Re: airport / pcmcia ?
Michel Lanners wrote:
> Hi all,
> On 20 Aug, this message from Andrew Sharp echoed through cyberspace:
> > Colin Walters wrote:
> >> Michael Flaig <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> >> > Well ... no encryption is bad :-( Everyone with a laptop in front of
> >> > my door could sniff my network, or isn´t it so easy ?
> >> As I understand it, WEP is bad becuase the key size is far too small.
> No, it is mostly because it is implemented _wrong_. There are a few
> drawbacks in the potocol spec, that is what makes WEP a joke.
> Have a look here:
> >> This means an attacker would only have to make a slight amount of
> >> effort to break the encryption through brute force.
> Not brute force (well not really... it's not about trying every possible
> key one after the other), but simply by listening to wireless traffic,
> and extracting information out of it as it goes by.... Have a look here
> for tools that do the crack for you:
> > Which is better than no encryption, hello.
> Right. WEP still prevents casual sniffing, and easy wireless net
> hijacking. However, your neighbour in the apartment next to you could
> still _easily_ crack your net in no time.
Actually, I was gonna set all my neighbors up on the network. ~:^)
See consume.net and also
details. The open source model comes to network infrastructure!
> > Also, the key size is
> > not fixed but only depends on how you set it up. A key size of 40
> > bits prevents casual sniffing of your "conversations" while not
> > adding significant cost to the parts. A key size of 128 bits
> > prevents any timely cracking of your network traffic,
> No, that is not true anymore, as has been pointed out.
> I'd suggest these steps to secure an 802.11 network (in increasing
> - use hard-to-guess network names
> - use WEP
> - use MAC-based access-control
> these three should really be the base line
> - use application-level encryption or a strongly encrypted tunnel
Got it. Now if I can just get ppp to work on my 8500....