CEH EXAM OBJECTIVES COVERED IN THIS CHAPTER:
Wireless networks have been popular for over a decade now and have quickly replaced or enhanced wired networks. The ability to become more mobile due to the lack of wires has been a big motivator in the adoption of the technology by businesses as well as end users. In addition, the technology has made it possible to push networks into areas they have not traditionally been able to go, including airports, hotels, coffee shops, libraries, and other areas where the use of wires would be prohibited.
Adding to the security issues associated with Wi-Fi is another technology in the form of Bluetooth. While not the same as Wi-Fi, it is a wireless technology and does suffer from some of the same general issues that Wi-Fi networks have had to deal with. With the increasing amount of Bluetooth-enabled devices available on the market including smartphones, tablets, and other devices, the implications of data leakage associated with Bluetooth are huge. All you have to think about is the type of information the average user stores on their mobile devices to understand the potential issues emerging with Bluetooth. In this chapter we will cover the various types of wireless networks as well as Bluetooth and how to explore their vulnerabilities and security risks and how to penetrate them successfully.
The risks associated with wireless networks have definitely increased, in some cases dramatically, compared to traditional wired networks. Attacking parties have found that wireless networks allow for much easier targeting of victims and make the penetration into seemingly protected safe areas simpler than they were before the technology arrived. As a result of the perceived risks (both actual and imagined), many companies have slowed their implementation or needlessly exposed themselves to security risks—needlessly because they can have a wireless network that is secure if they take the time to consider all the issues involved as well as the risks.
Wireless networks, or Wi-Fi, fall into the range of technologies covered under the IEEE 802.11 standard. The technology has been adapted for use by everything from laptops and personal computers to smartphones and video game consoles. Through the use of wireless technology, users can connect to the Internet and share resources in ways that weren’t possible in the past. However, the technology for all its convenience and flexibility does have its drawbacks:
Some of the advantages are as follows:
A wireless network uses radio waves to transmit data. The technical details that define a wireless network and 802.11 occur at the Physical layer of the network. The standard that defines Wi-Fi was itself built from the 802.11 specification. The Wi-Fi standard defines many details, including how to manage a connection through techniques such as Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum (DSSS), Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum (FHSS), infrared (IR), and orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM).
In this chapter we will be talking about four environments built around the technology and how each varies:
The first type, which uses access points, comes in one of two types: hardware- or software-based. Hardware-based access points (HAPs) use a device such as a wireless router or dedicated wireless access point for Wi-Fi–enabled clients to attach to as needed. A software-based access point (SAP) is also possible through the use of a wireless-enabled system attached to a wired network, which, in essence, shares its wireless adapter.
The second type involves providing more than one access point for clients to attach to as needed. With this implementation, each access point must have some degree of overlap with its neighboring access points. When it has been set up correctly, this network allows clients to roam from location to location seamlessly without losing connectivity.
A LAN-to-LAN wireless network, the third type, allows wired networks in different locations to be connected through wireless technology. This approach has the advantage of allowing connections between locations that may otherwise have to use a more expensive connectivity solution.
A 3G/4G hot spot, the fourth type, provides Wi-Fi access to Wi-Fi–enabled devices, including MP3 players, notebooks, cameras, PDAs, netbooks, and more.
Not all wireless standards are the same, and you should become familiar with the differences and similarities of each (see Table 15.1).
Table 15.1 Wireless standards
Type | Frequency (GHz) | Speed (Mbps) | Range (ft) |
802.11a | 5 | 54 | 75 |
802.11b | 2.4 | 11 | 150 |
802.11g | 2.4 | 11 | 150 |
802.11n | 2.4/5 | 54 | ~100 |
802.11ac | 2.4/5 | 433-3.69 Gbps | ~100 |
802.16 (WiMAX) | 10–66 | 70–1000 | 30 (miles) |
Bluetooth | 2.4 | 1–3 (first gen) | 33 |
So why all the different letters in the 802.11 family? Well, the short answer is that the additional letters correspond to the working groups that came up with the modifications to 802.11. For example, 802.11a refers to the standard that defines changes to the Physical network layer required to support the various frequency and modulation requirements.
Once a wireless access point or wireless network is established, the next step involves getting clients to attach to it in order to transmit data. This is the job of the service set identifier (SSID). An access point will broadcast an SSID, which will be used by clients to identify and attach to the network. The SSID is typically viewed as the text string that end users see when they are searching for a wireless network. The SSID can be made up of most combinations of characters, but it can only ever be a maximum of 32 bytes in size.
