Receive new posts as email.
RSS 0.91 | RSS 2.0
RDF | Atom
Podcast only feed (RSS 2.0 format)
Get an RSS reader
Get a Podcast receiver
| Sun | Mon | Tues | Wed | Thurs | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
This site operates as an independent editorial operation. Advertising, sponsorships, and other non-editorial materials represent the opinions and messages of their respective origins, and not of the site operator or JiWire, Inc.
Entire site and all contents except otherwise noted © Copyright 2001-2006 by Glenn Fleishman. Some images ©2006 Jupiterimages Corporation. All rights reserved. Please contact us for reprint rights. Linking is, of course, free and encouraged.
Powered by
Movable Type
« Windows, WPA2, and Wi-Fi Security | Main | Who's Hot Today? Albany, NY (Buses) »
eWeek reports that WPA2 support under Windows XP SP2 lacks 802.1X supplicant upgrade: Microsoft’s WPA2 support should probably have included the four mandatory supplicant secured EAP types required under Wi-Fi Alliance certification standards for WPA2. I say probably because the new secured EAP types were added after the WPA2 certification standard was initially set.
What this means in practical terms is that you cannot use 802.1X with anything but EAP-TLS with Microsoft’s native supplicant. You’ll need third-party software. Microsoft’s WPA2 update boils down to just WPA2-PSK (Preshared Key) support for networks that really don’t need CCMP keys using AES if they’re just going to all share the same key!
Update: A colleague tells me that WPA2 support for Microsoft’s flavor of PEAP is included with their native supplicant. Since that’s now the dominant secured EAP flavor outside of installations in which companies particularly work hard to use another method or have all Cisco gear, that’s really the most important piece.
Posted by Glennf at May 27, 2005 9:36 AM
Categories: Security
TrackBack URL for this entry:
CCMP is definitely still useful even if you're only using PSK.
It means that you trust other authorised users of the network, but you don't trust anyone else. This is actually the security model used in most Ethernet LANs, so you're not any worse off, and it's probably exactly what most home users want.
Of course pairwise keys are nice to have, but many people will consider them a bonus.
The real problems with PSK are administrative. You have to make sure that the key is truly secure - not generated from a short password. You also face having to change every key in the network if one device is stolen, so it's not really very sensible for large networks.
Posted by: Mike at May 31, 2005 12:29 AM