Live data from Hacker News

WPA3 Enterprise 192-bit mode at home

smallstep.com

181–190 of 201 posts

Re: WPA3 Enterprise 192-bit mode at home

#181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

right!? i was hoping this would be a guide with something like freeradius and letsencrypt/acme to handle certs instead of yet another rando “free until we go under/get bought” saas service

You can roll your own with https://github.com/smallstep/certificates . We maintain major open source projects and contribute a lot to other projects. I don’t think that means everything we do has to be open source. Sorry this one wasn’t. Doing this in pure open source would be a book, not a blog post. Love Let’s Encrypt — we’re sponsors — but using them for WiFi is a terrible idea. You need internal PKI for WiFi.

> You need internal PKI for WiFi. [Let's Encrypt-issued certs are a terrible idea.]

If you're talking about Centrally-Managed Enterprise WiFi, sure, agreed. Feel free to stop reading this comment, as my objections are only relevant to the home WiFi scenario.

If you're talking about home WiFi, then no, absolutely not. With the state of the world as it is (particularly with the various inbuilt CA distribution mechanisms being in the state they're in) I could not disagree more.

Remember that in the home WiFi case, you're replacing a system that does absolutely no verification of the AP that the supplicant is connecting to. So, in the case of EAP-PEAP replacing non-RADIUS PSKs, you're no worse off, and the case of EAP-TLS replacing Open WiFi, you're strictly better off... even when the supplicant does not verify the identity of the RADIUS server it's speaking to.

If I could have my guest scan a QR code (or have me read a number to them for them to enter) to get my CA into their "only trusted for the SSIDs I assign it to and only those SSIDs" cert store, then, sure, passing along this overly-large PSK would be an acceptable burden. But as it stands now, if I don't choose to use a TLS cert issued by an already-trusted CA I have to do one of the following:

* Do some sort of corporate provisioning thing that requires a lot of configuration of the client device. ("Why is this so complicated? You know what? Forget it, I'll just use my cellular connection. What the fuck is wrong with you that you make this so complicated?")

* Have them use some alternate network connection to download my CA cert, then go through the multi-step process to load it into their trust store and blah blah blah. (See the previous bullet point for the guest reaction to this process.)

* Put the CA on removable storage, hope that their phone can USE that storage, and walk them through putting the CA where it belongs. (Again, the guest is simply not going to do this and think I'm an idiot for making it needlessly complicated.)

* (I'm not sure this one is even possible, but I mention it for completeness' sake) Use some Phone App that can pull down a CA from the servers of some VC-funded startup and load that into the phone's CA trust store.

While my guests might actually do thing #4, thing #4 is for me a non-starter. I live in a large city, have lived in small cities, and have also lived in The Country. The number of times I've had someone successfully attempt to impersonate my wireless network infrastructure is zero. The number of times I've had services provided by some company (whether a startup or a BigCo) be discontinued or otherwise changed to become entirely unsuitable for purpose is far, far larger than zero.

If we had a widely-deployed, reliable, inbuilt CA insertion mechanism that normies could (and would) use, then sure, these privately-generated PSKs would be not crazy to use in home networks that you expect normie houseguests to connect to. But with the sorry state of the inbuilt "Add a new CA cert" tools, the habit of companies that produce useful consumer-focused tools to either bait-and-switch, or just evaporate after a few years, and the real-world infrequency of folks doing attacks on home WiFi networks, using a cert signed by an already-trusted CA like Let's Encrypt is the best option... if your supplicants DEMAND that cert checking be enabled.

Re: WPA3 Enterprise 192-bit mode at home

#182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone noted above the Commercial Solutions for Classified program has been in existence for a long while (probably over a decade). This package is newer but not wildly newer. Installs of the various 'packages' do exist.

Huh interesting. I can't imagine where people would willingly use it.

The white house scif is pretty laissez faire as far as SCIFs go and I imagine there's a whole pile of stuff from Maryland monitoring everything in another room nearby. I can see it being used for ipads for principals as it might be easier to police than stacks of paper.

Re: WPA3 Enterprise 192-bit mode at home

#183
post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Items 4-9 accomplish nothing. Your LAN is not a security perimeter. This ain’t token ring.

You work with reality as it is, not as you'd prefer it to be. A home router is generally protected on the WAN side. Your threat model is to secure connections originating from the LAN side, which is the only way a threat actor can establish a connection into a default deny network.

Connections into hosts on your LAN doesn’t gain an attacker anything, otherwise it would be unsafe to connect your laptop or phone to hotel, coffee shop, or airport wifi, and it’s not.

Re: WPA3 Enterprise 192-bit mode at home

#184
post #5
post #2

> However, if you want a home network that’s simple to configure, easy for your guests to borrow, hassle-free, and that all of your Smart Home gadgets can connect to, then you should close this tab now Or do what I do: run multiple APs. I have my primary one, which is very tightly secured and monitored, and only gives access to my local VPN. I have a guest one, which is only as secure as any average AP and gets you i…

You can run multiple SSIDs on the same AP and segment your networks with VLANs. No need to buy multiple APs unless you need the coverage.

