1. Home
  2. Electronics Repair
  3. Did you update your router for the WPA2/PSK KRACK nonce re-use attack yet?
  4. Page 2

Did you update your router for the WPA2/PSK KRACK nonce re-use attack yet?

He who is harry newton said on Mon, 16 Oct 2017 22:03:42 +-0000 (UTC):

Here's every patch for KRACK Wi-Fi vulnerability available right now

Apple: The iPhone and iPad maker confirmed to sister-site CNET that fixes for iOS, macOS, watchOS and tvOS are in beta, and will be rolling it out in a software update in a few weeks.

MORE SECURITY NEWS

WPA2 security flaw puts almost every Wi-Fi device at risk of hijack, eavesdropping Homeland Security orders federal agencies to start encrypting sites, emails

+IAs-OnePlus dials back data collection after users protest These fake tax documents spread jRAT malware Arris: a spokesperson said the company is "committed to the security of our devices and safeguarding the millions of subscribers who use them," and is "evaluating" its portfolio. The company did not say when it will release any patches.

Aruba: Aruba has been quick off the mark with a security advisory and patches available for download for ArubaOS, Aruba Instant, Clarity Engine and other software impacted by the bug.

AVM: This company may not be taking the issue seriously enough, as due to its "limited attack vector," despite being aware of the issue, will not be issuing security fixes "unless necessary."

Cisco: The company is currently investigating exactly which products are impacted by KRACK, but says that "multiple Cisco wireless products are affected by these vulnerabilities."

"Cisco is aware of the industry-wide vulnerabilities affecting Wi-Fi Protected Access protocol standards," a Cisco spokesperson told ZDNet. "When issues such as this arise, we put the security of our customers first and ensure they have the information they need to best protect their networks. Cisco PSIRT has issued a security advisory to provide relevant detail about the issue, noting which Cisco products may be affected and subsequently may require customer attention.

"Fixes are already available for select Cisco products, and we will continue publishing additional software fixes for affected products as they become available," the spokesperson said.

In other words, some patches are available, but others are pending the investigation.

Espressif Systems: The Chinese vendor has begun patching its chipsets, namely ESP-IDF and ESP8266 versions, with Arduino ESP32 next on the cards for a fix.

Fortinet: At the time of writing there was no official advisory, but based on Fortinet's support forum, it appears that FortiAP 5.6.1 is no longer vulnerable to most of the CVEs linked to the attack, but the latest branch,

5.4.3, may still be impacted. Firmware updates are expected.

FreeBSD Project: There is no official response at the time of writing.

Google: Google told sister-site CNET that the company is "aware of the issue, and we will be patching any affected devices in the coming weeks."

HostAP: The Linux driver provider has issued several patches in response to the disclosure.

Intel: Intel has released a security advisory listing updated Wi-Fi drives and patches for affected chipsets, as well as Intel Active Management Technology, which is used by system manufacturers.

Linux: As noted on Charged, a patch is a patch is already available and Debian builds can patch now, while OpenBSD was fixed back in July.

Netgear: Netgear has released fixes for some router hardware. The full list can be found here.

Microsoft: While Windows machines are generally considered safe, the Redmond giant isn't taking any chances and has released a security fix available through automatic updates.

MikroTik: The vendor has already released patches that fix the vulnerabilities.

OpenBSD: Patches are now available. (The bastards allowed a diff to be performed by the bad guys!)

Ubiquiti Networks: A new firmware release, version 3.9.3.7537, protects users against the attack.

Wi-Fi Alliance: The group is offering a tool to detect KRACK for members and requires testing for the bug for new members.

Wi-Fi Standard: A fix is available for vendors but not directly for end users.

At the time of writing, neither Toshiba and Samsung responded to our requests for comment. If that changes, we will update the story.

Reply to
harry newton
Loading thread data ...

Yet there are still people who think the "Internet of Things" is a good idea.

Huge numbers of cheap wifi-connected devices, many poorly-designed, most of them likely never receiving security updates. What could possibly go wrong?

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
  Roger Blake (Posts from Google Groups killfiled due to excess spam.) 

