The Wi-Fi alliance releases WPA3 which promises better security and simplified Wi-Fi configurations

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

It was already impossible to break in practice, and now it's kind of ridiculous (but probably easier to market).

And that right there is why most manufactures will change to 192.   Not because they think it's safer but because they'll lose sales if everyone else does and they don't.

 

To be honest I am not sure why the average domestic user would be worried about heavy security anyway, by the time I get to my property boundary (anywhere where someone could start hacking from) the signal is so weak it'd be quicker to just break into my house and take my computer.

[Sakkura]

21 hours ago, M.Yurizaki said:

An increase of 64-bits of entropy seems kind of wah. Is 256-bit encryption too hard for these routers or something?

It means brute-forcing will take 18.4 quintillion times as long. I think that's a fairly substantial increase. So if 128-bit would take a millisecond to brute force, 192-bit would take 585 million years. If 128-bit would take an hour to brute force, 192-bit would take 2.1 quadrillion years.

 

Exponential scaling is intense.

[Sakkura]

4 hours ago, mr moose said:

And that right there is why most manufactures will change to 192.   Not because they think it's safer but because they'll lose sales if everyone else does and they don't.

 

To be honest I am not sure why the average domestic user would be worried about heavy security anyway, by the time I get to my property boundary (anywhere where someone could start hacking from) the signal is so weak it'd be quicker to just break into my house and take my computer.

People also live in apartments, dorms etc.

[jagdtigger]

45 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

People also live in apartments, dorms etc.

Exactly, and we all know that everyone has at least one malevolent neighbor...  Or its easy to get close to the house.

[Doobeedoo]

That's really good. I personally don't use WiFi but good keeping security in check. 

Now, to get back to my dreaming of fiber connection... 

[mr moose]

6 hours ago, Sakkura said:

People also live in apartments, dorms etc.

I know.

[Trixanity]

Any idea when we'll see it in actual products and I assume it requires devices on both ends to support it (in hardware)?

[TopHatProductions115]

14 hours ago, mr moose said:

And that right there is why most manufactures will change to 192.   Not because they think it's safer but because they'll lose sales if everyone else does and they don't.

 

To be honest I am not sure why the average domestic user would be worried about heavy security anyway, by the time I get to my property boundary (anywhere where someone could start hacking from) the signal is so weak it'd be quicker to just break into my house and take my computer.

And that's the point where you then install physical locks on the chasis of the computers themselves, to simply infuriate the robbers once inside - while also showing off your use of AES+Skipfish (on the boot drives themselves). So even if they do cut the locks somehow, the drives are doubly encrypted. The only thing left to do is make the computers impossible to open or wipe without a key

[Andreas Lilja]

3 minutes ago, TopHatProductions115 said:

And that's the point where you then install physical locks on the chasis of the computers themselves, to simply infuriate the robbers once inside - while also showing off your use of AES+Skipfish (on the boot drives themselves). So even if they do cut the locks somehow, the drives are doubly encrypted. The only thing left to do is make the computers impossible to open or wipe without a key

Didn't old computers need keys to be opened?

 

[mr moose]

23 minutes ago, Raskolnikov said:

Didn't old computers need keys to be opened?

 

Yes, and many still do, they are usually made for schools and companies these days to stop people opening them up more than for security reasons.

 

 

[TopHatProductions115]

14 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Yes, and many still do, they are usually made for schools and companies these days to stop people opening them up more than for security reasons.

 

 

Counts as security - keeps people from stealing components.

[DeScruff]

On 1/9/2018 at 11:51 AM, Sniperfox47 said:

Nah. But think about all the crazy stuff you could run off your router then! Minecraft server? Video transcription server?

A Minecraft server on an ARM based CPU... Maybe I'm underestimating how powerful these things are, but I doubt that it have enough horsepower.
I mean I have issues with my laptop running as a Minecraft server for 3 people, and that thing has a i7-2760QM!

