LEAP Security Vulnerabilities??
I am well aware of the many security vulnerabilities that exist on wireless networks as well as the inadequacies of WEP. I was curious if anyone has had any experiences with Cisco's LEAP authentication protocol? I have scoured the net for reviews or documents examining any potential vulnerabilities, but have not been able to find any. Any and all help or information would be appreciated. Thanks in advance, Jason Hyska Worldwide Information Security Johnson & Johnson jhyska1@corus.jnj.com
Thus spake "Hyska, Jason [JJCUS]" <JHyska1@CORUS.JNJ.com>
I am well aware of the many security vulnerabilities that exist on wireless networks as well as the inadequacies of WEP.
WEP's only real failure was the failure to specify keying; vendors (and users) with less security experience interpreted this to mean static keys were sufficient. The choice of RC4 was unfortunate given the above problem, but the coming switch to AES should fix that.
I was curious if anyone has had any experiences with Cisco's LEAP authentication protocol? I have scoured the net for reviews or documents examining any potential vulnerabilities, but have not been able to find any. Any and all help or information would be appreciated.
LEAP itself is unlikely to present problems, as it's just a means to verify 802.1x credentials and force key rotation. I'd be much more wary of potential problems in 802.1x itself, since that's the over-the-air portion. S
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 02:34:29PM -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
WEP's only real failure was the failure to specify keying; vendors (and users) with less security experience interpreted this to mean static keys were sufficient.
The choice of RC4 was unfortunate given the above problem, but the coming switch to AES should fix that.
Most existing wireless APs cannot keep up with 802.11b doing RC4 (which is EXTREMELY light on the cpu) at line rate. I'm afraid to see what they consider acceptable for AES, anything done as a firmware upgrade is going to be quite limiting. At least for 802.11a I believe they're doing better. -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)
Thus spake "Richard A Steenbergen" <ras@e-gerbil.net>
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 02:34:29PM -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
The choice of RC4 was unfortunate given the above problem, but the coming switch to AES should fix that.
Most existing wireless APs cannot keep up with 802.11b doing RC4 (which is EXTREMELY light on the cpu) at line rate. I'm afraid to see what they consider acceptable for AES, anything done as a firmware upgrade is going to be quite limiting. At least for 802.11a I believe they're doing better.
Most vendors chose to do their RC4 encryption in software and consequently can't do more than 1-2mb/s -- caveat emptor. That's hardly a failing of the 802.11 WG; at least one vendor can do RC4 (and soon AES) at wire rate. "You can have it good, fast, or cheap -- pick two." S
participants (3)
-
Hyska, Jason [JJCUS] -
Richard A Steenbergen -
Stephen Sprunk