Information Security Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for information security professionals. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

According to this paper it is cracked:

Using Reaver.

share|improve this question

closed as not a real question by schroeder, Scott Pack, Iszi, Rory Alsop May 14 '12 at 12:31

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

This has been a known vulnerability for quite a long time now; your question doesn't really ask anything - in direct answer, no, WPS setups are not particularly secure or safe. – Savara May 5 '12 at 15:03
You ask and answer your own question. A simple google search shows your answer. Is there something else that you are getting at? – schroeder May 5 '12 at 15:19
up vote 2 down vote accepted

Since the vulnerability reaver exploits is only in kind of authentication (PIN) the question should probably be rephrased to: Is WPS broken completely or only in parts.

share|improve this answer

Simple answer - no.

If you read that paper you linked to, it details the problem.

It hasn't been safe for a long time.

share|improve this answer
What do you mean not safe for a long time? any older proof of concepts? – user101579 May 5 '12 at 20:17
Perhaps I should have specified - the paper you linked to made the issue public months ago. – Rory Alsop May 5 '12 at 20:18

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.