ACEEE Int. J. on Network Security , Vol. 03, No. 02, April 2012



     Attack Robustness and Security Enhancement with
           Improved Wired Equivalent Protocol
                       Mr. S.M.K.M. Abbas Ahmad1, Dr. E.G. Rajan2 and Dr. A. Govardhan3
                                              Corresponding Author: S.M.K.M. Abbas Ahmad)
    (1)
       Associate Professor, Dept. of E.C.E., Hi-Tech College of Engg & Tech, Hyderabad, India, Phone: +918985042004,
                                              Email: smkmabbas@rediffmail.com
      (2)
          President, Pentagram Research Centre, Hyderabad, India, Phone: +919849164747, Email: rajaneg@yahoo.co.in
          (3)
              Professor of CSE, JNTUH, Hyderabad, India, Phone: +919440887733, Email: govardhan_cse@yahoo.co.in


Abstract: With the widespread use of wireless networks,                in ad hoc networks which are decentralized environments.
securing Data transmission becomes a basic requirement. The
IEEE 802.11 standard which defines wireless networks                                           II. WEP ENCRYPTION
communication, has proposed in its second version, IEEE
802.11b, a new protocol to offer some wired-like security                  The IEEE 802.11[1] standard defined Wired Equivalent
services, such as: data privacy, data integrity, and                   Privacy (WEP) as a first line of defense for wireless networks.
authentication. In this paper, we analyze Wired Equivalent             WEP, as defined by the 802.11 standard is intended to provide
Privacy(WEP) security holes and we propose an improvement              the level of data confidentiality that is equivalent to a wired
over WEP which achieves, in addition to its security goals,
                                                                       network. The WEP provides both authentication, to protect
another security service which is replay detection.
                                                                       against unauthorized access to network through the open
Keywords: WEP; RC4; 802.11 Security;                 Wireless          system and shared key authentication, and encryption
Communication; Authentication; Attacks.                                services to defeat eavesdroppers who may try to decrypt
                                                                       captured transmission. The encryption used in implementing
                       I. INTRODUCTION                                 this protocol is the RC4 symmetrical stream cipher with either
                                                                       a 40-bit or 104-bit encryption key.
    Research has been done in the field of ad hoc networking
since the 1970s. Wireless networking devices were not easily           A. Authentication Process
available at this time, therefore ad hoc networking stayed                WEP security involves two parts, Authentication and
theoretical for a while. Few years ago, IEEE 802.11 has been           Encryption. Authentication in WEP as described n Figure: 1,
defined as a new standard for wireless networking. In a short          involves authenticating a device when it first joins the LAN.
period of time, many manufacturers provided Wi-Fi                      The authentication process in the wireless networks using
networking devices at a low cost. This facilitated the building        WEP is to prevent devices/stations joining the network
of real ad hoc networks. Today, many ad hoc networking test            unless they know the WEP key.
beds are using Wi-Fi technology.
    The security in 802.11 networks is handled by the Wired
Equivalent Privacy (WEP) protocol that has been part of the
802.11 standard since initial ratification in 1999. WEP relies
on RC4
    stream cipher [1,2]. However, security experts [8] revealed
several weaknesses in the key scheduling algorithm of RC4,
                                                                                            Figure1: WEP Authentication
showing that RC4 is completely insecure in the common mode
of operation which is used in WEP. This has been illustrated               In WEP-based authentication, wireless device sends
with an implementation [9] which permitted to retrieve the             authentication request to the wireless access point, then
WEP secret key by passively collecting enough data over                wireless access point sends 128 bit random challenge in a
the wireless network. IEEE 802.11 established the Task Group           clear text to the requesting client. The wireless device uses
(TGi) to solve the security problems of WEP. The 802.11                the shared secret key to sign the challenge and sends it to
security protocol is so seriously flawed that TGi has decided          the wireless access point. Wireless access point decrypts
to create a new security protocol from scratch, not constrained        the signed message using the shared secret key and verifies
by WEP design. However, many WEP- based wireless                       the challenge that it has sent before. If the challenge matches,
networking adapters have already been shipped and                      then authentication succeeds otherwise not.
deployed. TGi has proposed the Temporal Key Integrity                      Unfortunately, in WEP, no secret key is exchanged after
Protocol (TKIP), a collection of algorithms wrapping WEP, to           authentication. The same secret key or shared key is used for
improve security for already deployed 802.11 devices                   both authentication and encryption. So there is no way to
operating in infrastructure mode (involving access points).            tell whether the subsequent messages come from the trusted
This solution uses an authentication server: It cannot apply           device or from an impostor. This kind of authentication is
© 2012 ACEEE                                                      42
DOI: 01.IJNS.03.02.3
ACEEE Int. J. on Network Security , Vol. 03, No. 02, April 2012


prone to man in the middle attack. This authentication is                  stream and form the cipher text of the packet.
really not a best effort here. In the Wi-Fi specification,                 6) The cipher text, the initialization vector IV and some
authentication was completely dropped, despite being in the                additional header fields are used to build a packet, which is
IEEE 802.11 standard.                                                      now send to the receiver.
