The vulnerability that Drake outlines rises from a poorly coded service, infosvr, which is used by ASUS to facilitate router configuration by automatically monitoring the local area network (LAN) and identifying other connected routers. Infosvr, Drake explains, runs with root privileges and contains an unauthenticated command execution vulnerability. In turn this permits anyone connected to the LAN to gain control by sending a user datagram protocol (UDP) package to the router.
via Root command execution bug found across wireless router range.
This seems more like a designed in feature not implemented correctly. Transferring config information on an unsecure network is difficult to implement without some kind of flaw.
This kind of hack is well above the capability of your average hacker. Very unlikely they could do much more than Man In the Middle which they could do anyway without hacking the router. I do not chase updates on SOHO routers because it’s pointless, a waste of time that possibly introduces different bugs.
However, the FCC did act in October, slapping Marriott with the fine after customers complained about the practice. In their complaint, customers alleged that employees of Marriott’s Gaylord Opryland Hotel and Convention Center in Nashville used signal-blocking features of a Wi-Fi monitoring system to prevent customers from connecting to the Internet through their personal Wi-Fi hotspots. The hotel charged customers and exhibitors $250 to $1,000 per device to access Marriott’s Wi-Fi network.
via Hotel group asks FCC for permission to block some outside Wi-Fi | Network World.
The research, originally demonstrated at the PasswordsCon Las Vegas 2014 conference in early August, builds on previous work published by Stefan Viehböck in late 2011. Viehböck found a number of design flaws in Wi-Fi Protected Setup, but most significantly, he found that the PIN needed to complete the setup of a wireless router could be broken into smaller parts and each part attacked separately. By breaking down the key, the number of attempts an attacker would have to try before finding the key shrunk from an untenable 100 million down to a paltry 11,000—a significant flaw for any access-control technology.
via Offline attack shows Wi-Fi routers still vulnerable | Ars Technica.
It’s hard to imagine a single smartphone or tablet needing to receive more than 433Mbps of data. But the fact that MU-MIMO-powered Wi-Fi will be able to serve more users simultaneously could bring huge benefits to large-scale wireless networks, like those in airports, convention centers, and sports stadiums. Real-world throughput will end up being something lower than 433Mbps to each user because of networking overhead and other limitations, but given that a high-definition Netflix stream is just 5Mbps, there isn’t much reason to worry about that yet.
via Wi-Fi networks are wasting a gigabit—but multi-user beamforming will save the day | Ars Technica.
The first 11ac products implemented single-user beamforming, sending one transmission to a single receiver. Multi-user beamforming, coming in the next wave of 11ac products this year and next year, enables MU-MIMO and its simultaneous transmission to multiple devices.
Ubiquiti Networks (NASDAQ: UBNT) is closing the digital divide by building network communication platforms for everyone and everywhere. With over 10 million devices deployed in over 180 countries, Ubiquiti is transforming under-networked businesses and communities. Our leading edge platforms, airMAX™, UniFi™, airFiber™, airVision™, mFi™ and EdgeMAX™ combine innovative technology, disruptive price performance and the support of a global user community to eliminate barriers to connectivity.
via About Us | Ubiquiti Networks, Inc..
Ubiquiti is a competitor of Ruckus wireless. Here’s an interesting review using some of Ruckus’ products.
Another competitor is Xirrus. And also Aruba and of course Cisco.
Perlman says pCell takes a different approach: it embraces signal interference. In his vision, base stations smaller than your typical satellite TV antenna are placed wherever it’s convenient (such as on the roof or the side of a building), and their signals purposely overlap. Those overlapping signals, Perlman says, combine constructively to create a sort of personal cell, a centimeter in diameter, that moves with you as you move around the network. The signal doesn’t diminish as each additional user joins the network. Overall capacity can grow by adding more access points.
via Alternative to Traditional Cellular Networks Makes a Virtue of Wireless Interference | MIT Technology Review.
Meanwhile, the underlying tasks of assigning client devices to particular channels and access points are centrally controlled to make the best use of the infrastructure. Where separately owned and managed APs may make poor use of the unlicensed frequencies available in the building, the centrally controlled network can use its universal view to arrange the resources most efficiently.
via Stanford team tries for zippier Wi-Fi in crowded buildings – Network World.
Adding to the challenge, “We expect these people to be carrying and using multiple wireless devices,” says Frohwerk. “In Vancouver, we only had to provision one device per user. This means that we really have to have the capability to support up to 120,000 users on the Sochi Wi-Fi network, without issues or interruptions.”
via Avaya builds massive Wi-Fi net for 2014 Winter Olympics – Network World.
It’s interesting that they have to provision devices to users. Is this done manually? Here’s more….
In Sochi, Avaya’s Wi-Fi network will be split into five virtual SSID-based networks. There will be one network for the athletes, two for media (one free, one paid), one for Olympics staff, and one for dignitaries.
Each group will have its own access password, and extra layers of password protection will be added where needed. The Wi-Fi traffic will be distributed using about 2,000 802.11n access points across the Olympics Game sites; including inside the stands for the first time.
Each SSID will need its own range of frequencies so having 5 seems like it would present problems trying to figure out where to place access points so their radio transmissions don’t step on each other. Also there doesn’t seem to be any provisions made for their customers, the people paying to attend these events.
Ironically, WDS (when compatible) is generally considered the superior solution. Without getting into the nitty-gritty, it’s just a cleaner, more efficient solution, with fewer idiosyncrasies than universal bridging. But what always kills WDS is the incompatibilities.
via WDS vs Repeater – Wireless Network – Wireless Networking.
I found this paper very useful.
Wireless sensor networks promise fine-grain monitoring in a wide variety of environments. Many of these environments (e.g., indoor environments or habitats) can be harsh for wireless communication. From a networking perspective, the most basic aspect of wireless communication is the packet delivery performance: the spatio-temporal characteristics of packet loss, and its environmental dependence.
These factors will deeply impact the performance of data acquisition from these networks.
In this paper, we report on a systematic medium-scale (up to sixty nodes) measurement of packet delivery in three different environments: an indoor office building, a habitat with moderate foliage, and an open parking lot. Our findings have interesting implications for the design and evaluation of routing and medium-access protocols for sensor networks.
via Understanding Packet Delivery Performance In Dense Wireless Sensor Networks