Re: Wi-Fi User Authentication
From: Tiago Filipe Dias (tiago.dias_at_tp.telepac.pt)
Date: 07/21/03
- Previous message: Dan Bartley: "RE: Microsot Liability for vulnerabilities"
- In reply to: N407ER: "Wi-Fi User Authentication"
- Next in thread: David Gillett: "RE: Wi-Fi User Authentication"
- Reply: David Gillett: "RE: Wi-Fi User Authentication"
- Reply: N407ER: "Re: Wi-Fi User Authentication"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 17:17:14 +0100 To: security-basics@securityfocus.com
Why simply not use FreeRADIUS or even inspite expensive, radiator ?
One of the solutions could be radius configurated communicating with a ldap.
sincero
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 13:29:32 -0400
N407ER <n407er@myrealbox.com> wrote:
> Hi, folks,
>
> We're (I use the anonymous "we" here with apologies) in the process of
> setting up a Wi-Fi access point here. Bear in mind that we have little
> control over client configuration or consistency--personal computers
> would be used, with any OS--and don't want to spend a lot of time
> providing technical support.
>
> One of the other groups here went with a product called ReefEdge to
> provide Wi-Fi authentication to prevent unauthorized usage; as far as I
> can tell from chatting with them, it does pretty much the same as what
> we were thinking; however, due to cost, we'd prefer to develop something
> in-house or use something open source.
>
> So the plan I had was this:
>
> Set up the gateway with a firewall which would by default redirect all
> outgoing tcp/80 traffic to some the local machine, which would have a
> "sign-in" page. Users authenticate with their username/password, and a
> ruleset is temporarily added to the firewall allowing them full outgoing
> traffic. When they are done, they log out, deleting the ruleset (or we
> time out their connection after a certain amount of inactivity).
>
> The real question I have is, even if we were to use MAC address matching
> instead of IP (iptables has an option in the 2.4 kernel for MAC
> matching, as I recall) anyone can grab all the information he needs to
> spoof a valid connection from a single captured packet. Now, assuming we
> close or timeout connections when the user logs out, he'd have to take
> over a connection still in use. There is no guarantee, though, that the
> victim client would even notice (nor would we), especially if it is
> running something like ZoneAlarm and simply drops, with no ICMP reject,
> all unexpected packets. This would mean the attacker could simply pick
> up all the responses to his spoofed connections without the victim
> noticing.
>
> So how can you prevent this without using something which would require
> client-side support, like VPN? VPN is not much of an option for us, I've
> been told that a Mac VPN client costs money, and regardless, we don't
> want to have to support user configuration. Do I have to simply hope no
> one will be able to hijack a connection which is in use?
>
> I've seen software which claims to detect attempts to hijack Wi-Fi
> networks, but most appear to just detect brute-forcing on the IP
> address, etc. Any attacker could merely passively capture a single
> packet and bypass this detection in a snap.
>
> Thanks for any help.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Evaluating SSL VPNs' Consider NEOTERIS, chosen as leader by top analysts!
> The Gartner Group just put Neoteris in the top of its Magic Quadrant,
> while InStat has confirmed Neoteris as the leader in marketshare.
>
> Find out why, and see how you can get plug-n-play secure remote access in
> about an hour, with no client, server changes, or ongoing maintenance.
>
> Visit us at: http://www.neoteris.com/promos/sf-6-9.htm
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Previous message: Dan Bartley: "RE: Microsot Liability for vulnerabilities"
- In reply to: N407ER: "Wi-Fi User Authentication"
- Next in thread: David Gillett: "RE: Wi-Fi User Authentication"
- Reply: David Gillett: "RE: Wi-Fi User Authentication"
- Reply: N407ER: "Re: Wi-Fi User Authentication"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|