                                                                               The packet being sent now contains the following header
B. Working of RC4 Algorithm
                                                                           fields:
1. RC4 Stream Cipher:                                                      Frame control
    RC4 is a stream cipher designed in 1987 by Ron Rivets for                  It contains general information about the frame (is it a
RSA Security[2]. It is a variable key-size stream cipher with              data, management, or control frame) and the transmission
byte oriented operations. The algorithm is based on the use                (has the station more packets to send.)
of a random permutation. A variable-length key K, of size 1 to             Duration, ID
256 bytes is used to initialize a 256-byte state vector S, with                It contains the expected duration of this transmission and
elements S0, S1 to S255. At all times, S contains a permutation            some other values in special cases.
of all 8-bit numbers from 0 to 255. Initially, the entries of S are        Address 1,2,3
set to the values 0 to 255 in ascending order. A temporary                     It contains the following addresses. The address of the
vector T, is also created. For a key of length keylen bytes, the           AP the packet is send from/to, the address of the destination
first keylen elements of T, are copied from K, and then K is               station and the address of the source station. In a special
repeated as many times as necessary to fill out T. Next, we                mode called WDS, where two APs communicate directly with
use T to produce the initial permutation of S.                             each other, there is a fourth address, the address of the second
    Once S is initialized, the input key is no longer used. The            AP.
next step (stream generation) is to generate the key used for              Sequence control
encryption. It involves starting with S0 and going through to                  It contains information about fragmentation. The IEEE
S255, and, for each Si, swapping Si with another byte in S                 802.11 protocol is able to fragment packets before they are
according to a scheme dictated by the current configuration                transmitted.
of S. After S255 is reached, the process continues, starting               WEP parameters
over again at S0. For encryption, the value key is XORed                       contains the IV which was used to encrypt this packet,
with the next byte of plaintext. For decryption, the value key             and a key index. The key index is used to identify the correct
is XORed with the next byte of cipher text.                                key, when more than one key is used in a network.
C. WEP Encryption Process and Frame                                        Payload and ICV is the encrypted payload of the packet
                                                                           including a CRC32 checksum at the end of the payload which
    Every data frame sent by a station in a WEP protected
                                                                           is called Integrity protection value (ICV). Payload and ICV
network is encrypted integrity protected. Non-data frames,
                                                                           are encrypted.
like beacon frames, acknowledgment frames and similar frames
are not protected by WEP at all. When a station sends a
packet, the following steps are executed.
    1) The station picks a 24 bit value called initialization
vector IV. The IEEE 802.11 standard does not specify how to
choose this value. Beside some minor modifications, most                                      Figure 2 WEP Frame Format
vendors implemented one of the following two methods:                      D. WEP Vulnerability
a) The IV is chosen by a pseudo random number generator                        Several serious security flaws were discovered in the
PRNG independently from all other packets send by this                     WEP[3] owing to which, the WEP failed to achieve its security
station.                                                                   goals. Some of its vulnerabilities are listed below:
b) The station always remembers the last IV used. When a                   1. The RC4 algorithm itself has a subtle weakness[4] that can
new IV needs to be chosen, the station interprets the last IV              be exploited to crack keys.
used as a number and adds 1 to this number. When the highest               2. The presence of relatively short IVs and keys that remain
possible number is reached, the station starts again with 0.               static[5]. If an individual collects enough frames based on
On startup, the IV counter either takes a fixed value or a                 the same IV, he can determine the shared values among them,
random number is assigned to it.                                           i.e., the key stream or the shared secret key. This of course
2) The IV is prepended to the root key and form the per                    leads to decrypting any of the 802.11 frames.
packet key K = IV||Rk.                                                     3. The 802.11 does not support the exchange of keys among
3) A CRC32 checksum of the payload is produced and                         stations nor does it provide any automatic way of changing
appended to the payload. This checksum is called Integrity                 keys. It depends on external key management for distribution.
