Collaborate Disseminate
When a client is forced to reinstall the key and to reset the nonce and the replay counter, what does it imply for the future communication between the client and the AP? There’s an adversary in the MITM position who now can decrypt packet… Continue reading Can the client communicate with the AP after a KRACK attack?
Thinking of interim solutions to lower the chance of attack while waiting for patches for routers. Would setting a MAC filter, i.e. limiting WIFI access to only known devices, reduce or protect against the attacker hijacking … Continue reading WPA KRACK – protect with MAC filtering?
From my reading of the whitepaper it is the 4-way handshake that is vulnerable, but WPA2-Enterprise uses a RADIUS server for authentication, so is it also exploitable? And if so, how?
Continue reading Is WPA2-Enterprise affected by the KRACK attack?
From what I’ve read, the issue is as simple as performing step 3 of a 4-step handshake and the consequences of performing that step more than once. Considering the complexity of these kinds of algorithms, I’m somewhat surpris… Continue reading Why wasn’t the KRACK exploit discovered sooner?
KRACK attacks work against networks using WPA and WPA2 encryption Continue reading Wi-Fi at risk from KRACK attacks – here’s what to do
Following on from this question, I am unclear on which of the following steps are sufficient to protect a WPA2-based wifi connection from the KRACK flaw:
Patching the AP (e.g. router)
Patching the client (e.g. mobile device… Continue reading To sufficiently protect against KRACK is patching the client, the AP, or both, required?
I’m sure that by now most InfoSec-lovers have heard about KRACK.
If you haven’t, check out this great explaination by a fellow StackExchanger.
It’s a new attack on WPA2 which allows for decryption and forging of packets in… Continue reading KRACK: How does a nonce reset allow for decryption?
This question already has an answer here:
Consequences of the WPA2 KRACK attack
1 answer
To sufficiently protect against KR… Continue reading Is it enough to patch the AP to protect against KRACK attacks? [duplicate]
Wi-Fi Protected Access(WPA,more commonly WPA2)handshake traffic can be manipulated to induce nonce and session key reuse,resulting in key reinstallation by a wireless access point(AP)or client. An attacker within range of an affected AP and client may leverage these vulnerabilities to conduct attacks that are dependent on the data confidentiality protocols being used. Attacks may include arbitrary packet decryption and injection,TCP connection hijacking,HTTP content injection,or the replay of unicast and group-addressed frames. These vulnerabilities are referred to as Key Reinstallation Attacks or"KRACK"attacks. Continue reading VU#228519: Wi-Fi Protected Access (WPA) handshake traffic can be manipulated to induce nonce and session key reuse
WPA2, the standard security for Wi-Fi networks these days, has been cracked due to a flaw in the protocol. Implications stemming from this crack range from decrypting Wi-Fi, hijacking connections, and injecting content. It’s fair to say, WPA2 is now Considered Harmful. The paper is available here (PDF).
This is a proof-of-concept exploit, and like all headline-making network security stories, it has a name. It’s called KRACK, for Key Reinstallation Attack. The key insight to this exploit is a vulnerability in the handshaking between routers and devices to establish a secure connection.
This is not …read more
