<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Can I own your wireless network?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.mcafee.com/mcafee-labs/2008/02/21/can-i-own-your-wireless-network/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.mcafee.com/mcafee-labs/can-i-own-your-wireless-network</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2011 07:51:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: AlanRII</title>
		<link>http://blogs.mcafee.com/mcafee-labs/can-i-own-your-wireless-network/comment-page-1#comment-14690</link>
		<dc:creator>AlanRII</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 03:23:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.mcafee.com/2008/02/21/can-i-own-your-wireless-network/#comment-14690</guid>
		<description>Self-signed certs not installed on the supplicant machine would necessitate not validating the cert.  Bad mojo.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Self-signed certs not installed on the supplicant machine would necessitate not validating the cert.  Bad mojo.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rusty</title>
		<link>http://blogs.mcafee.com/mcafee-labs/can-i-own-your-wireless-network/comment-page-1#comment-14689</link>
		<dc:creator>Rusty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Feb 2008 09:31:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.mcafee.com/2008/02/21/can-i-own-your-wireless-network/#comment-14689</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve found that some admins uncheck &quot;validate server certificate&quot; because sometimes it prevents users from authenticating.  If everything is properly configured, then of course validating the server certificate should not be a problem.  But in the real world mistakes happen sometimes and unchecking that box can get users authenticated in a pinch.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve found that some admins uncheck &#8220;validate server certificate&#8221; because sometimes it prevents users from authenticating.  If everything is properly configured, then of course validating the server certificate should not be a problem.  But in the real world mistakes happen sometimes and unchecking that box can get users authenticated in a pinch.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: brad</title>
		<link>http://blogs.mcafee.com/mcafee-labs/can-i-own-your-wireless-network/comment-page-1#comment-14688</link>
		<dc:creator>brad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Feb 2008 17:45:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.mcafee.com/2008/02/21/can-i-own-your-wireless-network/#comment-14688</guid>
		<description>The common response is &quot;well...we couldn&#039;t get the wireless working, so we were playing around with the configuration and we noticed that if we unchecked that box, everything worked!&quot;

unfortunately i&#039;ve heard that more then you can imagine. Nonetheless the validate server certificate box is somewhat misleading in itself. With that checkbox checked, WZC will prompt the user to either &quot;continue&quot; or &quot;cancel&quot;. When it prompts the user, WZC only displays the signing authority of the certificate, and not the certificate name (i.e verisign). An attacker with a couple dollars can buy any verisign certificate to mislead users.

Think about it, if you&#039;re prompted in a similar situation and the first thing you see is &quot;verisign&quot; would you be more inclined to accept it?

Also, in general its never a good idea to put the security of the network in the client&#039;s hands, which by prompting the user, WZC is doing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The common response is &#8220;well&#8230;we couldn&#8217;t get the wireless working, so we were playing around with the configuration and we noticed that if we unchecked that box, everything worked!&#8221;</p>
<p>unfortunately i&#8217;ve heard that more then you can imagine. Nonetheless the validate server certificate box is somewhat misleading in itself. With that checkbox checked, WZC will prompt the user to either &#8220;continue&#8221; or &#8220;cancel&#8221;. When it prompts the user, WZC only displays the signing authority of the certificate, and not the certificate name (i.e verisign). An attacker with a couple dollars can buy any verisign certificate to mislead users.</p>
<p>Think about it, if you&#8217;re prompted in a similar situation and the first thing you see is &#8220;verisign&#8221; would you be more inclined to accept it?</p>
<p>Also, in general its never a good idea to put the security of the network in the client&#8217;s hands, which by prompting the user, WZC is doing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RNP</title>
		<link>http://blogs.mcafee.com/mcafee-labs/can-i-own-your-wireless-network/comment-page-1#comment-14687</link>
		<dc:creator>RNP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Feb 2008 03:52:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.mcafee.com/2008/02/21/can-i-own-your-wireless-network/#comment-14687</guid>
		<description>On the WZC supplicant, &quot;validate server certificate&quot; is enabled by default, I am not sure why an organization would remove this configuration.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On the WZC supplicant, &#8220;validate server certificate&#8221; is enabled by default, I am not sure why an organization would remove this configuration.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: higB</title>
		<link>http://blogs.mcafee.com/mcafee-labs/can-i-own-your-wireless-network/comment-page-1#comment-14686</link>
		<dc:creator>higB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 19:14:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.mcafee.com/2008/02/21/can-i-own-your-wireless-network/#comment-14686</guid>
		<description>Good job.  I&#039;m glad to see a topic that is *not WEP related.  What you&#039;re doing here is actually valuable to real enterprise wireless configurations.  This technique will certainly be useful on wireless pentests.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good job.  I&#8217;m glad to see a topic that is *not WEP related.  What you&#8217;re doing here is actually valuable to real enterprise wireless configurations.  This technique will certainly be useful on wireless pentests.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