Check Value (ICV).                                                         4. The implementation has so far been based on 64-bit with
4) The per packet key K is fed into the RC4 stream cipher to               24-bit initialization vector resulting in only a 40-bit encryption,
produce a key stream X of the length of the payload with                   which is quite low. Improving the static nature of the IV and
checksum.                                                                  providing a stronger encryption at a higher layer could solve
5) The plaintext with the checksum is XORed with the key                   a major part of the WEP vulnerability. A stronger encryption
© 2012 ACEEE                                                          43
DOI: 01.IJNS.03.02.3
ACEEE Int. J. on Network Security , Vol. 03, No. 02, April 2012


could prevent brute force attacks and result in larger                      generate a key stream KS using RC4. S concatenates the
overheads during cryptanalysis.                                             CRC to M1 which gives T1 = (M1, CRC), then he concatenates
                                                                            iv2 to T1. The all is Fig. 2. Ciphering principle in iWEP then
                           III. ATTACKS                                     XORed with KS1. S sends the XORed message to the receiver
                                                                            R. Knowing iv1, R decrypts the message, verifies CRC, and
A. Types of Attacks crafted on WEP                                          then stores iv2. iv2 will be used to decrypt the next frame sent
1. The FMS attack:                                                          by S. As a matter of fact, every frame contains the initialization
    The FMS attack was the first key recovery attack against                vector used to encrypt the next one. So, the frame i encrypted
RC4 in WEP-like operating modes and was published by                        using ivi contains ivi+1, which will be used to encrypt and
Fluhrer, Mantin, and Shamir in 2001. We can summarize the                   decrypt frame i + 1. Initialization Vectors are all, except the
FMS attack as follows:                                                      first one, generated randomly by the sender. This makes no
An attacker, who has access to an oracle OWEP CTR(3; 13;                  correlation between iv’s, and therefore enhances resistance
1) can recover the internal key of the oracle with a success                to brute force attacks.
probability of 50% with about 9,000,000 queries to the oracle               B. Procedure for selecting Initial Vector IV
and negligible computational effort.
                                                                                 The process shown above requires that S and R agree on
B. The KoreK key recovery attack                                            the initial iv. This can be done by many ways. We suggest
This implementation uses 17 different attacks, which are able               here two methods that are enough secure and don’t produce
                                                                            an overhead. The first manner is to agree on iv1 using Diffie-
to determine K[l], if K[0] to K[l - 1] and the first two words of           Hellman (DH) algorithm[7]. This algorithm allows two entities
                                                                            to establish a secret (a key for example), based upon messages
output X[0] and X[1] are known.                                             exchanged publicly. It will be sufficient to take as iv1 the first
An attacker, who has access to an oracle OWEP CTR(3; 13;                  24 bits of the key agreed on using DH. The second manner is
2) can recover the internal key of the oracle with success                  to use a hash algorithm[5], [6] to compute iv. A hash algorithm
probability 50% with 700,000 queries to the oracle and                      is a one-way function that allows to compress some bit stream
negligible computational effort.                                            BS into a digest D of a given length. The principle is to
                                                                            compute D in each side by hashing a common secret
C. Mantin’s second round attack                                             information, such as k. Thus, S and R compute separately the
   It was the first key recovery attack on RC4, which made                  digest of k, and take the first 24 bits as iv1. SHA-1 which is a
use of the so called Jenkins’ correlation which is also called              secured well-known hash algorithm can be used to this end.
Glimpse property or RC4 Glimpse.
An attacker who has access to an Oracle OSKIPWEP (OWEP(liv;                               V. INTEROPERABILITY WITH WEP
16; 1); 256) can recover the secret key of Oracle OWEP with a
probability of 80% by sending about 225 H” 3.3·107 queries to               A. Translating from WEP to iWEP
OSKIPWEP and by testing up to 248 H” 2.8·1014 different keys for                The translation is carried out in two steps:
correctness, even if he has not got direct access to OWEP .                 I- Extraction of iv : it consists of separating ivs from their
Different tradeoffs for CPU-time and number of queries are                  messages. Iv’s are already clear;
possible. liv must be large enough to generate 225 different                II- Re-association of ivs: in this step, a given iv, ivi is used to
IVs. The complexity decreases for shorter root keys.                        encrypt the concatenation of Ti and ivi+1.

             IV. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS IN WEP                               B. Translating from iWEP to WEP
                                                                                 In this case, the translator typically re-uses previous iv,
    The proposed approach aims to resolve WEP flows
                                                                            ivi to decrypt current iWEP frame (i).
without changing the hardware while keeping a good
                                                                                 I- Extraction of iv : using ivi for decryption, the clear text
interoperability with existing WEP.
                                                                            contains the message Ti, and ivi+1 which will be extracted
A. Encryption Process                                                       (and to be used also for further decryption);
     We propose a scheme similar to WEP. The difference is                       II- Re-association of ivs: ivi is used to encrypt Ti and ivi.
that in iWEP we encrypt both of the message T and iv with                   ivi+1 is used for decryption of next frame.
RC4. Encrypting iv aims to hide it from eavesdropping. As
can be visualized, iWEP sender encrypt Ti concatenated to
ivi+1 using ivi. Thus, it’s sufficient to the receiver to know the
initial iv -iv1- to decrypt the first frame which contains iv2
used to decrypt the second frame and so on.
     To start the encryption process, the two nodes agree on
some initial iv, this step is detailed in section B. After this, the
sender S generates randomly a new iv. Let iv2 be the generated
iv, and iv1, the initial iv. S uses his own key k and iv1 to
© 2012 ACEEE                                                           44
DOI: 01.IJNS.03.02. 3
ACEEE Int. J. on Network Security , Vol. 03, No. 02, April 2012


                         VI. RESULTS                                                            REFERENCES
                                                                      [1] S.M.K.M. Abbas Ahmad, Dr. E.G.Rajan,Dr.A.Govardhan, Mr.