The SSID is continually broadcast by the access point or points to allow clients to identify the network. A client is configured with the name of an access point in order to join the given network. It is possible to think of the SSID configured on a client as a token used to access the named wireless network. The SSID is embedded within the header of packets, thus making it viewable. On open networks, the SSID is visible and can be viewed by any client searching for it. On closed networks, the SSID is not visible and in some cases is said to be cloaked.
In addition to the term SSID, this chapter uses the terms shown in Table 15.2.
Table 15.2 Common wireless terms
Term | Description |
GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications) | An international standard for mobile wireless |
Association | The process of connecting a client to an access point |
BSSID (basic service set identification) | The MAC address of an access point |
Hot spot | A location that provides wireless access to the public such as a coffee shop or airport |
Access point | A hardware or software construct that provides wireless access |
ISM (industrial, scientific, and medical) band | An unlicensed band of frequencies |
Bandwidth | How much speed is available for devices |
Something else you should be aware of when talking about wireless networks is the type of antenna in use. If you are working with consumer-grade access points, this typically is not a big concern because the antenna is built in or provided with these products. However, when working with enterprise and commercial-grade access points, you may very well need to select an antenna to suit your environment or for a specific purpose. In this section we’ll look at each of the available types and what makes them unique and why you would choose one over another.
The first type of antenna we’ll discuss is the Yagi antenna (Figure 15.1), which is designed to be a unidirectional (more commonly known as directional) antenna. As a unidirectional antenna, it works well transmitting and receiving signals in some directions but not in others. Typically, this type of antenna is used in applications where the transmission of signals is needed from site to site instead of covering a wider area. From a security standpoint, this type of antenna enhances security by limiting signals to smaller areas.
The next antenna type is one of the more common ones and is known as an omnidirectional antenna. This type of antenna emanates radio energy in all directions but typically in some directions better than others. In many cases, these antennas can transmit data in two dimensions well but not in three dimensions.
A parabolic grid antenna (Figure 15.2) is another popular type of design and is commonly seen in various applications. This type of antenna takes the form of a dish and is a directional antenna because it sends and receives data over one axis; in fact, it can be said that this type of antenna is unidirectional, working well only over a single axis and in one direction. One big advantage of this type of antenna is that its dish catches parallel signals and focuses them to a single receiving point, so it gets better signal quality and over longer ranges. In many cases, this type of antenna can receive Wi-Fi signals over a distance of 10 miles.
When you are authenticating clients to a wireless network, two processes are available. The first, known as open system authentication, is used in situations where you want to make your network available to a wide range of clients. This type of authentication occurs when an authentication frame is sent from a client to an access point. When the access point receives the frame, it verifies its SSID, and if it’s correct, the access point sends a verification frame back to the client, allowing the connection to be made.
The second process is known as shared key authentication. In this process, each client receives the key ahead of time and then can connect to the network as needed.
This is how shared key authentication works:
One of the big concerns with wireless networks is the fact that the data is vulnerable when being transmitted over the air. Without proper protection, the transmitted data can be sniffed and captured easily by an attacker. To prevent or at least mitigate this issue, encryption is a layer of security that is included in most, if not all, wireless products.
The following are some of the more commonly used wireless encryption and authentication protocols in use:
Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP) is the oldest and arguably the weakest of the available encryption protocols. The WEP standard was introduced as the initial solution to wireless security but was quickly found to be flawed and highly vulnerable.
The WEP protocol is still regularly encountered as an option on many wireless access points and devices but should be avoided in favor of other options or upgrading hardware to support newer standards where possible. However, if these options aren’t realistic at the time, then it can suffice as a short-term solution but should be combined with other security technologies just in case.
Some points to remember:
WEP is the oldest of the wireless encryption protocols and is also the most maligned of all of the available methods. When originally introduced and integrated into the 802.11b standard, it was viewed as a way of providing security of data transmissions more or less on a par with that of wired networks. As designed, WEP made use of some existing technologies, including RC4, as encryption mechanisms. Although WEP was intended to provide security on the same level as wired networks, it failed in that regard and has largely fallen into disuse.
