But WPA-PSK mode is even easier to use than WEP.  Why would you use WEP.  Distance isn't really a problem with a pringle can antenna.
 

George


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] WEEPING FOR WEP
From: Troy Cregger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, April 06, 2007 11:49 am
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [email protected]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hash: SHA1



I use WEP at home, even though my house is far enough from the road to

make it rather difficult for someone to jump on my network.



Even if someone decided to hide in the woods at the edge of my yard with

a laptop they're more likely to be eaten by a bear, sprayed by a skunk,

or chewed alive by mosquitoes than collecting enough packets to crack

the WEP key, so WPA or LEAP would be overkill.



Like you said, measurement of risk.





neal.krawetz@mac.hush.com wrote:


> seconds. Knowing that WEP is no more secure than a plastic
luggage


> lock, many people are questioning whether WEP is even useful at
all.

> 


> While I certainly do not recommend WEP for high security (or
even


> moderate risk) environments, you need to remember: security is
a


> measurement of risk. If the threat is low enough, then WEP
should

> be fine.

> 

> WEP actually has three things going in its favor:

> 


>    * Availability: While there are many alternatives to WEP,
such


> as WPA and LEAP, only WEP is widely available. Hotels and
coffee


> shops that only cater to WPA or LEAP will not support many of
their


> customers. However, if you support WEP then everyone should be
able

> to access the network.

> 


>    * Better than nothing: There's a saying in Colorado: I
don't


> have to run faster than the bear, I just have to run faster
than


> you. If a casual war driver or WiFi-parasite has the option to
use


> your WEP system or your neighbor's open system, they will
always


> choose your neighbor. Having WEP makes you less desirable than
an


> open WiFi because there is no effort needed to use the network.
If


> you happen to live next to a coffee shop or library that
offers


> free WiFi, then the casual wireless user who just wants
Internet


> access will always choose free over the hassle of cracking
WEP.


> While WEP does not block a determined attacker who wants
your


> network, it will stop opportunistic network users.  Attackers
tend


> to not be sophisticated and do not choose their targets. 
Attackers


> are much like Russian roulette players, and like Russian
roulette

> players are usually both Russian and not very intelligent.

> 


>    * Intent: This is a biggie. If someone trespassed on
your


> private network through an open wireless access point, then
proving


> digital trespassing can be very difficult. However, if the
user


> must bypass your minimalist WEP security, then they clearly
show

> intent to trespass.

> 


> Consider WEP like a low fence around a swimming pool. Without
the


> fence, you are in trouble if a neighborhood kid drowns in the
pool.


> It's an "attractive nuisance". However, with the fence, you
should


> be covered if a kid climbs the fence and drowns. It's still
bad,


> but you have a standing to refute blamed since you put up
a

> barrier, even if the barrier was minimal.

> 


> As far as WEP goes, it may not be very secure, but it is
better


> than the open-network alternative. If you have the option to use
a


> stronger security algorithm, then definitely do that. However,
if

> you have no other option, then WEP is better than nothing.

> 

> - Dr. Neal Krawetz, PhD


> Author of "An Advanced Guide to chmod(1)" and "An Introduction
to

> Graphical Wrappers for apt and dpkg in Ubuntu"

> 


> I am best known for spending two weeks figuring out alternatives
to

> single user mode on my Mac.  PhD powah!

> 

> http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/>



- --

Click to consolidate debt and lower month expenses

http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/CAaCXv1QPxZfhpzcJ4Xn8PICitIjcFxD/





_______________________________________________

Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.

Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html

Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/



- --

Troy Cregger

Lead Developer, Technical Products.

Kennedy Information, Inc

One Phoenix Mill Ln, Fl 3

Peterborough, NH 03458

(603)924-0900 ext 662

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org



iD8DBQFGFpY5nBEWLrrYRl8RAujxAJ4/emoKx9/vwwteZeGrBdEQNJq7YwCfRT+H

w5n4HjI21HB4ENS5a2hkTI0=

=8pPp

-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



_______________________________________________

Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.

Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html

Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Reply via email to