Return to Answer

Cisco I believe were the ones that pushed this (I read somewhere that they invented it). Windows did not really support it until Windows 8 and up (though I speculate given it's the driver that supports it, probably any new driver does and very likely 802.11ac supporting ones).

Also to help your research, Cisco refer to it as Management Frame Protection (MFP) but the standard refers to it as Protected Management Frames (PMF).

"802.11w is an IEEE standard based on Cisco’s Management Frame Protection(MFP), a feature that was first supported on autonomous access points in release 12.3(8)JA in 2006 and in the unified release 4.0.155.5 in 2008. 802.11w isn’t a new standard. IEEE ratified the 802.11w standard in 2009, however the adoption has been slow to date, but that is expected to change with Windows 8."

Windows did not really support it until Windows 8 and up (though I speculate given it's the driver that supports it, probably any new driver does and very likely 802.11ac supporting ones).

Also to help your research, Cisco refer to it as Management Frame Protection (MFP) but the standard refers to it as Protected Management Frames (PMF). "For reference, 802.11w was rolled up in the 802.11-2012 maintenance release of the 802.11 standard."

Put simply 802.11w just signs the integrity of packets as coming from the AP. Previously only a MAC spoof of the AP was all it took to pretend to be the router asking you to leave the network. So once you know this, 802.11w will obviously not guard against jamming caused by a splatter of nonsense in the RF (because 802.11w is not above the laws of physics) or another AP with the same SSID and PSK of a stronger signal (because then the clients will just join that instead anyway).

802.11w put simply is there to stop the man/woman in the street telling your devices to disassociate from the WiFi network (in the hope of capturing your authentication data to then bruteforce the PSK), that is who it's protecting against. 802.11w is NOT there to defend against someone determined who is already on the inside from impersonating your access points or who can just jam every 2.4Ghz packet on those channels in that area.

Cisco I believe were the ones that pushed this (I read somewhere that they invented it). Windows did not really support it until Windows 8 and up (though I speculate given it's the driver that supports it, probably any new driver does and very likely 802.11ac supporting ones). There's also some horrendously buggy wireless implementations that claim to support message signing (because they have just repeated back the AP saying it supported it) but then refuse to sign even a single packet with it.

  See also https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/12543141/wap371-firmware-v1202-wireless-client-incompatibility which also links off to a list of bad clients I have discovered (I don't have the rep points on this site to post more than 2 links yet).

The standard is probably the best guide to read but it looks like you have to pay to access it (though I did from a google search find some leaked versions of it available online).

802.11w uses AES in CMAC mode and AES was added as part of WPA2, so WPA2 support is required to enable it.

Put simply 802.11w just signs the integrity of management frame packets as coming from the AP. Previously only a MAC spoof of the AP was all it took to pretend to be the router asking you to leave the network. So once you know this, 802.11w will obviously not guard against jamming caused by a splatter of nonsense in the RF (because 802.11w is not above the laws of physics) or another AP with the same SSID and PSK of a stronger signal (because then the clients will just join that instead anyway).

802.11w put simply is there to stop the man/woman in the street telling your devices to disassociate from the WiFi network (in the hope of capturing your authentication data to then bruteforce the PSK), that is who it's protecting against. 802.11w is NOT there to defend against someone determined who is already on the inside from impersonating your access points or who can just jam every 2.4Ghz frame on those channels in that area.

Cisco I believe were the ones that pushed this (I read somewhere that they invented it). Windows did not really support it until Windows 8 and up (though I speculate given it's the driver that supports it, probably any new driver does and very likely 802.11ac supporting ones). 

There's also some horrendously buggy wireless implementations that claim to support message signing (because they have just repeated back the AP saying it supported it) but then refuse to sign even a single packet with it. See also https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/12543141/wap371-firmware-v1202-wireless-client-incompatibility which also links off to a list of bad clients I have discovered (I don't have the rep points on this site to post more than 2 links yet).

The standard is probably the best guide to read (http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/download/802.11w-2009.pdf).

802.11w uses AES in CMAC mode and AES was added as part of WPA2, so WPA2 support looks required to enable it.

The standard is probably the best guide to read but it looks like you have to pay to access it (though I did from a google search find some leaked versions of it available online). I also think 802.11w probably isn't supported by WPA1 based networks, it seems to be a thing that requires WPA2 AES keys.

The standard is probably the best guide to read but it looks like you have to pay to access it (though I did from a google search find some leaked versions of it available online). 

802.11w uses AES in CMAC mode and AES was added as part of WPA2, so WPA2 support is required to enable it.

Also to help your research, Cisco refer to it as Management Frame Protection (MFP) but the standard refers to it as Protected Management Frames (PMF).