First, you need to understand what WEP was designed to provide. WEP was intended to achieve the following:
Its problems arise from the following circumstances:
WEP suffers from many flaws that make it easy for even a slightly skilled attacker to compromise. These flaws are in the following areas:
Undoubtedly you have heard a lot about how poor the WEP protocol is and how you should not use it. In this section we’ll explain how WEP is broken so you can see the process and how everything pulls together.
The important part of breaking the WEP protocol is intercepting as many IVs as possible before attempting to recover the key. The collection of IVs is done through the process of sniffing or capturing. Collecting and saving IVs allows you to perform analysis: The more packets, the easier it becomes to retrieve the keys. However, there can be a problem with this process: collecting enough IVs can take a substantial amount of time, which depends on how active the network is over the period in which the packets are being collected. To speed up this process, it is possible to perform a packet injection to induce the network to speed up the generation and gathering process.
To perform this process (including cracking the keys), follow these steps:
So, looking at step 1, we put the wireless card into monitor mode to perform the cracking operation. So what is monitor mode? In a sense it is much like promiscuous mode for wired network cards, but taking a closer look we can see it is different than that. On wireless that supports this mode, monitoring allows for the capture of traffic from wireless networks without first being associated with an access point or other device. Another distinction is that wired and wireless cards can both operate in promiscuous mode, but only wireless cards can operate in monitor mode.
Once you look at these steps and realize that we are trying to capture traffic from a network that we aren’t currently attached to, the reason for this mode becomes evident. If we need to retrieve the key from a network we are not currently associated with, we need to be able to capture traffic from the target without having an association to it already. In this case the solution is monitor mode. (See Exercise 15.1.)
When using some of the tools for sniffing wireless, additional equipment is needed such as Riverbed Technology’s AirPcap hardware. This device is used to sniff wireless frames in ways that standard Wi-Fi cards cannot. If you are going to be auditing wireless networks, an investment in this device is well worth it.
The successor to WEP is WPA, or Wi-Fi Protected Access. This standard was intended to be a replacement for the flawed and insecure WEP protocol. The WPA protocol was designed to be a software upgrade instead of requiring full hardware upgrades. However, in some cases where older hardware is present and processing power or other mechanisms are limited, a hardware upgrade may be required.
The most significant development introduced with the WPA protocol was the TKIP system, whose purpose is to improve data encryption. TKIP improves on the WEP protocol (where a static unchanging key is used for every frame transmitted) by changing the key after every frame. This dynamic changing of keys makes WPA much more difficult to crack than WEP.
WPA suffers from the following flaws:
To crack WPA you must use a different approach than you would with WEP. Fortunately, one of the best tools available for thwarting WPA is freely available in Kali Linux in the form of Reaver. Reaver exploits holes in wireless routers in an attempt to retrieve information about the WPA preshared key that is used to access the network.
When WPA came onto the scene, one of the issues encountered by early adopters was the perceived difficulty in setting up the technology. In order to reduce configuration issues and ease transition from WEP to WPA a new technology known as Wi-Fi Protected Setup (WPS) was introduced to the public. This feature was and is supported by countless access points, devices, and, of course, operating systems.
In theory, WPS is supposed to make life easier for the non-technology inclined by allowing for quick push button configuration of wireless devices. In practice, the owner of the device and network can push a hardware or software button on their router, and for a brief period devices in range can connect to the wireless network without entering a passphrase. Sounds easy, right? However, for the brief period after WPS is activated on the router, devices in range of the access point can connect whether you authorize them or not. This doesn’t sound like a big deal, but anyone who can get physical access to the access point can push the button and gain access.
But let’s talk about the big problem with WPS, the PIN code. A PIN is simply a code like the one you use for your ATM card and is used for a similar purpose in Wi-Fi networks. The problem is twofold. First, the setting of a PIN code is mandatory, and second, the PIN is only eight characters.
So here is the problem with the PIN and WPS. When the router checks the eight-digit PIN, it only checks the first four digits to verify that they are correct before moving to the second set of four. This makes it staggeringly easy to punch a hole in a WPS-enabled router’s security. In practice, an attacker can brute force the PIN code by cracking only four digits at a time, of which only about 11,000 combinations are possible. Now you may think back to your ATM card and assume that if your bank card locks you out after three attempts, so should the router, right? No such luck here; WPS does not make any accommodations for blocking brute-force attempts this way. In reality, an attacker can hit Go in their attack package and wait until the PIN is retrieved.