                                                                      Juluru PEraiah, “Security Enhancement in WEP Mobility”, invited
                                                                      paper at International Conference on CNSA-2010, Springer-Verlog,
                                                                      July, 2010, Volume No: CCIS 90, pp 388-399.
                                                                      [2] Arash Habibi Lashkari, F. Towhidi, R. S. Hoseini,”Wired
                                                                      Equivalent Privacy(WEP)”, ICFCC Kuala Lumpur Conference,
                                                                      Published by IEEE Computer Society, Indexed by THAMSON
                                                                      ISI, 2009.
                                                                      [3] Donggang Liu, P. N., “Security for Wireless Sensor Networks”,
                                                                      Springer., November, 2006
                                                                      [4]Garcia, R. H. a. M., “AN ANALYSIS OF WIRELESS
                                                                      SECURITY”, CCSC: South Central Conference. 2006
                                                                      [5] Kempf, J., “Wireless Internet Security: Architecture and
                                                                      Protocols “,Cambridge University Press. October, 2008
        Figure3: Encryption Process of WEP and iWEP                   [6] Hani Ragab Hassan, Yacine Challal, “Enhanced WEP: An
                                                                      efficient solution to WEP threats”, IEEE 2005
                                                                      [7] Scott R. Fluhrer, Itsik Mantin, and Adi Shamir. Weaknesses in
                                                                      the key scheduling algorithm of RC4. In Serge Vaudenay and Amr
                                                                      M. Youssef, editors, Selected Areas in Cryptography 2001, volume
                                                                      2259 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 1{24. Springer,
                                                                      2001.
                                                                      [8] David Hulton. Practical exploitation of RC4 weakness in WEP
                                                                      environments, 2002. presented at HiverCon 2002.
                                                                      [9] Wireless lan medium access control (MAC) and physical layer
                                                                      (PHY) specifications (IEEE Standard 802.11). L.M.S.C. of the
                                                                      IEEE Computer Society, 1999.

                                                                                             AUTHORS’ PROFILE

    Figure4: iWEP and WEP compared when     decrypting data                                  Mr. S.M.K.M. ABBAS AHMAD did his
                                                                                             B.E. from Gulbarga University, Karnataka,
                                                                                             India in 1998, M.Tech. from V.T.U.,
                                                                                             Belgaum in 2004. He is pursuing Ph.D. at
                                                                                             Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University,
                                                                                             Hyderabad under the guidance of Dr. E.G.
                                                                                             Rajan & Dr. A. Govardhan. He is presently
                                                                                             an Associate Professor of ECE at Hi-Tech
                                                                      College of Engineering & Technology, Hyderabad. He has 14 years
                                                                      of teaching experience. His areas of interest are Wireless Commu-
                                                                      nications, Wireless Network Security & Digital Electronics. He is
                                                                      life member of Indian Society for Technical Education. He is the
                                                                      member of IAENG.
 Figure5: Throughput of iWEP and WEP for variable data length                                  Dr. E.G.Rajan did is B.Sc. in Physics
                         computa tional                                                        Major from Madras University in 1970,
                                                                                               DMIT in Electronics Engineering in 1974,
                        CONCLUSION                                                             M.E. in Applied Electronics from Madras
                                                                                               University in 1983. He did his Ph.D. in
    In this paper, we’ve reviewed security holes in WEP. Then                                  Signal & Image Processing at Indian Insti-
we described our protocol iWEP which achieves security                                         tute of Technology, Kanpur, India in 1990.
goals of the WEP. We also compared iWEP and WEP when                  He is the founder president of Pentagram Research Center (Pvt),
decrytpting data. In this paper we also shown that throughput         Hyderabad, India He was categorized as Best Instructor of Dept.
is greater for iWEP than WEP for variable data length                 of Electrical Engineering, IIT, Kanpur for the years1990-91 & 1991-
computaions. It is important to note that iWEP can be directly        92. He has 34 years of industry & teaching experience. He worked
deployed over any hardware using WEP.                                 as Electronic Warfare Officer/Signal Analyst, Aviation Research
                                                                      Centre, Cabinet Secretariat, Director of General of Security, Govt.
                                                                      of India from 1977-1986. He proposed the Transforms for Pattern
                                                                      Recognition known by his name Rajan Transforms. He is an elected
                                                                      member of International Federation of Systems Research, Kepler
                                                                      University, Austria. He has guided 7 Ph.D. scholars, 60 M.Tech.
