Makes me wonder whether the designer is, in fact, a saboteur.
Chuck Norcutt
On 2/28/2014 8:19 AM, WayneS wrote:
> At 2/27/2014 07:50 PM, Chuck wrote:
>> You're making me sparinoid too. Did you understand how it's possible to
>> know if failure occurs on the lower four digits vs the upper three +
>> checksum digit? I didn't understand that at all except for
>> understanding why it dramatically reduces the number of combinations to
>> be tried to brute force the PIN.
>>
>> Chuck Norcutt
>>
>>
>> On 2/26/2014 2:44 PM, WayneS wrote:
>>> Many wifi routers have have a pin for easy wpa configuration that can be
>>> cracked. Password cracking is also on the rise. I put the wifi on a
>>> separate subnet zone.
>>>
>>> http://sviehb.wordpress.com/2011/12/27/wi-fi-protected-setup-pin-brute-force-vulnerability/
>
> Only in that it appears that sending M4 "proves possession of 1sthalf
> of PIN" and sending M6 proves for 2nd half - because of the response NACk.
>
> Seems like a silly protocol, whoever made that up? Why not just require
> the whole pin to be correct?
>
> I believe my asus nt-r66u requires a button push to activate WPS
> - I'll just have to keep an eye on my cat.
>
> WayneS-panoid
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|