The only countermeasure for this type of attack at this time is to disable WPS, which may or may not be possible on many devices. (See Exercise 15.2.)
The upgrade or successor to WPA is WPA2, which was introduced to address some of the weaknesses present in the original. The protocol offers dramatically improved security over its predecessor and maintains full compatibility with 802.11i standards for security.
Like WPA, WPA2 can function in two modes:
As with WEP, WPA and WPA/2 both suffer from vulnerabilities that can be exploited to an attacking party’s advantage. Each offers a way to penetrate the security of an otherwise strong protocol.
The idea behind an offline attack is to be in close enough proximity to an access point to observe the handshake between the client and the access point. This handshake represents the authentication of the client and the access point. If you set up the attack properly, you can capture the handshake and recover the keys by recording and cracking them offline. The main reason why this attack works is that the handshake occurs completely in the clear, making it possible to get enough information to break the key.
The deauthentication attack approaches the problem of observing the handshake between the client and the access point by forcing a reconnect. An attacker induces a client that is already connected to an access point to disconnect, which should lead the client and access point to reestablish the connection. Authentication will occur, allowing the information to be captured and cracked.
An easy way to perform a deauthentication attack is to use the Linux-based Wifite. This software package will target a network such as one using WPA2 and transmit packets intended to kick clients off the wireless network. Once this is done, the client will attempt to reauthenticate, and at this point clients and the access point undergo the handshake when they connect. Capturing this handshake allows us to extract information needed to connect to the network. The problem is how long will this process take?
In practice it is possible to actively or passively perform this attack. Passively means that we would just wait for a client to connect to the access point and then get our information at that point. Actively means we target either one or multiple clients and kick them off and listen. The latter is more effective, but the former is less intrusive. Wifite performs active attacks very effectively and is ideal for this purpose.
The old standby in a number of cases, including the breaking of WPA/WPA2 keys, is the brute-force attack. This attack is typically performed using tools such as aircrack-ng, aireplay-ng, or KisMAC. The downside of this attack is that it can take a long time or a lot of computing power to recover the keys.
So how can you thwart many of the attacks that we have discussed here that target WEP and WPA? Excluding encryption and other mechanisms, here are the leading techniques:
Now that you understand the various technologies and issues specific to each, let’s take a much closer look at some of the other generalized threats that can target an environment. Typically, these attacks can be categorized as access control, integrity, and confidentiality targeted attacks.
A wardriving attack is one of the most common forms of action targeting wireless networks. It consists of an attacker driving around an area with a computing or mobile device that has both a wireless card and software designed to detect wireless clients or access points.
What makes this type of attack possible is that wireless detection software will either listen for the beacon of a network or send off a probe request designed to detect the network. Once a network is detected, it can be singled out for later attack by the intruder.
Some of the software packages that are used to perform this type of attack are KisMAC, NetStumbler, Kismet, WaveStumbler, and InSSIDer.
There are also variations of the wardriving attack, all of which have the same objective:
Warflying Same as wardriving, but uses a small plane or ultralight aircraft
Warballooning Same as warflying but makes use of a balloon instead
Warwalking Involves putting the detection equipment in a backpack or something similar and walking through buildings and other facilities
A technique known as warchalking involves the placement of symbols in locations where wireless signals were detected. These symbols tell the informed that a wireless access point is nearby and provide data about it where available, including open or closed access points, security settings, channel, and name.
A rogue access point is another effective way of breaching a network by violating trust. The attacker installs a new access point that is completely unsecured behind a company firewall. The attacker can then connect with relative impunity to the target network, extracting information or carrying out further attacks.
This type of attack has been made relatively easy to perform through the use of more compact hardware access points and software designed to create an access point. A savvy attacker will either hide the access point from being readily observed or will configure the SSID to appear as a corporate access point.
For those access points that employ MAC filtering, you can use MAC spoofing. MAC filtering is a technique used to either blacklist or whitelist the MAC addresses of clients at the access point. If a defender deploys this technique, an attacking party can spoof the address of an approved client or switch their MAC to a client that is not blocked.
Typically, it is possible to use tools such as SMAC, ifconfig, changemac.sh, and others to accomplish this task. However, in some cases the hardware configuration settings for a network card may allow the MAC to be changed without such applications.
