Since the v4 supports AX wifi (Wifi 6) it has to support WPA3 in order to be compliant with the standard.
Oh yeah, interesting. WiFi 6 and above requires WPA3 compatibility, but only the 6GHz band requires WPA3 for the connection. So devices can still connect using WiFi6 on WPA2 on the lower bands, and apparently most devices that support WPA3 will do that if the router is set on compatibility mode for WPA2/WPA3. So having a signal that only accepts WPA3 is better, and all WiFi6 with 6GHZ have to use WPA3.
Good to know.
Wifi 6 requires support for WPA3 but not required to connect.
Wifi 6e and 7 on the 6ghz band requires WPA3 to connect, and leaves it optional for 2.4 and 5. Iâm a bit surprised it isnât required for Wifi7 5ghz devices to connect at full speed (or for the 2.4 and 5 combining feature of Wifi7), but likely would have caused issues with older Wifi 6 devices, since 7 is essentially just an increase in the modulation rate with the underlying technology being essentially the same. Unlike when N came out and required WPA2, it was totally different encoding scheme from A/B/G,
It isnât a massive concern. Iâve cracked WPA2 but simply as an experiment and the hardware, effort, and knowledge required isnât something terribly common. Though at some point someone will simplify it and release a âeducational kitâ that automates most of it. I have rogue AP detection on my network so would know if someone was trying to do a man-in-the-middle, which is the first step in cracking it, they need to get one of your devices to attempt to associate with their AP.
WPA2/3 mode is sort of pointless. As long as you have a device connecting with WPA2, you are vulnerable. It is only there to allow a transition, but until you disable WPA2, it does not enhance security at all. So for those that want to try and enhance security, you can run your main network at WPA3 and all devices that support it go on that, then an isolated or guest network with WPA2 so if it gets hacked, they canât access anything. But that presents challenges with access between those devices, etc.
I no longer carry out covert activities or launch rockets. I can wait for WPA3.
It is also for keeping people from using your wifi network for nefarious purposes, but again the likelihood of that is pretty small, unless you live around hackers.
Pretty much everything you do on the web these days is encrypted anyway, so more about protecting your network than being snooped on.
To me, the main benefit of WPA3 is that it will prevent the new fad of burglars running around with portable Deauth devices, knocking everything off your network. If youâre running WPA3 they canât do that anymore from some cheap portable watch-like device they bought off aliexpress. No more deauth and disassociation vulnerabilities.
Secondary benefit is that it is more resistant to offline dictionary attacks and automatic bruteforcers. Should also simplify IoT device setup in general with Wi-Fi Easy Connect (DPP) without displays to the WiFi network.
I donât care as much about all the other stuff. I think WPA2 is adequately encrypted for most residential purposes, but the more people who use WPA3, the less likely the burglars will be trusting Deauth attacks to be successful and the more safe everyone will be.
Unfortunately most of the cheap watches and pocket devices the burglars are using simply flood 2.4ghz noise, they arenât doing targeted deauths. The noise will either saturate the bandwidth so your camera canât send data, or knock it off (essentially a deauth, just a dirty one). WPA3 wonât solve that unfortunately.
The targeted deauth is part of the attack to hack your WPA2 password, set up a rogue AP with strong signal, deauth a client, hope it reconnects to your rogue AP, and grab the info needed to decrypt the password.
Of course eliminating deauth has other benefits, like avoiding the hacker kid next door who just likes to be a jerk.
There are lots of benefits to WPA3 and if you can use it, you should. Unfortunately weâre just not at that point for most people yet. And WPA2/3 mixed eliminates many of those benefits so I see it as sort of a pointless feature, other than to have it there for a 1-2 week migration period so you donât have to âhot cutâ everything at once.
The silver lining to the junk devices the criminals are using, is that the high power 2.4ghz RF in their pocket is probably giving them nut cancer.
I believe in operational security and look foward to WPA3, but I believe my target desirability is low. There are other low hanging fruit. I live in a middle-class neighborhood where people go to work everyday in a suburb city. I donât have the only home network.
Of course hacking could happen anywhere. I would think of it more apt to happen in a crowded city apartment building. My mesh router notifies me of new connections. I turn off my PCs at night. My cams are on a separate IOT network.
I am more concerned with financial security concerning my social security number and credit rating. Luckily, the county has a title-lock placed on property ownership.
Access to my 100/20 network is the least of my concerns, but not to be disregarded entirely.
Anyhow, I do enjoy conversations about security. I just try to limit my paranoia.
Yeah, being aware and self-monitoring are the best defenses regardless. Working in the networking and security field I probably have a bit more running than most but it is significantly scaled back from what I used to have.
As far as financial security, there is none left. Thatâs why TOTP based 2FA and credit report freezes are pretty much a requirement these days. Some totally unknown company that supplies info to those âpeople finderâ sites was breached a few months ago, and even though they claim they only have âpublic dataâ, there were social security numbers included along with all the other info someone needs to open accounts in your name. So clearly, they were pulling data sources they shouldnât have been. One of my âdark web monitoringâ services found like 20 records of mine, all including SSN. But there are breaches like that multiple times a year now. Too bad corporations value profit over security, as if thatâs a surprise.
But us geeks arenât just in the city, some of us grew up in the boonies and had nothing better to do
Old thread but the needle hasnât moved much on WPA3, because there are still so many broken WPA2 devices in the field preventing users from turning on WPA3-Personal Transition Mode (WPA2-Personal / WPA3-Personal on a single network).