Yes, this is actually what I do. They're conceptually separate APs, so I talk about them as such.

Re: WPA3 Enterprise 192-bit mode at home

#185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I have guests all isolated from the LAN already.

Client isolation means the clients on the network can't reach each other. This would prevent them from attacking each other or your insecure iot devices. Otherwise your friends will backdoor your security camera. ;-)

Yes, that's what I meant, I guess I don't know the terms: no one on the guest SSID can talk to anyone else on either network, only the internet.

Re: WPA3 Enterprise 192-bit mode at home

#186
post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You work with reality as it is, not as you'd prefer it to be. A home router is generally protected on the WAN side. Your threat model is to secure connections originating from the LAN side, which is the only way a threat actor can establish a connection into a default deny network.

Connections into hosts on your LAN doesn’t gain an attacker anything, otherwise it would be unsafe to connect your laptop or phone to hotel, coffee shop, or airport wifi, and it’s not.

[dead]

Re: WPA3 Enterprise 192-bit mode at home

#187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not know that. Wow nice. Having so many SSIDs is drawing attention to all the equipment in my flat. However I guess this feature is WPA3 only which means I'll still need the SSIDs for years to come :'(

The opposite in fact. It only works with WPA2 which means that you cannot combine it with Wi-Fi 6E or use it on any WPA3-enabled SSID.

Ah ok, strange that the feature is only becoming mainstream now (as in added by Unifi, and I never heard of it before). It's very good to hear actually because most of the devices I want to have on separate VLANs are quite dumb (IoT home automation stuff in particular) and they won't have WPA3 (and often even only have 2.4Ghz).

Re: WPA3 Enterprise 192-bit mode at home

#188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your threat model to warrant this effort at home? Are your work-related machines not networking through an encrypted tunnel in some other way (that would be a serious oversight!)? What government are you living under that is routinely compromising WPA3 from mobile vans? Are friends/guests so untrustworthy that you can allow them into your home but can’t trust the VLAN implementation of your network equipment…

That's the wrong question to ask. Instead, we should be asking ourselves, why is it after all these years that we still don't have secure and easy to use multi-account WiFi networks with per-account configurable security policies in our homes? It's the current state of things that's unhealthy, not the people demanding better. Security measures should be evaluated based on their own merits, not by appealing to friends…

> we should be asking ourselves, why is it after all these years that we still don't have secure and easy to use multi-account WiFi network

But that’s exactly what we do have! Any old router/AP combo you buy at the store or get from your ISP will let you set up a normal network and an isolated Guest network. All with a nice UI/UX that involves checking one box and choosing a password. Considering WPA3 to be insecure is just not rational or based in reality. Exploits against it are really complicated and just don’t happen all that much.

I don’t have to trust all the junk IOT devices that end up in my house because I just throw them on the guest network and call it a day. Nothing bad is going to happen to me as a result of this practice.

Re: WPA3 Enterprise 192-bit mode at home

#189
post #175

Because the requirements of "192-bit mode" for WPA3 Enterprise fall on not only the actual WiFI but also the backend identity providers, you are explicitly not allowed to do this for Eduroam unless you also provide a parallel WPA2-style (thus WPA3 compliant but not "192 bit mode") WiFi for everybody whose home institution isn't the US government. Lots of institutions have Eduroam set so that students (and academics,…

??? This is a dude playing with his home wifi. 192-bit WPA3 Enterprise is not for every use case, nor does the author or anyone else make this claim. Your comment seems misplaced.

Sure, it's just interesting because this seems like just a straight up good idea for authenticated WiFi, but because of the need to significantly change the identity backends it's actually not practical for large federated systems like Eduroam.

Re: WPA3 Enterprise 192-bit mode at home

#190
post #110
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can already do this with hostapd under WPA3 or WPA2 - The password alone can identify each client, and activate different configs for each one. Some commercial APs support this under different names but it's hard to make it work with RADIUS, which is usually necessary on larger installations. But without preloaded certificates, the clients don't know that they're not connecting to a rogue access point. Hotspot 2.…

> The password alone can identify each client, and activate different configs for each one. That's interesting, first time I hear this. How would that be represented in the hostapd config file? Would it be WPA enterprise using a radius server, or would it actually use WPA-PSK?

Check the wpa_psk_file option in the main config file [1] which lets you specify a file full of PSKs [2], each with its own options like vlanid=X and keyid=X:

[1] https://w1.fi/cgit/hostap/plain/hostapd/hostapd.conf [2] https://w1.fi/cgit/hostap/plain/hostapd/hostapd.wpa_psk

Works with WPA2 or WPA3-Personal modes, but (if you didn't know) an attacker that sniffs a WPA2-Personal association can learn the password they're using.

Post reply on HN