The ad hoc attack relies on an attacker using a Wi-Fi adapter to connect directly to another wireless-enabled system. Once this connection is established, the two systems can interact with each other. The main threats with this type of connection are that it is relatively easy to set up, and many users are completely unaware of the difference between infrastructure and an ad hoc network and so may attach to an insecure network.
Security on an ad hoc network is quirky at best and is very inconsistent. For example, in the Microsoft family of operating systems, ad hoc connections are unable to support any advanced security protocols, thus exposing users to increased risk.
We have pointed out this problem before in other areas, and misconfiguration is a problem with access points as well. All the security features in the world aren’t going to help one bit if they are misconfigured or not configured at all. The danger here is heightened, however, since a wireless access point provides an ideal “access anywhere” solution for attackers or other malicious parties who can’t physically connect to the network.
The client misassociation attack starts with a client attaching to an access point that is on a network other than their own. Due to the way wireless signals propagate through walls and many other structures, a client can easily detect another access point and attach to it either accidently or intentionally. In either case, a client may attach to a network that is unsafe perhaps while still connected to a secure network. This last scenario can result in a malicious party gaining access to a protected network.
The promiscuous client offers an irresistibly strong signal intentionally for malicious purposes. Wireless cards often look for a stronger signal to connect to a network. In this way the promiscuous client grabs the attention of the users by sending a strong signal.
One particularly interesting way of attacking a WLAN is to resort to a plain-old DoS attack. Although there are many ways to do this, one of the easiest is to just jam the network, thus preventing it from being used. It is possible to use a specially designed jammer that will transmit signals that can overwhelm and deny the use of the access point by legitimate clients. The benefit of this type of attack is that it works on any type of wireless network.
To perform this type of attack, you can use a specially designed hardware device that can transmit signals that interfere with 802.11 networks. These devices are easy to find online and can be used to jam any type of wireless network.
Users can connect to any available wireless network as long as they are in range of one another; sometimes this can be a large number of access points. With such an environment, an attacker has expanded opportunities to attract unknowing users. To perform this type of attack, a malicious party sets up a rogue access point in the range of several legitimate ones as a honeyspot. With the rogue access point generating a much stronger and clearer signal, it is possible to attract clients looking for the best signal.
In order to attack, you must first find a target, and though site surveys can make this easier, they cannot help in every case. Several tools and mechanisms make locating a target network easier.
The following tools can complement wardriving or be used on their own:
Once you’re connected to a target network, the next step is to perform traffic analysis to gain insight into the activity in the environment. As when using Wireshark with standard network traffic, it is entirely possible to scrutinize traffic on a wireless network. By performing such analysis, you can gain vital information on traffic patterns, protocols in use, and authentication, not to mention information specific to applications. In addition, analysis can reveal vulnerabilities on the network as well as client information.
Under ideal conditions, traffic analysis of a wireless network can be expected to reveal the following:
Currently, a number of products can perform wireless traffic analysis—Kismet, AirMagnet, Wireshark with AirPcap, CommView, and a few others.
Also note that in addition to traffic analysis, some tools offer the ability to perform spectrum analysis. This means that the user can analyze the RF spectrum of wireless networks and devices. In the right hands, these tools can detect issues with frequency, channel overlap, and performance, as well as help locate devices other than access points that may be in range.
The subject of wireless cards and chipsets is important. Although in many cases the chipset on the card and the wireless card itself may not matter, some tools require the presence of certain chipsets in order to function.
Items to consider include the following:
Another wireless technology to consider is Bluetooth, which is seen in many mobile devices in today’s marketplace. Bluetooth refers to a short-range wireless technology commonly used to connect devices such as headsets, media players, and other types of technologies. Bluetooth operates in the 2.4 GHz frequency range and is designed to work at distances up to 10 meters (33 feet).
When you’re working with Bluetooth devices, there are some specifics to keep in mind about the devices and how they operate.
First, the device can operate in one of the following modes:
Discoverable This allows the device to be scanned and located by other Bluetooth-enabled devices.
Limited Discoverable This mode is becoming more commonly used; in this mode the device will be discoverable by other Bluetooth devices for a short period of time before it returns to being nondiscoverable.
Nondiscoverable As the name suggests, devices in this mode cannot be located by other devices. However, if another device has previously found the system, it will still be able to do so.
In addition to the device being able to be located, it can be paired with other devices to allow communication to occur. A device can be in pairing or nonpairing mode; pairing means it can link with another device and nonpairing means it cannot.