                                                                      Projects. He Published more than 20 research papers in interna

© 2012 ACEEE                                                     45
DOI: 01.IJNS.03.02.3
ACEEE Int. J. on Network Security , Vol. 03, No. 02, April 2012

tional journals. His areas of interest are Communication Engineer-        He is presently a Professor of CSE and and Director of Evaluations
ing, Cryptography, Pattern Recognition, Bioinformatics, Systemics,        at Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University Hyderabad AP, In-
Image Processing, Signal Processing.                                      dia. He is a member on the Editorial Boards of International Journal
                        Dr.A.Govardhan did his BE in Computer             of Emerging Technologies and Applications in Engineering Tech-
                        Science and Engineering from Osmania              nologies and Sciences (IJ-ETA-ETS) and International Journal of
                        University College of Engineering,                Computer Applications in Engineering Technologies and Sciences
                        Hyderabad in 1992, M.Tech from                    (IJ-CA-ETS), International Journal of Advanced Computing, In-
                        Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi in             ternational Journal of Data Engineering and Computer Science,
                        1994 and Ph.D from Jawaharlal Nehru               International Journal of Computational Intelligence and Informa-
                        Technological University, Hyderabad in            tion Security and Scientific and Technical.
                        2003.




© 2012 ACEEE                                                         46
DOI: 01.IJNS.03.02.3

Attack Robustness and Security Enhancement with Improved Wired Equivalent Protocol

  • 1.
    ACEEE Int. J.on Network Security , Vol. 03, No. 02, April 2012 Attack Robustness and Security Enhancement with Improved Wired Equivalent Protocol Mr. S.M.K.M. Abbas Ahmad1, Dr. E.G. Rajan2 and Dr. A. Govardhan3 Corresponding Author: S.M.K.M. Abbas Ahmad) (1) Associate Professor, Dept. of E.C.E., Hi-Tech College of Engg & Tech, Hyderabad, India, Phone: +918985042004, Email: smkmabbas@rediffmail.com (2) President, Pentagram Research Centre, Hyderabad, India, Phone: +919849164747, Email: rajaneg@yahoo.co.in (3) Professor of CSE, JNTUH, Hyderabad, India, Phone: +919440887733, Email: govardhan_cse@yahoo.co.in Abstract: With the widespread use of wireless networks, in ad hoc networks which are decentralized environments. securing Data transmission becomes a basic requirement. The IEEE 802.11 standard which defines wireless networks II. WEP ENCRYPTION communication, has proposed in its second version, IEEE 802.11b, a new protocol to offer some wired-like security The IEEE 802.11[1] standard defined Wired Equivalent services, such as: data privacy, data integrity, and Privacy (WEP) as a first line of defense for wireless networks. authentication. In this paper, we analyze Wired Equivalent WEP, as defined by the 802.11 standard is intended to provide Privacy(WEP) security holes and we propose an improvement the level of data confidentiality that is equivalent to a wired over WEP which achieves, in addition to its security goals, network. The WEP provides both authentication, to protect another security service which is replay detection. against unauthorized access to network through the open Keywords: WEP; RC4; 802.11 Security; Wireless system and shared key authentication, and encryption Communication; Authentication; Attacks. services to defeat eavesdroppers who may try to decrypt captured transmission. The encryption used in implementing I. INTRODUCTION this protocol is the RC4 symmetrical stream cipher with either a 40-bit or 104-bit encryption key. Research has been done in the field of ad hoc networking since the 1970s. Wireless networking devices were not easily A. Authentication Process available at this time, therefore ad hoc networking stayed WEP security involves two parts, Authentication and theoretical for a while. Few years ago, IEEE 802.11 has been Encryption. Authentication in WEP as described n Figure: 1, defined as a new standard for wireless networking. In a short involves authenticating a device when it first joins the LAN. period of time, many manufacturers provided Wi-Fi The authentication process in the wireless networks using networking devices at a low cost. This facilitated the building WEP is to prevent devices/stations joining the network of real ad hoc networks. Today, many ad hoc networking test unless they know the WEP key. beds are using Wi-Fi technology. The security in 802.11 networks is handled by the Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP) protocol that has been part of the 802.11 standard since initial ratification in 1999. WEP relies on RC4 stream cipher [1,2]. However, security experts [8] revealed several weaknesses in the key scheduling algorithm of RC4, Figure1: WEP Authentication showing that RC4 is completely insecure in the common mode of operation which is used in WEP. This has been illustrated In WEP-based authentication, wireless device sends with an implementation [9] which permitted to retrieve the authentication request to the wireless access point, then WEP secret key by passively collecting enough data over wireless access point sends 128 bit random challenge in a the wireless network. IEEE 802.11 established the Task Group clear text to the requesting client. The wireless device uses (TGi) to solve the security problems of WEP. The 802.11 the shared secret key to sign the challenge and sends it to security protocol is so seriously flawed that TGi has decided the wireless access point. Wireless access point decrypts to create a new security protocol from scratch, not constrained the signed message using the shared secret key and verifies by WEP design. However, many WEP- based wireless the challenge that it has sent before. If the challenge matches, networking adapters have already been shipped and then authentication succeeds otherwise not. deployed. TGi has proposed the Temporal Key Integrity Unfortunately, in WEP, no secret key is exchanged after Protocol (TKIP), a collection of algorithms wrapping WEP, to authentication. The same secret key or shared key is used for improve security for already deployed 802.11 devices both authentication and encryption. So there is no way to operating in infrastructure mode (involving access points). tell whether the subsequent messages come from the trusted This solution uses an authentication server: It cannot apply device or from an impostor. This kind of authentication is © 2012 ACEEE 42 DOI: 01.IJNS.03.02.3
  • 2.
