All this makes WPA2 the most hardest cipher to crack. Encryption bits are substituted, rearranged and mathematical operations like multiplications are performed to further randomize the process. It uses encryption keys of different sizes (128, 192 and 256 bits) iteratively, in varying number of rounds (9, 11, 13 rounds respectively). Moreover, it is kind of a ‘shape-shifting’ algorithm, technically known as ‘substitution permutation network’. One of the reasons being the fact that it is a block cipher, which encrypts an entire bunch of text at once, unlike WPA’s stream cipher that encodes one character at a time. It is advertised to be theoretically uncrackable due to the greater degree of randomness in encryption keys that it generates. The AES algorithm is superior to the one used by WPA. The most fundamental difference between WPA and WPA2 lies in the encryption algorithm used to encode data.
To solve the problem, WPA2 was introduced which used the AES (Advanced Encryption Standard) algorithm to encrypt data. Security researchers Eric Tews and Martin Beck described their successful hacking of WPA technology in an article at WiSec 2009, using what is now known as a chopchop attack. However, as smart as hackers are, even WPA was found to be vulnerable to hacking. For every data packet, 280 trillion possible keys can be generated, using TKIP. WPA uses the TKIP (Temporal Key Integrity Protocol) to create encryption keys from passphrases supplied by the administrator, coupled with SSID (service set identifier) codes of wireless networks. WPA does not make direct use of the master encryption keys and has a message integrity checking facility. With so many combinations, the possibility of the encryption key reuse is lesser and therefore the encryption can endure hacking attacks better than WEP. EncryptionĮvery WPA key includes a 48 bit IV key, which creates 500 trillion combinations and is a stronger encryption compared to WEP. Let us see how WPA and WPA2 stack up against each other.
Wep vs wpa 40 bit key crack#
Constant change in encryption keys makes it harder for hackers to crack wireless networks. Longer the encryption key’s bit length, more are the possible permutations and combinations, and stronger is the encryption method. The encryption keys consist of a secret key and an ‘Initialization Vector (IV)’. RC4 + Temporal Key Integrity Protocol (TKIP)Īll data packets are encrypted with the use of encryption keys at transmission and decrypted at receiving points. Ergo, the WPA2 standard was developed, which is now known to be almost impregnable to brute force attacks.
It was indeed much more robust than WEP, but it was also demonstrated to be easily hackable.
WPA (Wi-Fi Protected Access) was developed as an improvement over WEP for the IEEE 802.11i wireless network standard. However, WEP proved to be inadequate and was easily hacked due to inherent flaws in the encryption methods. It was a 40 bit encryption that used a RC4 stream cipher algorithm. To protect wireless networks, first the WEP (Wired Equivalent Privacy) technology was developed. Data encryption for information security is constantly evolving to meet the challenge posed by advanced hacking methods. Cryptology developed as a science to counter these hacking attempts made on wireless transmissions. To counter these threats, with the advent of wireless networking, encryption methods were developed to prevent data theft. Since the beginning of wireless telegraphy and radio communication, the threat of data being intercepted and stolen for malicious purposes has always been a reality. These encryption technologies are built to protect the data transmitted on the network and can act as an effective bulwark against the nefarious schemes of hackers. To safeguard a network from such attacks, installation of a wireless security standard like WPA or WPA2 is imperative. Even with 1 million dollar worth of processors, it would take 2.2 x 1017 years to break WPA2’S 128 bit AES (Advanced Encryption Standard ) by brute force.Ī wireless network transmits signals over radio waves, bringing in a possibility or in most cases, a certainty of attempts being made to intercept signals and hack your network.
0 kommentar(er)