Of course, one of the issues that needs to be addressed when targeting Bluetooth devices is the lack of range; 33 feet is not that far. Staying calm and collected as well as undetected is tough when in such close proximity of a target. So we need to be able to do something about the range question. To tackle this problem we can incorporate the use of an industrial-level Bluetooth adapter. One notable option in this area is the UD100 from Sena Technologies. This adapter can extend the range of Bluetooth from 300 to 1000 meters (1000 feet to 3300 feet) depending on whether an external adapter is used or not. By using this adapter, it is possible to dramatically increase the range of your attacks.
Much like Wi-Fi, Bluetooth has a bevy of threats facing it that you must take into account. Bluetooth suffers from many shortcomings that have been slowly addressed with each successive version, but many flaws remain and can be exploited. The technology has already seen many attacks take their toll on victims in the form of losing information such as the following:
Bluejacking is one form of Bluetooth attack that is more annoying than malicious in most cases. The attack takes the form of sending an anonymous text message via Bluetooth to a victim. Since this attack exploits the basic operation of the Bluetooth protocol, it is hard to defend against, other than making the device nondiscoverable.
Use the following steps to bluejack a victim or a device:
If all goes well at this point, your new “friend” should receive the message you just crafted.
Another example of a Bluetooth attack is bluesnarfing. This attack is designed to extract information at a distance from a Bluetooth device. If you execute the attack skillfully, you can obtain the address book, call information, text information, and other data from the device. Because of the nature of the attack, it is considered very invasive and extremely dangerous.
A new way to target Bluetooth devices and draw them in is to use a Linux-based tool called Bluepot. This utility is designed to accept incoming malware and respond to Bluetooth attacks. This utility can make the discovery and targeting of Bluetooth devices easier.
In this chapter we explored wireless technologies, including Wi-Fi and Bluetooth. We observed that wireless is a powerful and convenient technology that frees users from wires and allows the network to expand into areas it could not go into before. We also explored the fact that wireless technologies are very vulnerable and have a whole range of concerns that don’t exist with traditional networks.
Today’s enterprise is likely to have a wireless network in place as well as numerous Bluetooth-enabled devices. The propagation of signals, the misapplication of the technology, social engineering, and just plain-old mistakes have all led to significant vulnerabilities in the workplace. An attacker using a notebook, an antenna, and the right software can easily use a wireless network to break into and take over a network or at the very least steal information with ease.
You learned some of the defensive measures that are also available for wireless technologies. 802.11 networks typically offer security in the form of WEP, WPA, or WPA2 as a front-line defense, with preference given to WPA2 and WPA over the much weaker and broken WEP. If configured correctly, WPA and WPA2 offer strong integrity and protection for information transmitted over the air. Additional security measures include the use of strong passwords and phrases as well as the proper configuration of wireless gear.
Understand the various types of wireless technologies. Know that not all wireless technologies are the same. Each wireless technology has different frequencies it works on, channels it can use, and speeds it is capable of achieving to transmit data.
Know how Bluetooth works Understand that Bluetooth is a short-range wireless technology that has several vulnerabilities that can be exploited. Also know that the range of Bluetooth can be extended beyond its default range of 10 meters.
Know the different types of wireless attacks Understand what distinguishes one wireless network attack from another.
Know the differences between the 802.11 standards. Understand that each standard of wireless has its own attributes that make it different from the others.
Understand WEP, WPA, and WPA2. Understand that WEP was the initial specification included in the 802.11 protocol and that WPA and WPA2 were introduced later. Both of the latter protocols are intended to be compatible with the 802.11i standard.
WEP is designed to offer security comparable to which of the following?
Which of the following operates at 5 GHz?
Which of the following specifies security standards for wireless?
Which of the following options shows the protocols in order from strongest to weakest?
Which of the following is designed to locate wireless access points?
What is a client-to-client wireless connection called?
When a wireless client is attached to an access point, it is known as which of the following?
Bluesnarfing is used to perform what type of attack?
Monitor mode is used by wireless cards to do what?
A honeyspot is designed to do what?
An SSID is used to do which of the following?
AirPcap is used to do which of the following?
What is a rogue access point?
Bluejacking is a means of which of the following?
The wardriving process involves which of the following?
Warchalking is used to do which of the following?
A closed network is typically which of the following?
Which feature makes WPA easy to defeat?
What is a PSK?
Which of the following is a device used to perform a DoS on a wireless network?