pBASEtobe 0 #26 September 29, 2005 When I turn on the SSID broadcast NetStumbler sees it. When I turn it off, it doesn't...???? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuFantasma 0 #27 September 29, 2005 Put barbwire areound the little antenna on the router, put the router in a foxhole and wrap an anti-personnel mine around your computer.Y yo, pa' vivir con miedo, prefiero morir sonriendo, con el recuerdo vivo". - Ruben Blades, "Adan Garcia" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AlexCrowley 0 #28 September 29, 2005 i dont know why you cant see it. Wireless sniffers dont just look for SSID broadcast packets, they look for other frametypes that are related to wireless traffic. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #29 September 29, 2005 PGP on the desktop. Nukenabber port scan blocker running on the pc. Desktop firewall running on the PC. Preferably 2 like zonealarm and norton internet security. Those 2 don't interfere with each other. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AlexCrowley 0 #30 September 29, 2005 sorry pBASE, my mistake. You're right that netstumbler is crippled to not see those frametypes. My bad - mixed up my toolsets. There are plenty of passive scanners out there that will display non-broadcasting networks for windows and linux. Just look around for wardriving tools that'll do frame inspection. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nate_1979 9 #31 September 29, 2005 QuotePGP on the desktop. Nukenabber port scan blocker running on the pc. Desktop firewall running on the PC. Preferably 2 like zonealarm and norton internet security. Those 2 don't interfere with each other. So excesive... I run, well, nothing.. I sit behind a linux box, no other firewalls, programs, any of that shit.. just a bunch of unnecessary overhead. FGF #??? I miss the sky... There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AlexCrowley 0 #32 September 29, 2005 interesting. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pBASEtobe 0 #33 September 29, 2005 Oh good, you saved me probably hours of frustration. I would have gone home trying to figure out why my NetStumbler wasn't working right! Whew! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #34 September 30, 2005 QuoteQuoteWEP has and can be easily cracked. I don't totally agree with that one. It can be cracked sure, just sniff their packets and EVENTUALLY you'll crack their WEP key. But, do you have any idea how long that'd take to do if your talking about sniffing one person, one computer? You have to collect 5-10 million encrypted packets to crack their key. Just for fun I set up a laptop and sniffed my neighbors WEP protected signal. It took me 12 hours to get 5,000 (encrypted) packets. That means it'd take 500 days to get 5 million packets at that rate. And that was when they were using the computer. What about when it's turned off or they're gone for the weekend? No one would wait that long to get it. I haven't figured out how to use it, but the FBI has demonstrated how to crack 128 bit WEP in 3 minutes. Find the analyzer toolkit if you want to play around with wireless. Sometime when I have more free time I want to see if I can get into all 6 of the neighbor wifi points at my apartment. WiFi crypto can be broken in 3 mins WEP, the access-control system for WiFi, is notoriously shit. Now Fed computer scientists have shown an attack that can break a WEP key in three minutes. Gabe sez, "Brilliant approach, using a second computer to re-send the same packet back to the router, thus generating more traffic, thus catching more weak packets, etc." The FBI team used the deauth feature of void11 to repeatedly disassociate the laptop from the access point. Desired additional traffic was then generated as Windows XP tried to re-associate back to the AP. Note that this is not a particularly stealthy attack, as the laptop user will notice a series of "Wireless Network unavailable" notifications in the taskbar of their desktop screen. Another attack method the FBI team used is a replay attack. The basic premise of this attack is to capture at least one packet traveling from the victim laptop to victim access point. This packet can then be replayed into the network, causing the target AP to respond and provide more traffic to capture. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AlexCrowley 0 #35 September 30, 2005 Yeah, the whole problem with WEP is that you dont need to brute force it. Happy reading: Tom's hardware guide to cracking WEP TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #36 September 30, 2005 WPA2, even with pre-shared keys, provides fairly good security (if you use a passphrase that is sufficiently entropic.) if you need more security than that, you have no business transmitting your information with a COTS router. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AlexCrowley 0 #37 September 30, 2005 yup, but my personal feeling is that unless you're unreasonably paranoid there's very little gain in encrypting wireless traffic *if* youre paying attention, the performance hit just isnt worth it. I view it this way: most of the network traffic I send is cleartext anyway, the stuff I dont want people sniffing is encrypted at the application level. My feeling is that if you're doing anything you want secure you shouldnt be firing it through the air for anyone to hear. It's also a game of leaf in the forest, just another jumble of bits among many - who cares if someone else is able to see that I'm posting on DZ.com this evening, etc etc. It would be just as simple to simply tunnel everything via SSH/stunnel if portability is important, I guess. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AlexCrowley 0 #39 October 1, 2005 Heh bad news. Did some testing. Netstumbler will show networks with SSID broadcasting disabled, it just wont scan for further info. In the display it's listed as the MAC. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pBASEtobe 0 #40 October 1, 2005 QuoteNetstumbler will show networks with SSID broadcasting disabled, it just wont scan for further info. Damn it why did you have to tell me that? Why couldn't you have just kept it a secret? I did read Toms guide to cracking WEP. It was very interesting. I'm going to give it a try just for fun! Thanks...kind of. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
meridianjumper 0 #41 October 5, 2005 My suggestion is http://www.lucidlink.com/ The company I work for uses this software for encryption. VERY secure. We have great results with this. If you have any questions about it, PM me. You can get a free copy of it too. It is only for 3 licenses. Blue Skies, Jeremy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
