New answers tagged

0

There are several ways of doing this. All of them are illegal (in the US at least). You can repeat traffic with a tiny bit of delay. You can make a nice device to do this out of a router and a Raspberry pi, in theory, but you should not. You can also just broadcast random noise, but echoes are worse. This is because random noise acts Gaussian, which ...


2

According to the 802.11i-2004 specification (link to download 802.11i-2004 pdf): A pass-phrase is a sequence of between 8 and 63 ASCII-encoded characters. The limit of 63 comes from the desire to distinguish between a pass-phrase and a PSK displayed as 64 hexadecimal characters.


0

Your original problem is about a weak WiFi connection. This is not related to security of the WiFi access point. However, I will answer the question posed in your title - How to secure a wireless access point (AP) from unauthorized access. The below two points are good for a start: Use WPA2 encryption which is the strongest and most current method ...


0

Its easy buddy. Get yourself a new standalone PC that you aren't using for anything else (craigslist comes highly recommended). From there, get software that will run your virtual machines, e.g. qemu, virtualbox, VMWare Player, etc. For your attacking machine, Kali Linux comes highly recommended. For the VM to attack, you should download preloaded VM ...


0

It sounds like you are trying to setup something of a cyber-range for learning. If this is the case you simply need to understand what risks are and are not being added to your network. Are you trying to make these systems available to the Internet as a whole ? If so, then you are adding very different risks than if they can only be accessed internally. ...


0

It ultimately depends on your threat model and what exactly you will be doing, but I see no problem having the host machine on your home network, especially if the VMs are on their own, isolated network. Even then, unless you are releasing malware into this network, I can't imagine the existence your test environment would pose much of a threat to your home ...


0

It means the access point is a hidden station which means it does not send any beacons. Airodump knows of the network existence and it's SSID because the clients did revealed it. This is why a hidden station isn't a secure one. As soon as a client is connected at least the BISSD is visible to everyone with a card in monitor mode.


0

How and to what extent can he spy on my PC? The password to the Wi-Fi network means very little aside from the fact you are authenticated to the network. Even if he or you cracked into the network without having previously known the password, either one of you would be able to see eachother's traffic. WEP/WPA/WPA2 occur on Layer 2, because the fact you ...


1

Keep these things in mind: How does it wirelessly connect to the internet ? WEP should be fine if you are only concerned about remote hackers, but still is considered generally insecure. Think about this: If the camera's wifi security is outdated (WPA and WPA2 have been around for a long time), what else will be insecure? What kind of authentication does ...


1

There are 2 main factors here: the person configured your wifi the person was using your computer Both of these factors open up opportunities for spying. If the person set up wifi using the lowest possible security (WEP), it is possible that they (or others) would be able to monitor all your traffic. But if the person intended to do harm, they would ...


3

Some very specific suggestions: A device that is not accessible via the internet is going to limit the physical range of threats. Wired, RF, or even bluetooth based devices will likely fall into this category. If you do use a WiFi based monitor, make sure your home wireless network is secured at a basic best practice level, and that the monitor supports ...


1

The question should be along the lines of Is my computer more vulnerable if I leave wireless on while shutting down/booting. I would say it's "possible," but most likely you are completely fine, if we assume you are up to date with patches and all that good stuff. I've seen AV Programs that have an option if you want to wait to disable the firewall ...


1

In some cases it could be risky to have wireless on even for a second, particularly for those instances when you are connected to a public network.Most guys prefer their laptops to connect to wireless connections automatically which they have ever used, due to which they are in great danger of security breach.Talking about security over wireless networks its ...


4

The problem here is that most people who buy baby monitors plan on using them in their home, and most people don't do top secret stuff in their home - they reserve that for their corporate office or government agency type stuff. I also wouldn't recommend wireless security cameras either because they're seen as a low cost alternative to wired, mostly used in ...


1

Yes, this could happen in theory. The webinterface could be faked by the attacker if she manages to get full control over the router (e.g. rewrite firmware), so that your normal DNS server is displayed on the settings page, while in fact a malicious one is actually used. In theory the attacker could also fake the firmware update function, so that you think ...


4

The most common things are default configuration and outdated software. So, in order to be safe, first be sure that you are using the latest software provided by the vendor. Then change the default configuration. This include users and passwords, ports and any other relevant option you see. Finally, be smart. Don't allow external traffic to that device if ...


2

You do not need to be concerned by this. Windows 8 in particular introduced many new security features and technologies which take direct aim at early boot malware. You can read about these in some depth here: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn283963(v=ws.11).aspx One introduction for example is ELAM - Early Launch Anti-Malware, which gives ...


0

"I was wondering if at any point my computer is vulnerable, even if it's for a second or two" Step away from the questions/reasoning of wireless being turned off, or on. You're running Windows 8.1, what is your system (Windows 8.1), and the software running on your laptop vulnerable to. Are your patches up to date, this includes patches for non-MS software. ...


