and you'll break all wifi networks larger than a few rooms.

lloeki 9y ago
I know this is on purpose and I use it myself to great extent, but provisioning each legit AP with an asymmetric key pair to be checked by the client proves this is one of the APs you intend to connect to, while still allowing for the roaming functionality. Public areas could even physically display the AP's key fingerprint alongside the SSID (+ WPA key when not open).