    ACEEE Int. J.on Network Security , Vol. 03, No. 02, April 2012 prone to man in the middle attack. This authentication is stream and form the cipher text of the packet. really not a best effort here. In the Wi-Fi specification, 6) The cipher text, the initialization vector IV and some authentication was completely dropped, despite being in the additional header fields are used to build a packet, which is IEEE 802.11 standard. now send to the receiver. The packet being sent now contains the following header B. Working of RC4 Algorithm fields: 1. RC4 Stream Cipher: Frame control RC4 is a stream cipher designed in 1987 by Ron Rivets for It contains general information about the frame (is it a RSA Security[2]. It is a variable key-size stream cipher with data, management, or control frame) and the transmission byte oriented operations. The algorithm is based on the use (has the station more packets to send.) of a random permutation. A variable-length key K, of size 1 to Duration, ID 256 bytes is used to initialize a 256-byte state vector S, with It contains the expected duration of this transmission and elements S0, S1 to S255. At all times, S contains a permutation some other values in special cases. of all 8-bit numbers from 0 to 255. Initially, the entries of S are Address 1,2,3 set to the values 0 to 255 in ascending order. A temporary It contains the following addresses. The address of the vector T, is also created. For a key of length keylen bytes, the AP the packet is send from/to, the address of the destination first keylen elements of T, are copied from K, and then K is station and the address of the source station. In a special repeated as many times as necessary to fill out T. Next, we mode called WDS, where two APs communicate directly with use T to produce the initial permutation of S. each other, there is a fourth address, the address of the second Once S is initialized, the input key is no longer used. The AP. next step (stream generation) is to generate the key used for Sequence control encryption. It involves starting with S0 and going through to It contains information about fragmentation. The IEEE S255, and, for each Si, swapping Si with another byte in S 802.11 protocol is able to fragment packets before they are according to a scheme dictated by the current configuration transmitted. of S. After S255 is reached, the process continues, starting WEP parameters over again at S0. For encryption, the value key is XORed contains the IV which was used to encrypt this packet, with the next byte of plaintext. For decryption, the value key and a key index. The key index is used to identify the correct is XORed with the next byte of cipher text. key, when more than one key is used in a network. C. WEP Encryption Process and Frame Payload and ICV is the encrypted payload of the packet including a CRC32 checksum at the end of the payload which Every data frame sent by a station in a WEP protected is called Integrity protection value (ICV). Payload and ICV network is encrypted integrity protected. Non-data frames, are encrypted. like beacon frames, acknowledgment frames and similar frames are not protected by WEP at all. When a station sends a packet, the following steps are executed. 1) The station picks a 24 bit value called initialization vector IV. The IEEE 802.11 standard does not specify how to choose this value. Beside some minor modifications, most Figure 2 WEP Frame Format vendors implemented one of the following two methods: D. WEP Vulnerability a) The IV is chosen by a pseudo random number generator Several serious security flaws were discovered in the PRNG independently from all other packets send by this WEP[3] owing to which, the WEP failed to achieve its security station. goals. Some of its vulnerabilities are listed below: b) The station always remembers the last IV used. When a 1. The RC4 algorithm itself has a subtle weakness[4] that can new IV needs to be chosen, the station interprets the last IV be exploited to crack keys. used as a number and adds 1 to this number. When the highest 2. The presence of relatively short IVs and keys that remain possible number is reached, the station starts again with 0. static[5]. If an individual collects enough frames based on On startup, the IV counter either takes a fixed value or a the same IV, he can determine the shared values among them, random number is assigned to it. i.e., the key stream or the shared secret key. This of course 2) The IV is prepended to the root key and form the per leads to decrypting any of the 802.11 frames. packet key K = IV||Rk. 3. The 802.11 does not support the exchange of keys among 3) A CRC32 checksum of the payload is produced and stations nor does it provide any automatic way of changing appended to the payload. This checksum is called Integrity keys. It depends on external key management for distribution. Check Value (ICV). 4. The implementation has so far been based on 64-bit with 4) The per packet key K is fed into the RC4 stream cipher to 24-bit initialization vector resulting in only a 40-bit encryption, produce a key stream X of the length of the payload with which is quite low. Improving the static nature of the IV and checksum. providing a stronger encryption at a higher layer could solve 5) The plaintext with the checksum is XORed with the key a major part of the WEP vulnerability. A stronger encryption © 2012 ACEEE 43 DOI: 01.IJNS.03.02.3
  • 3.
