Re: Tricky question...
From: Alan Schwartz (alansz@tala.mede.uic.edu)Date: 09/30/02
- Next message: Oliver: "Re: winnt / 2000 secure channel operation"
- Previous message: chris@nospam.com: "Re: Tricky question..."
- In reply to: Gabriel: "Tricky question..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: alansz@tala.mede.uic.edu (Alan Schwartz) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 04:10:11 +0000 (UTC)
Gabriel <en_hemlig_person@hotmail.com> writes:
>The setup is as follows: Three access points (AP1, AP2 and AP3) are
>connected to a switch and to each of the access points one laptop is
>associated (Lap1, Lap2 and Lap3). Each of the three laptops uses a
>different WEP key (WEP1, WEP2 and WEP3) when they associate to their
>access point.
>
>Question: Is it possible for Lap1 (in this case the attacker and
>associated to AP1 using WEP1) to perform a Man-in-the-Middle attack
>using ARP cache poisoning (with e.g. Ettercap) against Lap2 and Lap3
>(i.e. sniffing the communication between Lap2 and Lap3)? Assuming
>that Lap2 is associated to AP2 using WEP2 and Lap3 is associated to
>AP3 using WEP3???
>
>I am thinking that WEP only encrypts the data that travels trough the
>air between a laptop and the AP, which would mean that it travels in
>clear text between the AP and the switch?? If this is the case Lap1
>should be successful in carrying out a MITM attack against Lap2 and
>Lap3 since it "intercepts" the data trough the switch. Am I right or
>am I wrong?
>
>If I am right this scenario would be possible: AP1 is NOT using WEP,
>which (basically) means than anyone can associate with it, but AP2 and
>AP3 are using WEP. Now Lap1 (the attacker) can perform a MITM attack
>against Lap2 (associated to AP2 using WEP2) and Lap3 (associated to
>Lap3 using WEP3) without any problems whatsoever since it didn't have
>to crack a WEP key…
I think this depends on whether your switch would allow this
attack to work, and the wireless aspect is fairly immaterial.
Note that cracking a WEP key, of course, is not so very hard either.
Anyone using an 802.11b network really should use ipsec, ssh tunnels
or some other vpn.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Alan Schwartz | Disclaimer: I represent no one
<alansz@uic.edu> |
Asst. Prof. of Clinical Decision Making| Life is what happens to you while
University of Illinois at Chicago | you're busy making other plans
Department of Medical Education | - J. Lennon
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
- Next message: Oliver: "Re: winnt / 2000 secure channel operation"
- Previous message: chris@nospam.com: "Re: Tricky question..."
- In reply to: Gabriel: "Tricky question..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