  NSA sedition and treason        -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com 
  Don't talk to cops!             -- http://www.DontTalkToCops.com 
  Badges don't grant extra rights -- http://www.CopBlock.org 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to
Roger Blake

He who is Roger Blake said on Tue, 17 Oct 2017 01:03:46 -0000 (UTC):

Well, much more information is out today than yesterday, where it appears that this situation was handled well since May of this year.

The one open-source fiasco was the anomaly of OpenBSD, which the authors vowed to never let happen again.

Otherwise, the proprietary solutions were all fixed (or being fixed) in the way that'd you'd expect.

The problem is in all WiFi WPA1 and WPA2 implementations, but mostly in Linux and Android "clients" and less so in iOS and Windows clients.

Likewise less so in "routers" not set up as "bridges" (where, unfortunately, almost all the many routers in my home are almost all set up as bridges or as stations - all of which are vulnerable).

I guess, when the smoke clears, the problem will be the unsupported devices, of which Android may be a significant set as may be some of the older routers and access points.

Reply to
harry newton

You can think of it like

[client]----->[MITM HTTP-service]--->[MITM client]--->[HTTPS Site]

or if you want to keep encryption

[client]----->[MITM HTTPS-service]--->[MITM client]--->[HTTPS Site]

In the first case the client connect to the Man-in-the-middle (MITM) over http, MITM then resends the data over HTTPS to the site the client tried to connect to.

In the second example the MITM do allow the client to connect with HTTPS, the certificate which the MITM has will not be the same as on the site, so if the client don't verify the certificate, then the attack works.

If you want to read more in detail and better explained how MITM works, please take a look at:

formatting link

I wouldn't say it's hijacked, as you can resend the third request without knowing the first request. The request is sent to the client and on the client side, if you have followed the specification and cleared out the key already, then a zero-key used. I think they did explain this well on the video.

--

 //Aho
Reply to
J.O. Aho

No, not the chip vendor, the manufacturer of the device, for example to get a fix for your phone, the phone manufacturer has to push out a fix, then your phone operator may have a custom firmware for your phone, then you may be vulnerable a lot longer. When it comes to your wifi, the Access point is usually not a client, so it's not as vulnerable to the issue. It's important to get updates to your devices that connects to wifi.

Reply to
J.O. Aho

As I understand it on Android, it uses wpa_supplicant to make the WPA2 connection, and what is needed is to push an updated wpa_supplicant onto the phone (and presumably something similar for IOS). I do not think it has anything to do with the firmware.

Reply to
William Unruh

Thanks, Harry.

Have you read/watched here?

formatting link 

--
David B.
Reply to
David_B

He who is David_B said on Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:04:31 +0100:

Nice find. KRACK WPA2 protocol Wi-Fi attack: How it works and who's at risk

Salient points: . There are 10 CVE identifiers . All WPA is likely affected especially Android 6.0+ & Linux/MacOS clients . . Lynchpin is the 4-way handshake to join a WPA network . wpa_supplicant is the Wi-Fi library that handles the 4-way handshake . The SSID passphrase is verified & an encryption key is negotiated . The client waits for the access point to acknowledge the encryption key . The client will receive the encryption key multiple times in that case . The client is expected to reinstall that rebroadcast encryption key . The client is expected to reset the incremental packet transit nonce . The result is a blank (all zero) encryption key

Reply to
harry newton

So are these "fixes" really fixing the problem, or are they merely moving the trap-doors to somewhere? That is, the trap-doors or maybe "portals" are always opened. :)

--
   @~@   Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!! 
  / v \  Simplicity is Beauty! 
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you! 
   ^ ^   (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10)  Linux 2.6.39.3 
???! ???! ???! ???! ???! ???! ????? (CSSA): 
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa
Reply to
Mr. Man-wai Chang

Logical fallacy - you cannot know what you do not know.

Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA

Reply to
pfjw

He who is Mr. Man-wai Chang said on Tue, 17 Oct 2017 20:11:31 +0800:

The author of the KRACK attack pleonasm says that he would expect other protocols to be similarly afflicted.

Reply to
harry newton

The wps_supplicant ain't delivered as APK, so you will need a firmware update. On most GNU/Linux phones it's a package (rpm/deb), so that could be pushed out without a firmware update.

Reply to
J.O. Aho

I am pretty sure it is not firmware, but it is part of the Android package, if that is what you mean. Ie, it is a system program/daemon. How to replace it I have no idea, esp since it is probably altered by either Google or by the phone manufacturer. So you are probably right that it requires them to ship a replacement.