    ACEEE Int. J.on Network Security , Vol. 03, No. 02, April 2012 could prevent brute force attacks and result in larger generate a key stream KS using RC4. S concatenates the overheads during cryptanalysis. CRC to M1 which gives T1 = (M1, CRC), then he concatenates iv2 to T1. The all is Fig. 2. Ciphering principle in iWEP then III. ATTACKS XORed with KS1. S sends the XORed message to the receiver R. Knowing iv1, R decrypts the message, verifies CRC, and A. Types of Attacks crafted on WEP then stores iv2. iv2 will be used to decrypt the next frame sent 1. The FMS attack: by S. As a matter of fact, every frame contains the initialization The FMS attack was the first key recovery attack against vector used to encrypt the next one. So, the frame i encrypted RC4 in WEP-like operating modes and was published by using ivi contains ivi+1, which will be used to encrypt and Fluhrer, Mantin, and Shamir in 2001. We can summarize the decrypt frame i + 1. Initialization Vectors are all, except the FMS attack as follows: first one, generated randomly by the sender. This makes no An attacker, who has access to an oracle OWEP CTR(3; 13; correlation between iv’s, and therefore enhances resistance 1) can recover the internal key of the oracle with a success to brute force attacks. probability of 50% with about 9,000,000 queries to the oracle B. Procedure for selecting Initial Vector IV and negligible computational effort. The process shown above requires that S and R agree on B. The KoreK key recovery attack the initial iv. This can be done by many ways. We suggest This implementation uses 17 different attacks, which are able here two methods that are enough secure and don’t produce an overhead. The first manner is to agree on iv1 using Diffie- to determine K[l], if K[0] to K[l - 1] and the first two words of Hellman (DH) algorithm[7]. This algorithm allows two entities to establish a secret (a key for example), based upon messages output X[0] and X[1] are known. exchanged publicly. It will be sufficient to take as iv1 the first An attacker, who has access to an oracle OWEP CTR(3; 13; 24 bits of the key agreed on using DH. The second manner is 2) can recover the internal key of the oracle with success to use a hash algorithm[5], [6] to compute iv. A hash algorithm probability 50% with 700,000 queries to the oracle and is a one-way function that allows to compress some bit stream negligible computational effort. BS into a digest D of a given length. The principle is to compute D in each side by hashing a common secret C. Mantin’s second round attack information, such as k. Thus, S and R compute separately the It was the first key recovery attack on RC4, which made digest of k, and take the first 24 bits as iv1. SHA-1 which is a use of the so called Jenkins’ correlation which is also called secured well-known hash algorithm can be used to this end. Glimpse property or RC4 Glimpse. An attacker who has access to an Oracle OSKIPWEP (OWEP(liv; V. INTEROPERABILITY WITH WEP 16; 1); 256) can recover the secret key of Oracle OWEP with a probability of 80% by sending about 225 H” 3.3·107 queries to A. Translating from WEP to iWEP OSKIPWEP and by testing up to 248 H” 2.8·1014 different keys for The translation is carried out in two steps: correctness, even if he has not got direct access to OWEP . I- Extraction of iv : it consists of separating ivs from their Different tradeoffs for CPU-time and number of queries are messages. Iv’s are already clear; possible. liv must be large enough to generate 225 different II- Re-association of ivs: in this step, a given iv, ivi is used to IVs. The complexity decreases for shorter root keys. encrypt the concatenation of Ti and ivi+1. IV. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS IN WEP B. Translating from iWEP to WEP In this case, the translator typically re-uses previous iv, The proposed approach aims to resolve WEP flows ivi to decrypt current iWEP frame (i). without changing the hardware while keeping a good I- Extraction of iv : using ivi for decryption, the clear text interoperability with existing WEP. contains the message Ti, and ivi+1 which will be extracted A. Encryption Process (and to be used also for further decryption); We propose a scheme similar to WEP. The difference is II- Re-association of ivs: ivi is used to encrypt Ti and ivi. that in iWEP we encrypt both of the message T and iv with ivi+1 is used for decryption of next frame. RC4. Encrypting iv aims to hide it from eavesdropping. As can be visualized, iWEP sender encrypt Ti concatenated to ivi+1 using ivi. Thus, it’s sufficient to the receiver to know the initial iv -iv1- to decrypt the first frame which contains iv2 used to decrypt the second frame and so on. To start the encryption process, the two nodes agree on some initial iv, this step is detailed in section B. After this, the sender S generates randomly a new iv. Let iv2 be the generated iv, and iv1, the initial iv. S uses his own key k and iv1 to © 2012 ACEEE 44 DOI: 01.IJNS.03.02. 3
  • 4.
