On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 01:07 +0000, g wrote: > On 05/17/2011 11:44 PM, JD wrote: > <> > > > You call youtube a credible publication? > > yes/no. > > they do have all different ways of cracking wep, wpa, and wpa2 > that are mentioned in this thread.
WEP is known to be vulnerable. WPA has some weaknesses in some circumstances. WPA2 however is thought to be secure if you use a hard-to-guess password. A quick look at Wikipedia could have told you this. Just for completeness, I visited some of the referenced URLS: > just a few from my bookmarks, which where easy to find via a little > google time; > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdJuXtjgIrA&feature=related Tells you how to improve signal strength. Nothing on WEP, WPA or WPA2. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OG9i2VPY_LE&NR=1 No longer available. Maybe the Men In Black removed it ... > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lNqqryPBNU&NR=1 Stupid Wifi detection program for WinXP. Again, no mention of WEP, WPA or WPA2. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3P8l-PsvYak&NR=1 No explanation, but appears to be standard password-guessing attack. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qP1BOZqrp5g&feature=related ABC News report on cellphone hacking. Unrelated to Wifi. > along with a few non youtube; > > http://hackerwhacker.com/ > http://whacker2.hackerwhacker.com/ > http://wi-foo.com/ > http://www.linux-wireless.com/Sniffers/ Random URLs of general sniffing and security pages. In conclusion, the assertion that there are genuine WPA2 vulnerabilities (other than guessing passwords) remains unsupported. poc -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