 

6 hours ago, TopHatProductions115 said:

Counts as security - keeps people from stealing components.

Or sticking random garbage in the PC... I can't tell you how many kids would stick wrappers or gum into the vents of my highschool's computers... Don't ask why I never understood that myself.

[Bit_Guardian]

On 10/01/2018 at 2:27 AM, M.Yurizaki said:

An increase of 64-bits of entropy seems kind of wah. Is 256-bit encryption too hard for these routers or something?

You only need two 64-digit numbers for the first exchange. Everything afterward has perfect forward secrecy.

[Sniperfox47]

2 hours ago, Sypran said:

A Minecraft server on an ARM based CPU... Maybe I'm underestimating how powerful these things are, but I doubt that it have enough horsepower.
I mean I have issues with my laptop running as a Minecraft server for 3 people, and that thing has a i7-2760QM!

You absolutely can. Hell you can run a pretty decent server off a Raspberry Pi 3 as long as it's only for a few people, and that only has a quad "little" A53 core processor and 1GB of RAM. A more traditional BIG.little processor with 4 A57+4 A53 would handle Minecraft with tons of wiggle room, as long as you're not running a ton of plugins and hooks.

 

Minecraft servers are far more likely to hit performance bottlenecks in other areas than the CPU since it's actually relatively CPU light. 

 

Did you have enough free RAM and configure the server to have access to it? Were you on a SSD or trying to load the world off a slower 5400RPM laptop hard drive? That it was out of ram or was trying to load chunks off a slow hard drive is the more likely cause of issues than your CPU.

 

Although this is getting pretty off topic so I'll drop it now. >.>

 

WiFi umm... Its too bad I'll have to update my whole ecosystem of devices to take advantage of this!

[jagdtigger]

1 hour ago, Sniperfox47 said:

You absolutely can. Hell you can run a pretty decent server off a Raspberry Pi 3 as long as it's only for a few people, and that only has a quad "little" A53 core processor and 1GB of RAM. A more traditional BIG.little processor with 4 A57+4 A53 would handle Minecraft with tons of wiggle room, as long as you're not running a ton of plugins and hooks.

 

Minecraft servers are far more likely to hit performance bottlenecks in other areas than the CPU since it's actually relatively CPU light. 

 

Did you have enough free RAM and configure the server to have access to it? Were you on a SSD or trying to load the world off a slower 5400RPM laptop hard drive? That it was out of ram or was trying to load chunks off a slow hard drive is the more likely cause of issues than your CPU.

 

Although this is getting pretty off topic so I'll drop it now. >.>

 

WiFi umm... Its too bad I'll have to update my whole ecosystem of devices to take advantage of this!

I wouldnt call it decent, i had to OC it to be somewhat usable(nothing else was running). But we still had issues where you break a block then it comes back...

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

I think Steve Gibson had the best take on this whole thing.

 

timestamped to 54:38

[BryL]

This is good since WPA2 is too vulnerable nowadays.

 

#Fluxion3

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

3 hours ago, BryL said:

This is good since WPA2 is too vulnerable nowadays.

The problem is that it's yet another specification developed behind closed doors by an organization that already has a very bad track record when it comes to security (WEP, WPA, WPA2 and WPS had some colossal and stupid flaws in them). 

 

Stuff like this really needs to be open-source and done by a community instead of by a small team that so far hasn't managed to do it properly yet. 

[LAwLz]

On 1/11/2018 at 8:15 PM, Captain Chaos said:

The problem is that it's yet another specification developed behind closed doors by an organization that already has a very bad track record when it comes to security (WEP, WPA, WPA2 and WPS had some colossal and stupid flaws in them). 

 

Stuff like this really needs to be open-source and done by a community instead of by a small team that so far hasn't managed to do it properly yet. 

I wouldn't call the WPA2 issues "stupid flaws". The technologies used in the WPA2 handshakes were actually proven to be mathematically secure.

Integration checks can be very difficult to do.