Email address obfuscation in effect -- please
click here to turn it off.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
- To: MLUG Off-Topic Discussion <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- Subject: Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Crack'n WEP
- From: Andrew Deering <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 00:04:53 -0500
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;s=beta; d=gmail.com;h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references;b=Tg1p96cmwI8f+SNKgnTg1w519degiwF4v9fjJhMv0pIUWZKIvoy71DDkd14N2Nh2k0VH2OigDCgcmYdgqCJJ/FwB9UpdOp63D4caEsfnzuOKAG1dTZ+eT8VJtPjAMe6EJ4gIJyDHPgrx5uXG8NnEu9OZlyTsmreNtQPQxJcwmF4=
- In-reply-to: <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- References: <EMAIL:PROTECTED> <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- Reply-to: Andrew Deering <EMAIL:PROTECTED>, MLUG Off-Topic Discussion<EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- Sender: EMAIL:PROTECTED
I was thinking the exact thing. If these 128-bit WEP keys can be
cracked, what's keeping my shell access safe?
drew
On Apr 4, 2005 10:49 PM, Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Apr 2005, Michael wrote:
>
> > http://www.tomsnetworking.com/Sections-article111.php
> >
> > The FBI tells us how to crack WEP keys in 3 minutes. You're WiFi isn't
> > safe. :)
>
> That is very impressive. I think we had a debate about this a while ago
> and I was taking the side that a 128-bit key could not be cracked so
> easily. I guess I was wrong. I still don't understand the method. He
> did use a random 128-bit key, so I guess it is legit.
>
> Luckily, I don't care about my WEP, but I do care about my SSH, so I hope
> they can't crack that yet!
>
> Mike
> _______________________________________________
> discussion mailing list
> EMAIL:PROTECTED
> http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
>
_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion