solomon@linux-wlan.com wrote: > > Since I'm not too sure how to carry out the attack, > > and I don't know if the vulnerability really exists or > > is just a false positive within nessus, can anybody > > else confirm this? > > linux-wlan-ng doesn't pad outgoing or incoming frames at all, as 802.11 > has no minimum length requirements. We transmit exactly what the linux > net layer gives us, and pass up exactly what comes off the air. > > Granted, a conversion from 802.11->802.[23] happens, but that involves > header mangling and not padding. > > The nessus test seems to "fail" if the ICMP response payload is > something other than null bytes. > > I'm inclined to blame a false positive at the moment, but I'm willing to > stand corrected. > > Now I do have one question -- what kind of AP was it? Perhaps the AP is > not doing the right thing, and because of that, the station is > apparently failing. > > - Solomon > -- > Solomon Peachy solomon@linux-wlan.com > AbsoluteValue Systems http://www.linux-wlan.com > 715-D North Drive +1 (321) 259-0737 (office) > Melbourne, FL 32934 +1 (321) 259-0286 (fax) FWIW, I tried this morning, and nessus does not report my laptop to be vulnerable to etherleak. I'm using the wlan-ng prism2_pci driver on my laptop, and ran nessus directly on my access point. -- see shy jo
Attachment:
pgpxHBo0afFSj.pgp
Description: PGP signature