2 ms·

> Absolutely false Let's first off go back to what I was replying to: > At that point, the attacker can pose as the router and collect the password hash. By

> Absolutely false Let's first off go back to what I was replying to: > At that point, the attacker can pose as the router and collect the password hash. By claiming my correction is "absolutely false" you're asserting that the above statement is "absolutely true." But even your technically unsound correction doesn't actually address the underlying inaccuracy of the original statement or why you seemingly believe it is "absolutely true." It is also pretty clear from your reply that you're attempting to muddy the waters by conflating the PTK with the PSK or any other "password." The PTK isn't a password. It isn't like a password, and in order to derive it you need additional information which you need to attack (which is easier than attacking the PSK itself, thus WPA3's improvements, but doesn't make the above statement technically sound or true). Your post reads like you decided to correct before having any corrections to actually make then tried to muddy the topic as much as possible in the hope that others would be fooled. Plus is "collect the password hash" really a hill worth dying on for WiFi Auth? That's obviously an unsound technical claim, that isn't how the protocol works at all (and you seemingly must know that given your knowledge). > Also what you describe with RADIUS is incorrect as well but there are too many ways to configure 802.1x and RADIUS to cover all of why in a comment. So it is "incorrect" because I simplified it rather than describing the process in intricate technical detail? And you won't point out why it was "incorrect" because it is too technically difficult..? K.

zamadatix 7y ago
> > At that point, the attacker can pose as the router and collect the password hash. > By claiming my correction is "absolutely false" you're asserting that the above statement is "absolutely true." Correct. > technically unsound correction Please explain how. > It is also pretty clear from your reply that you're attempting to muddy the waters by conflating the PTK with the PSK or any other "password." The PMK is part of the PTK hash. When using a PSK the PSK = the PMK. Not much to conflate, the PTK is a hash of the password with other variables. Exactly as I explained. > in order to derive it you need additional information which you need to attack I already explained how the rest of the information needed to derive the PTK is sent in the handshake frames. > Your post reads like... Please stick to talking about WiFi authentication. > Plus is "collect the password hash" really a hill worth dying on for WiFi Auth? Prior to WPA3, yes - as explained already. > So it is "incorrect" because I simplified it rather than describing the process in intricate technical detail? It was incorrect because the password isn't used as a PSK so cracking the PTK gets you a nonce instead of the user password. > And you won't point out why it was "incorrect" because it is too technically difficult..? Given we are still trying to agree how the 4 way handshake works and what parts get hashed in it, yes - it is. . https://www.wifi-professionals.com/2019/01/4-way-handshake https://www.wifi-professionals.com/2019/01/4-way-handshake https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/66008/how-exactly-does-4-way-handshake-cracking-work https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/66008/how-exact... https://www.aircrack-ng.org/doku.php?id=cracking_wpa https://www.aircrack-ng.org/doku.php?id=cracking_wpa

zamadatix 7y ago

> > At that point, the attacker can pose as the router and collect the password hash. > By claiming my correction is "absolutely false" you're asserting that the above statement is "absolutely true." Correct. > technically unsound correction Please explain how. > It is also pretty clear from your reply that you're attempting to muddy the waters by conflating the PTK with the PSK or any other "password." The PMK is part of the PTK hash. When using a PSK the PSK = the PMK. Not much to conflate, the PTK is a hash of the password with other variables. Exactly as I explained. > in order to derive it you need additional information which you need to attack I already explained how the rest of the information needed to derive the PTK is sent in the handshake frames. > Your post reads like... Please stick to talking about WiFi authentication. > Plus is "collect the password hash" really a hill worth dying on for WiFi Auth? Prior to WPA3, yes - as explained already. > So it is "incorrect" because I simplified it rather than describing the process in intricate technical detail? It was incorrect because the password isn't used as a PSK so cracking the PTK gets you a nonce instead of the user password. > And you won't point out why it was "incorrect" because it is too technically difficult..? Given we are still trying to agree how the 4 way handshake works and what parts get hashed in it, yes - it is. . https://www.wifi-professionals.com/2019/01/4-way-handshake https://www.wifi-professionals.com/2019/01/4-way-handshake https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/66008/how-exactly-does-4-way-handshake-cracking-work https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/66008/how-exact... https://www.aircrack-ng.org/doku.php?id=cracking_wpa https://www.aircrack-ng.org/doku.php?id=cracking_wpa