On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 13:57:25 +0300 Reco <recovery...@enotuniq.net> wrote:
... > WPA2's (that's your conventional WiFi standard) secure configuration is > fiendishly difficult. I take your point, but "fiendishly difficult"? I think you're exaggerating. > You have beacon frames that are broadcasted without any encryption. True, but is there any evidence that this constitutes a security risk? > You have authentication frames that can be intercepted (so WPA > passphrase can be bruteforced). Lots of things (such as TLS, ssh) can theoretically be brute forced - the question is whether such brute forcing is sufficiently practical to be a threat. I have seen nothing to indicate that properly configured WPA2 can be realistically brute forced. > You have several encryption algorithms, but: > a) They are not equally good. Of course not - they never are ;) The trick is to pick a good one, and for wifi, that's WPA2 using AES. > b) You may have a hardware that lack support for a good ones. I suppose, but my impression is that most hardware from the last few years is fine. Celejar