    ACEEE Int. J.on Network Security , Vol. 03, No. 02, April 2012 VI. RESULTS REFERENCES [1] S.M.K.M. Abbas Ahmad, Dr. E.G.Rajan,Dr.A.Govardhan, Mr. Juluru PEraiah, “Security Enhancement in WEP Mobility”, invited paper at International Conference on CNSA-2010, Springer-Verlog, July, 2010, Volume No: CCIS 90, pp 388-399. [2] Arash Habibi Lashkari, F. Towhidi, R. S. Hoseini,”Wired Equivalent Privacy(WEP)”, ICFCC Kuala Lumpur Conference, Published by IEEE Computer Society, Indexed by THAMSON ISI, 2009. [3] Donggang Liu, P. N., “Security for Wireless Sensor Networks”, Springer., November, 2006 [4]Garcia, R. H. a. M., “AN ANALYSIS OF WIRELESS SECURITY”, CCSC: South Central Conference. 2006 [5] Kempf, J., “Wireless Internet Security: Architecture and Protocols “,Cambridge University Press. October, 2008 Figure3: Encryption Process of WEP and iWEP [6] Hani Ragab Hassan, Yacine Challal, “Enhanced WEP: An efficient solution to WEP threats”, IEEE 2005 [7] Scott R. Fluhrer, Itsik Mantin, and Adi Shamir. Weaknesses in the key scheduling algorithm of RC4. In Serge Vaudenay and Amr M. Youssef, editors, Selected Areas in Cryptography 2001, volume 2259 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 1{24. Springer, 2001. [8] David Hulton. Practical exploitation of RC4 weakness in WEP environments, 2002. presented at HiverCon 2002. [9] Wireless lan medium access control (MAC) and physical layer (PHY) specifications (IEEE Standard 802.11). L.M.S.C. of the IEEE Computer Society, 1999. AUTHORS’ PROFILE Figure4: iWEP and WEP compared when decrypting data Mr. S.M.K.M. ABBAS AHMAD did his B.E. from Gulbarga University, Karnataka, India in 1998, M.Tech. from V.T.U., Belgaum in 2004. He is pursuing Ph.D. at Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad under the guidance of Dr. E.G. Rajan & Dr. A. Govardhan. He is presently an Associate Professor of ECE at Hi-Tech College of Engineering & Technology, Hyderabad. He has 14 years of teaching experience. His areas of interest are Wireless Commu- nications, Wireless Network Security & Digital Electronics. He is life member of Indian Society for Technical Education. He is the member of IAENG. Figure5: Throughput of iWEP and WEP for variable data length Dr. E.G.Rajan did is B.Sc. in Physics computa tional Major from Madras University in 1970, DMIT in Electronics Engineering in 1974, CONCLUSION M.E. in Applied Electronics from Madras University in 1983. He did his Ph.D. in In this paper, we’ve reviewed security holes in WEP. Then Signal & Image Processing at Indian Insti- we described our protocol iWEP which achieves security tute of Technology, Kanpur, India in 1990. goals of the WEP. We also compared iWEP and WEP when He is the founder president of Pentagram Research Center (Pvt), decrytpting data. In this paper we also shown that throughput Hyderabad, India He was categorized as Best Instructor of Dept. is greater for iWEP than WEP for variable data length of Electrical Engineering, IIT, Kanpur for the years1990-91 & 1991- computaions. It is important to note that iWEP can be directly 92. He has 34 years of industry & teaching experience. He worked deployed over any hardware using WEP. as Electronic Warfare Officer/Signal Analyst, Aviation Research Centre, Cabinet Secretariat, Director of General of Security, Govt. of India from 1977-1986. He proposed the Transforms for Pattern Recognition known by his name Rajan Transforms. He is an elected member of International Federation of Systems Research, Kepler University, Austria. He has guided 7 Ph.D. scholars, 60 M.Tech. Projects. He Published more than 20 research papers in interna © 2012 ACEEE 45 DOI: 01.IJNS.03.02.3
  • 5.
    ACEEE Int. J.on Network Security , Vol. 03, No. 02, April 2012 tional journals. His areas of interest are Communication Engineer- He is presently a Professor of CSE and and Director of Evaluations ing, Cryptography, Pattern Recognition, Bioinformatics, Systemics, at Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University Hyderabad AP, In- Image Processing, Signal Processing. dia. He is a member on the Editorial Boards of International Journal Dr.A.Govardhan did his BE in Computer of Emerging Technologies and Applications in Engineering Tech- Science and Engineering from Osmania nologies and Sciences (IJ-ETA-ETS) and International Journal of University College of Engineering, Computer Applications in Engineering Technologies and Sciences Hyderabad in 1992, M.Tech from (IJ-CA-ETS), International Journal of Advanced Computing, In- Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi in ternational Journal of Data Engineering and Computer Science, 1994 and Ph.D from Jawaharlal Nehru International Journal of Computational Intelligence and Informa- Technological University, Hyderabad in tion Security and Scientific and Technical. 2003. © 2012 ACEEE 46 DOI: 01.IJNS.03.02.3