Reply to
William Unruh

TP-Link is waking up, so it seems:

[Security Flaws] Severe flaws called "KRACK" are discovered in the WPA2 protocol

Microsoft announces they patched the leak(s) on October 10.

Microsoft releases statement on KRACK Wi-Fi vulnerability

--
s|b
Reply to
s|b

He who is s|b said on Tue, 17 Oct 2017 22:36:45 +0200:

What's interesting is that the open-source community has a problem with diffs letting the cat out of the bag too soon (witness openbsd).

Reply to
harry newton

And the closed source community has a problem with never actually fixing the problems (see most of the wireless router manufacturers).

As can be seen from the debate that occured re Krack and OpenBSD. Theodore felt that leaving his users hanging completely exposed was not a good idea, and eventually the Krack finder agreed (only to regret it later). It is a real moral connundrum. Did anyone actually notice that OpenBSD could be used to reveal the bug? Ofttimes fear makes one think that everyone in the world can see right through you and see what you are trying to hide, while actually noone does. So it was not a problem, but a true moral connundrum where no answer is right.

Reply to
William Unruh

Is a hard wired connection safer (at all distances)?

Reply to
bruce2bowser

He who is William Unruh said on Wed, 18 Oct 2017 02:25:28 -0000 (UTC):

Hi William, I'm not sure what you mean, but I guess what you're saying is that firmware is only available for the newest routers, which I would agree with. Is that what you're saying?

Thanks William for understanding what I was talking about. I do see the conundrum, which is the following, put bluntly:

  1. Researcher finds vulnerability on day 0 & secretly informs vendors
  2. Proprietary-code vendors fix & release code & nobody is the wiser
  3. Open-source vendors fix & release code & anyone can do a "diff"

The problem is that the bad guys can do the diff and then get a jump in the wild on building an attack vector.

I don't know *how* to solve this, and I don't understand what the Krack Attack researcher proposed for what Theordore should have done.

William, Can you help me understand what the researcher prefers for next time?

He used the words "sit on a diff", which I took to mean that someone *knew* what the changes were and had to "sit on it" (and not tell anyone). (Yes, I'm well aware of what a "diff" is in the Bash world anyway, which is just a command revealing what's different.)

I'm confused about one of two events, as to what the researcher wanted:

  1. Did he want Theordore to just *sit* on the fix & wait?
  2. Or did he propose not giving Theordore enough info to fix it next time?

But what is the *standard* approach in this situation for open-source code? What did the researcher propose for open-source code vendors?

  1. Did he propose that they not release the code until it's public?
  2. Or did he propose not *telling* the open-source community early?

I'm confused what the suggested "solution" by the researcher was.

Reply to
harry newton

The standard approach is to give a short waiting period in which the researcher who discovers the bug sits on the bug. Meaning that the researcher does not announce to the world the existence of the found bug. Instead the researcher notifies vendors and publishers, such as a distribution or a vendor for a router such as NetGear.

The idea is that they have 60 days in which to patch before the news goes fully public. The idea here is that sometimes they need to be shamed publicly for not patching their hardware or software.

In those 60 days all vendors and users of affected software have time to perform a standard update which should fix the discovered issue before the issue is revealed after the 60 days.

With open source software since development is out in the open it is possible to discover the bug before 60 days are up. Development is in the open after all. Sometimes if it is a really bad one many distros might agree to release on the same day.

And then you have smaller distros based on larger distros that may lag. rhel is typically incredibly fast to fix any known issue. Sometimes in just an hour of it being discovered depending on what it is.

In my opinion this is where Open Source really shines. Something like a pFsense firewall will get updates very quickly and you can bank on it. A good distribution like RHEL, Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, and Suse will get updates on any particular bug very quickly.

--
Marek Novotny 
https://github.com/marek-novotny
Reply to
Marek Novotny

I have to disagree with the first statement. The open-source community does fix bugs which are very well-known and widespread. That is why Krack already has a fix. It's the smaller issues, like graphical glitches that only affect about 25% of their users which they might not actually fix. They only prioritize whatever they know they can't get away without fixing.

Reply to
Doomsdrzej

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.