@K6CCC devices WPA3 support usually requires hardware updates, not just a firmware update. (PCs and such have fewer restrictions). The ask isnât for them to support WPA3 Personal - it is for them to support whatever they supported before, even if the network enables ANYTHING new (Fast Transition / 802.11r, WPA3 Personal / SAE, etc.).
Many devices, including many Wyze device models, work fine when the network is only WPA2 Personal, but stop working with that network if FT support is activated in addition to WPA2 Personal, or if WPA3 Personal is activated in addition to WPA2 Personal. They are supposed to, but they donât.
Most of the issues with transition mode relate to the AP itself and the fairly poor planning that went into it. Obviously old devices that were designed before WPA3 even existed arenât going to know what to do with it, it is up to the AP to detect that and fail back completely, totally removing PMF and any signs of WPA3 from the negotiation.
In reality, the transition mode was intended to be used for a couple of weeks while people go through and reconnect their devices using WPA3 so it doesnât have to be a hot cut all at once. Having it running for a long period is mostly pointless, if you have WPA2 enabled, even if some devices are using WPA3, most of the vulnerabilities are still there.
Iâm not sure how it works exactly, but my Eeros assign WPA3 to the devices that support and WPA2 to the ones that donât. No issues with Wyze cameras at all. The V3s get WPA2 and the v4 WPA3.
Most of the issues with transition mode relate to the AP itself and the fairly poor planning that went into it. Obviously old devices that were designed before WPA3 even existed arenât going to know what to do with it, it is up to the AP to detect that and fail back completely, totally removing PMF and any signs of WPA3 from the negotiation.
This is not correct.
A BSS advertises its authentication and cipher suite support in the RSNE included in its beacons and probe responses:
- WPA2-Personal is indicated by AKM 00-0F-AC:2 (and/or 00-0F-AC:6)
- WPA2-Personal with FT lists AKM 00-0F-AC:4 as well as AKM 00-OF-AC:2
- WPA3-Personal is indicated by AKM 00-0F-AC:8, and by setting the MFPC and MFPR bits in the RSN Capabilities field
- WPA3-Personal Transition Mode is indicated by including AKM 00-0F-AC:2 (and/or 00-0F-AC:6), AKM 00-0F-AC:8, setting the MFPC bit (PMF Capable) but clearing the MFPR bit (PMF Not Required).
Now, a properly implemented STA of any generation will ignore information it doesnât support, including unrecognized AKMs, cipher suites and capabilities bits in the RSNE. So in the case of WPA3-Personal Transition Mode, a well-implemented WPA2-Personal STA would recognize and use AKM 2 (or perhaps 6) and ignore AKM 4 or 8 or any other AKM. It would also ignore the MFPC bit.
If a STA supports WPA2-Personal but fails to work with a WPA3-Personal Transition Mode BSS or a WPA2-Personal with FT BSS, it is almost always the STAâs fault. But the good news is that fixing the problem is purely a software / firmware fix.
In reality, the transition mode was intended to be used for a couple of weeks while people go through and reconnect their devices using WPA3 so it doesnât have to be a hot cut all at once. Having it running for a long period is mostly pointless, if you have WPA2 enabled, even if some devices are using WPA3, most of the vulnerabilities are still there.
It would be used as long as the operator of the network needs the network to support STAs that donât support WPA3. That could be a couple of weeks or a couple of years.
Yes, WPA2-Personal STAs will be the weak link for protecting the network. But the unicast data traffic from STA to AP will remain protected for WPA3 STAs even if the network is compromised.
Your Eeros are working like they are supposed to. Unfortunately, not all brands do.
It can also depend how old the device is also.
My statement that many brands of home based APs (and even some small biz/corporate ones) are not correctly implementing what you say above is 100% correct. Seen it repeatedly with my own eyes including with wifi sniffers. Some of the fault lies in the client devices not having a correct implementation and getting confused by the advertisement of WPA3 and/or PMF requirement. Typically older ones that had no idea WPA3 would exist and no way to test against it.
Was never intended to be used for several years, at least not in my opinion.
If your network is compromised, who cares about your WPA3 devices, you have much bigger issues at that point.
This time instead of forcing the cipher upgrade in order to get the higher speeds like they did with G â N wifi, they left it optional. Probably to appease the people that got angry about that previous forced requirement, but honestly I think they should have forced it, would speed up adoption and transitions.
The whole copy/paste from Wikipedia or AI on forums is getting tiring. It is like someone asking why their car with a dead battery wonât start and someone replying with a blurb about how car batteries work when fully charged.
I donât know about all the nerd talk above this post. But i can verify WPA3 works for the the CAM OG and the CAM v4.
However, WPA3 does NOT work on the CAM v3pro and it was supposedly implemented back on v2?
Apple gaslights their customers, every other company follows. %*#&!@
I doubt it works on the OG, it is more likely that youâve got your router set to WPA2/3 transition mode and the OG is connecting using 2. I donât know if it even works on the v4, there have been mixed reports.
In reality, only the v4 and maybe Battery Cam Pro (any cam that supports something newer than Wifi 4) are ones that would be candidates to support native WPA3 properly.
I guess @dave27 needs screenshots.
Welcome to the forum.
Certainly not impossible that it works on the OGs, but very few wifi chipset manufacturers support WPA3 on 802.11N/Wifi4. Even WPA2 with PMF is a long shot with the cheaper chipsets.