4 ms·
Did I read the article correctly in that it is possible to disrupt WiFi networks to make devices disconnect from it, without breaking its encryption? Wow.
by FartyMcFarter 7y ago
Did I read the article correctly in that it is possible to disrupt WiFi networks to make devices disconnect from it, without breaking its encryption? Wow.
- mjg59 7y agoUnless the devices and AP support 802.11w, yes.
- Maxious 7y agoSo easily that a tamagotchi style game has been made of it and other wifi attacks https://pwnagotchi.ai/ https://pwnagotchi.ai/
- dtornabene 7y agohadn't seen this one yet and just got a zero, thanks for posting this
- Piskvorrr 7y agoTemporarily. Most devices (rescan and) reassociate when this happens. Obviously this is enough to break devices that assume that the link is always up and never retry failed transmissions.
- mjg59 7y agoIf you keep sending disassociate frames, most devices will continue dropping off and spending time reassociating. If you don't have significant quantities of local storage then that's enough to break video streaming.
- walrus01 7y agoEnterprise wifi systems from Cisco, xirrus, ruckus and others implement this feature for rogue access point suppression.
- Jon_Lowtek 7y agoWait what? Enterprise WiFi Systems are actively attacking each other if you put them close enough together and they overlap on some details like frequency band? ... skims search result for "rogue access point suppression" wow this is just stupid
- edwhitesell 7y agoIt's been a feature of enterprise WiFi for a long time. Airespace had the functionality before their acquisition by Cisco, that was March of 2005. Edit: minor grammar clarification.
- crmrc114 7y agoThough I don't see this feature in my environment anymore I am guessing it was pulled by Cisco after https://boingboing.net/2014/10/03/fcc-fines-marriott-for-jamming.html https://boingboing.net/2014/10/03/fcc-fines-marriott-for-jam...
- Nextgrid 7y agoRegardless of any encryption, wireless can always be disrupted via jamming. Even if management frames were encrypted you can still disconnect devices by jamming the signal.
- rocqua 7y agoThe power requirements for jamming are much higher. Making it much easier to detect a jammer, and harder to run one. Also quite a bit more illegal. Besides, jamming has a much less targeted effect than a de-auth.
- Nextgrid 7y agoWhen talking about home security I doubt the attacker cares much about legality, and detection requires specialised equipment, by the time it is brought in the robbery has already been committed and the attacker is long gone.
- deepak123123 7y agoTg
- FartyMcFarter 7y agoJamming is not as useful as a targeted attack, so this still seems like a defect in the WiFi spec. For example, an attacker may wish to keep their network working while disrupting others (there is an example of Marriott hotels doing this linked elsewhere in the comments here).
- xvector 7y agoWhen I was an edgy kid staying in hotels with shitty WiFi on vacation with my family, I would use a tool like this on Android to boot people off the WiFi and “clear up” some room. Not proud of it today of course, but fun times ;)
- hamhand 7y agoNot only that，you don't have to be in close range when attacking, weak signal that won't get you connected or even shown up in the list is enough to make it work, you can stay even farther if you have high gain antennas, as this attack doesn't require your response packets to work, you just have to send the target AP one-way fake frames.
- tlrobinson 7y agoYup. You can buy a little open source ESP8266-based watch to do it too: https://dstike.com/ https://dstike.com/