Penetration Testing mailing list archives
RE: Legality of WEP Cracking
From: "Edgar Romero" <edgar.romero () sciron us>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 13:57:42 -0600
All set aside, you have a good idea wrong method of pursuit. We all know WEP is weak and users are dumb, my suggestion is to identify the WEP clients and address them individually. There is no real need to show off the skills unless asked to prove it. That is simply not professional. Because as a consultant I am sure that you are looking for a bigger fish, not simply securing WiFi. This works as a nice filter to fish out a client, however trust is where you make your money. The hardest part in all this is addressing the right people the "decision makers" the "Money holders" and then getting them to trust you as an IT advisor. -----Original Message----- From: listbounce () securityfocus com [mailto:listbounce () securityfocus com] On Behalf Of Richard Brinson Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 3:32 AM To: pen-test () securityfocus com Subject: Legality of WEP Cracking During an internal business development meeting yesterday we were discussing new ways of picking up pen testing clients. One of our junior engineers suggested that we go war driving, crack some WEP keys and then approach each company offering services to make them more secure. The idea was put down straight away on the basis that without prior approval we would be breaking the law. However, upon further discussion a case was made that (moral issues aside) provided we only captured traffic passively, and as long as we did not try to connect or send any packets to any devices - would the law be broken? Does the law state anywhere that we can not analyse air traffic that is broadcast into the public domain? (if so surely we would all be breaking the law every time we picked up a network other than our own) and is it against the law to know someone else's WEP key when they have not made that information available to you? What are your thoughts on this? Kind regards, Richard Brinson Kanoo Ltd This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This List Sponsored by: Cenzic Are you using SPI, Watchfire or WhiteHat? Consider getting clear vision with Cenzic See HOW Now with our 20/20 program! http://www.cenzic.com/c/2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This List Sponsored by: Cenzic Are you using SPI, Watchfire or WhiteHat? Consider getting clear vision with Cenzic See HOW Now with our 20/20 program! http://www.cenzic.com/c/2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current thread:
- Legality of WEP Cracking Richard Brinson (May 18)
- RE: Legality of WEP Cracking Shenk, Jerry A (May 18)
- Re: Legality of WEP Cracking crazy frog crazy frog (May 18)
- Re: Legality of WEP Cracking Tim Shea (May 18)
- RE: Legality of WEP Cracking Richard Brinson (May 18)
- Re: Legality of WEP Cracking crazy frog crazy frog (May 19)
- Re: Legality of WEP Cracking crazy frog crazy frog (May 18)
- RE: Legality of WEP Cracking Shenk, Jerry A (May 18)
- Re: Legality of WEP Cracking Morning Wood (May 18)
- Re: Legality of WEP Cracking DaKahuna (May 19)
- Re: Legality of WEP Cracking Carl Livitt (May 20)
- Re: Legality of WEP Cracking Justin Ferguson (May 21)
- RE: Legality of WEP Cracking Richard Brinson (May 23)