Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

WiFi deauthentication attacks and home security

mjg59.dreamwidth.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 232 posts

Re: WiFi deauthentication attacks and home security

#91

Post by bkor »

AmericanChopper wrote: post #69
rocqua wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pointing a permanent security camera at a public space as a private person really is illegal. This is different from occasionally using a handheld camera. Because one is surveillance that is meaningfully different from what you could do just by watching someone, and the other is not (this is my argument, not sure whether this is the legal argument in NL)

Well that scenario is prohibited by the GDPR (though I’m not sure if different authorities would have differing views on that). But the statement that you cannot film public scenes or the people who happen to be in them is simple false.

This article is about a Ring camera and something installed on a door. These things are static and do not move around. That is what I was referring to.

You could read this as something else, but IMO it was pretty obvious what I was referring to. And for static cameras I'm entirely correct. For other cameras there's been various new restrictions for them as well.

Your summary of "cannot film public scenes or the people who happen to be in them is simple false" for one distorts what I wrote, secondly, if you do this with a static camera, you will have a problem and your statement is _not_ true. Friends had a "crazy lady" with cameras pointing at public space. It took a while, but eventually the cameras were removed. Something similar you can find via Google, plus (work) building security mentions the same.

Re: WiFi deauthentication attacks and home security

#92

Post by deepak123123 »

Nextgrid wrote: post #49
rocqua wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The power requirements for jamming are much higher. Making it much easier to detect a jammer, and harder to run one. Also quite a bit more illegal. Besides, jamming has a much less targeted effect than a de-auth.

When talking about home security I doubt the attacker cares much about legality, and detection requires specialised equipment, by the time it is brought in the robbery has already been committed and the attacker is long gone.

Tg

Re: WiFi deauthentication attacks and home security

#93

Post by mehrdadn »

punnerud wrote: post #89
mehrdadn wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you have any recommendation for those of us without a Mac?

Boot Kali Linux with USB/CB or use VM (that support mapping USB): https://www.kali.org Use a WiFi Dongle that support Monitor mode, as described here: https://www.aircrack-ng.org/doku.php?id=faq#what_is_the_best...

Ah shoot, I was hoping to not have to buy something. But okay thanks!

Edit: Seems my card might actually support monitor mode, I'll probably give it a shot.

Re: WiFi deauthentication attacks and home security

#94

Post by cwingrav »

oefrha wrote: post #46

> The most interesting one here is the deauthentication frame that access points can use to tell clients that they're no longer welcome. These can be sent for a variety of reasons, including resource exhaustion or authentication failure. And, by default, they're entirely unprotected. Anyone can inject such a frame into your network and cause clients to believe they're no longer authorised to use the network, at which…

A man-in-the-middle attack is what can happen here. Deauth and then the device tries to reauth. At that point, the attacker can pose as the router and collect the password hash. The WiFi spec has serious problems.

Re: WiFi deauthentication attacks and home security

#95

Post by blackflame »

swinglock wrote: post #68
AngryData wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can think of 2 potential reasons but neither seems satisfying. The first would be state agencies testing attack vectors in real life. Would suck to send out an agent who commits their crime 100% flawlessly only for them to get caught by some unsecured doorbell or other random internet device. The second would be attempts to force increases in security through intentional hacks and sabotage. Although if someone can…

Maybe an unethical Wi-Fi manufacturer thought they were clever to deauth clients of APs with MACs not in their own range, to clear other traffic off the band they use and have their products perform better than others by means of sabotage.

That surely would be noticed in any sort of rigorous certification program.

Re: WiFi deauthentication attacks and home security

#96

Post by blackflame »

the8472 wrote: post #64
Nextgrid wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get the point of this post - are you saying deauth attacks are fine and everyone should just abandon Wi-Fi?

I am saying not everyone is affected, only those who solely rely on wifi. Others have realized that a shared medium with questionable security is inherently unreliable and have other options at their disposal.

Ethernet is a shared medium as well if you want to talk to other devices on your network. So instead of deauth they do ARP poisoning.

Re: WiFi deauthentication attacks and home security

#97

Post by joeraut »

punnerud wrote: post #51
joeraut wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are people actually doing this on a wide scale?

I think most people don’t know that their equipment is doing this. A lot of WiFi Routers set to auto channel will select some other channel than the one with a lot of deauthentication packages, because the traffic is not stabil on this channel. In this way you get a better Internet connection if your equipment is sending these packages out. As a manufacture you know that you only need a couple of these “bad” devices…

This is fascinating that some manufacturers may have gone down this Darwinian path in "improving" their products.

Is there any such law against this or any efforts in introducing such laws, either in Norway or elsewhere?

Re: WiFi deauthentication attacks and home security

#98

Post by kernelsanderz »

AngryData wrote: post #65
joeraut wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are people actually doing this on a wide scale?

I can think of 2 potential reasons but neither seems satisfying. The first would be state agencies testing attack vectors in real life. Would suck to send out an agent who commits their crime 100% flawlessly only for them to get caught by some unsecured doorbell or other random internet device. The second would be attempts to force increases in security through intentional hacks and sabotage. Although if someone can…

Devices like the Pwnagotchi (https://pwnagotchi.ai) make this ridiculously easy and really fun. It’s getting very popular. Definitely recommend giving it a go if you have spare raspberry pi zero lying around.

Re: WiFi deauthentication attacks and home security

#100

Post by edwhitesell »

Jon_Lowtek wrote: post #41
walrus01 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Enterprise wifi systems from Cisco, xirrus, ruckus and others implement this feature for rogue access point suppression.

Wait what? Enterprise WiFi Systems are actively attacking each other if you put them close enough together and they overlap on some details like frequency band? ... skims search result for "rogue access point suppression" wow this is just stupid

It's been a feature of enterprise WiFi for a long time. Airespace had the functionality before their acquisition by Cisco, that was March of 2005.

Edit: minor grammar clarification.

Post reply on HN