3

Snapchat used to use a famously weak crypto implementation with a global key stored in the source code to encrypt pictures at rest, so they are infamous when it comes to security. But, luckily enough, all communication is over HTTPS. That means the owner of the network (your company) can not MitM the users (your friend) and read the content of their ...


0

The major distinction between the two should not be about cryptography. WPA2-PSK, provided the shared password is of sufficient complexity, is unbreakable given current resources. The use of WPA-EAP-PSK or any WPA Enterprise (i.e. EAP) implementation should not be in an effort to increase the cryptographic strength of a wireless network but to provide other ...


1

One of the points of social media login is to avoid password entry by resuing your existing loggged-in state with the social media. If you have not already logged in to the social media site in your browser, simply do that over mobile connection and then connect to this wifi. Some social media may want to verify your password before you can approve an ...


0

I am assuming when you ask whether WPA-Enterprise is more secure than WPA2, you mean WPA2-PSK (aka WPA-Personal). This is a bit like asking are vegetables healthier than an apple. WPA-Enterprise covers a spectrum of authentication methods (about 100 of them all under the extensible authentication protocol), some very strong, some very weak. WPA2-PSK is a ...


4

You had no right to scan their network, and any decision now is up to them. They could try and sue you (I doubt that), simply scold you or even thank you, and it very much depends on how you told them. I brought it up to the staff as soon as I found it and showed them, that they had two company computers unsecured on the public wifi they offered. I do ...


0

Never install a certificate you don't trust. If you trust a certificate, the company/ person that issued the cert can mitm (and certainly will) any https connection you make. The system is often used by companies to monitor their employees activities. Would you accept that for your personal data ? I think not...


0

WPA protects against casually plucking your data out of the air on the way to the Wi-Fi router. It has nothing to do with the end-to-end security that Facebook and Twitter uses (HTTPS). Also, logging in this way does not grant them the ability to directly observe your username or password. All they get is a unique token that identifies your account, plus ...


3

Who can view what you are doing? You, anyone that uses the same router (assuming you're not in Access Point isolation mode), anyone that has access to the router's access logs, possibly including the person that set up the router, and the Internet Service Provider. WPA prevents other people without access to the router from viewing your data casually from ...


0

Yes, it is possible. Hacking the WiFi is the hard part and would most likely not be the method used. Unless you have a real easy to guess password like a name, place, commonly used words. Most likely way would be from your computer, if you have a back door or virus on your PC, then someone could monitor everything. Who else has access to your PC, another ...


2

Contrary to a common misconception, the network key is not the encryption key. The WiFi communication is encrypted on its own using a key exchange protocol. This makes it impossible for anyone without abnormally huge processing power to decrypt anything that goes through. That said, if the person controls the router, that changes things as the router ...


-1

Found a script called "mass-deauth" https://github.com/m33b0/mass-deauth


0

So that everyone knows the problem was with the Kernel, there's a new issue with kernels below v4.4.0 with RT chipset (on KALI). Upgrading the kernel solved the issue.


0

Use the filters not broadcast and not multicast so that only unicast traffic remains. That should make thinks a lot more clear. If unicast traffic does not show, you may have an anti-virus interfering with the traffic capture.


1

The attack vectors remain the same. The only difference is that mobile phones might provide an additional attack surface with other services reachable like Bluetooth and GSM/UMTS/GPRS/... Check public vulnerability databases for entries regarding WLAN or other network issues to determine the known attack surface of mobile devices. Once in a while there is ...


0

As noted in other answers there is a possibility to intercept the network traffic. It has been well covered in other answers so I won't bother diving into it again. However it is not as simple as capturing the packets and data. You can't encode network packets into video. So at this point you are looking at modifying their video messaging client to take the ...


2

If it is your personal WiFi (Verizon jetpack) and you are running WPA2 from your tablet to your Jetpack ... while it is possible for them to run a WiFi sniffer and/or a MitM proxy ... it is very unlikely. Like coffeethulhu said SSL/TLS can be can be intercepted and decrypted IF your company controls the network access you are using for your chat (its ...


1

Depends on the level of packet capture they are doing. If they are doing full packet capture with ssl/tls interception then yes. You don't have to be the NSA to do this kind of interception but it is not something that most businesses will want to pay for.


5

Pixie works by exploiting weaknesses in the generation of the E-S1 and E-S2 nonces which are used to produce the enrollee hash, as described in the Pixie Dust Attack. Traditional attacks attack the two halves of the WPS PIN (PSK1, PSK2) in an online attack, essentially brute-forcing all possible options for the PIN until it is found. This has to be done ...


2

Rass, yes I remembered 4 years ago my network guy reported the very same problem. The accounts department went and bought a Brother wireless printer & connected it via wifi. turns out it's MAC points to a Japanese NIC maker of Brother & Toshiba printers. Man check your bomboclate print fleet first.



Top 50 recent answers are included