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

I saw it mentioned in an answer here about firesheep, but I've never heard of it -- Should WPA2 be presumed insecure?

share|improve this question
In short, WPA2 is still fairly secure against external threats. Insiders though - people who have your network's SSID & PSK - can sniff the wireless traffic of others on your network. – Iszi Sep 14 '12 at 1:55
up vote 5 down vote accepted

WPA2-AES should be considered secure against "outsiders": people to whom you have not given the cryptographic key / passphrase.

WPA2-AES is not secure against "insiders". People who you have given the cryptographic key can access the network and may be able to eavesdrop on communications of other users. However, usually this is acceptable and beyond the scope of what we are expecting the network to do for us.

See also How do I protect myself against 'hole 196'? and this summary of hole196.

Also, make sure you read about the vulnerability in Wifi Protected Setup (WPS). Probably you'll want to disable WPS. See, e.g., this question for some citations where you can read more about the WPS vulnerability.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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