DOC PREVIEW
U of I CS 498 - Wireless Security

This preview shows page 1-2-22-23 out of 23 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 23 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 23 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 23 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 23 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 23 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Wireless Security802.11 or Wi-FiExternal Security MechanismsWired Equivalent Privacy (WEP)RC4 Stream CipherWEP’s use of RC4WEP CRC ProblemsWEP Active AttacksWEP Passive AttacksHow do other security protocols avoid these problems?LEAP: One WEP Patch802.11i802.11i Reading Material802.1X802.11i ExchangesKey Management from 802.1xKey hierarchiesSlide 18Slide 19Home and Enterprise ModesWi-Fi Protected Access (WPA)WPA2802.11i SummaryWireless SecurityCyber SecuritySpring 2005802.11 or Wi-Fi•IEEE standard for wireless communication–Operates at the physical/data link layer–Operates at the 2.4 or 5 GHz radio bands–11 Mbps for 802.11b or 54 Mbps for 802.11a•Wireless Access Point is the radio base station–The access point acts as a gateway to a wired network e.g., ethernet•Laptop with wireless card uses 802.11 to communicate with the Access PointExternal Security Mechanisms•MAC restrictions at the access point–Protects servers from unexpected clients–Unacceptable in a dynamic environment–Steve points out that MAC isn’t really secure. You can reprogram your card to pose as an “accepted” MAC. •IPSec–To access point or some IPSec gateway beyond–Protects clients from wireless sniffersWired Equivalent Privacy (WEP)•Excellent example of how security system design can go wrong.–Flaws widely published in late 2000–(In)Security of the WEP algorithm. http://www.isaac.cs.berkeley.edu/isaac/wep-faq.html–Unsafe at Any Key Size. Tech. Rep. 00/362 http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/11/Documents/•Took secure elements and put them together poorly–RC4 stream ciphers and per packet initialization vectors –Encrypting 32 bit CRC for message authenticationRC4 Stream Cipher•Takes a key value as input and generates a key stream–Key stream is XOR’ed with plaintext to create ciphertext–ci = pi  ki, for i = 1, 2, 3–Ciphertext is XOR’ed with key stream to create plaintext,–pi = ci  ki, for i = 1, 2, 3 •Knowing two of key stream, plaintext, and ciphertext lets you easily compute the third–Reusing a key value is a really, really bad idea. A well known fact for RC4–Enables trivial attacks if you can inject traffic–Enables somewhat less trivial attacks from passive sniffing.WEP’s use of RC4•RC4 seed is created by concatenating a shared secret with a 24 bit initialization vector (IV)–Frames can be lost and stream ciphers do not deal with missing bits, so the stream must be reset with each packet.–Therefore, a new IV is sent in the clear with each packet•Since the IV is reset and the IV is only 24 bits, the time to repeat IV’s (and thus keys) with high probability is very short–Randomly select IV’s and probability of reuse pk = pk–1 + (k–1)  1/n  (1 – pk–1), where n=2^24–99% likely that you get IV re-use after 12,430 frames or 1 or 2 seconds of operation at 11 Mbps.•WEP defines no automatic means of updating the shared key–In practice folks do not frequently update WEP keys–Ideally should be changing shared key after 6 frames to keep low probability of IV collision (99.999% probability of no IV reuse)•RC4 has weak keys–Use of weak keys greatly aid crypto anlaysis–There are standard techniques to avoid the weak keys but WEP does not employee these techniques.WEP CRC Problems•We encrypt the CRC, so it is secure, right?•Wrong. CRC is linear–Flipping bits in the ciphertext can be fixed up in the CRC even if the CRC is RC4 encrypted•This means that an attacker can change the cipher text and fix up the CRC–Cannot do this with crypto hashes used by IKEWEP Active Attacks•Insert known plaintext–Send email (probably forged or annonymized) to someone on the access point and sniff the stream–Knowing both plain and ciphertext getting the key stream for that IV is just an XOR•Sniff both the wireless stream and the wire after the access point–Correlate the two streams to get plan and ciphertext pairsWEP Passive Attacks•Each frame contains one IP packet–Use knowledge about IP headers to get partial key recovery for all packets•XORing ciphertext streams using the same key will result in the XOR of the two plaintext streams–Knowing how plaintext streams differ can help in the analysis–Use natural language facts to determine the likely plain textHow do other security protocols avoid these problems?•SSL uses RC4 without these problems–Over a reliable data stream so the 128 bit key does not need to be reset with each packet–Would need to capture 2^64 streams rather than 2^12 streams to get key reuse with 50% probability–New keys potentially change all bits not just the bottom 24 bits.•IPSec has the unreliable transport issues too, but its security has stood up–Uses separate keys in each direction–Uses 64 bit (for 3DES) or 128 bit (for AES) IV’s–Uses the IV as a salt not as part of the key–Forces a rekey after at most 2^32 packetsLEAP: One WEP Patch•Cisco and Microsoft driven–Tried to get a fix out to market quickly because of all the flap over WEP–But didn’t get it quite right–LEAP: a Looming Disaster http://www.lanarchitect.net/Articles/Wireless/LEAP/•Problem is the use of EAP-MD5–Not appropriate for use over an unsecured physical layer like wireless–MS-Chapv2 is used to protect the credentials and is weak•User name sent in clear•No salt in the hashes•2 byte DES key–So the sniffer can easily launch an offline dictionary attack–ASLEAP attack tool http://asleap.sourceforge.net/ Implements the attack•One solution is to force your users to use strong passwords–Probably not a good basis for security though•EAP-TLS came out about the same time, but it requires certificate deployment and so was not as popular–EAP-TTLS and PEAP came later and only required access point certificates802.11i•IEEE effort to improve security of the 802.11 spec–Using 802.1X for authentication•Wi-Fi Alliance promoting interim standards–WPA, a shorter term solution that uses existing hardware–WPA2, an implementation of the full 802.11i standard802.11i Reading Material•Overview of industry slides from 2003 http://csrc.nist.gov/wireless/S10_802.11i%20Overview-jw1.pdf•Cisco white paper http://cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/wireless/ps430/products_white_paper09186a00800b469f.shtml•Cisco FAQ http://cisco.com/en/US/netsol/ns340/ns394/ns348/ns337/netqa0900aecd801e3e59.html•Recent overview article from Embedded.com


View Full Document

U of I CS 498 - Wireless Security

Documents in this Course
Lecture 5

Lecture 5

13 pages

LECTURE

LECTURE

39 pages

Assurance

Assurance

44 pages

LECTURE

LECTURE

36 pages

Pthreads

Pthreads

29 pages

Load more
Download Wireless Security
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Wireless Security and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Wireless Security 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?