1 / 48

A Methodology for Evaluating Wireless Network Security Protocols

A Methodology for Evaluating Wireless Network Security Protocols. David Rager Kandaraj Piamrat. Outline. Introduction Explanation of Terms Evaluation Methodology Analysis of WEP, WPA, and RSN Graphical Results Conclusion. Introduction.

lacy-maddox
Download Presentation

A Methodology for Evaluating Wireless Network Security Protocols

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A Methodology for Evaluating Wireless Network Security Protocols David Rager Kandaraj Piamrat

  2. Outline • Introduction • Explanation of Terms • Evaluation Methodology • Analysis of WEP, WPA, and RSN • Graphical Results • Conclusion

  3. Introduction • Difference properties of wireless network comparing to wired network • Two lines of defense in wireless network security • Preventive approach • Intrusion Detection and Response approach • WEP WPA RSN

  4. Explanation of Terms • WEP – Wired Equivalent Protocol (attempt #1) • WPA – Wi-Fi Protected Access (attempt #2) • RSN – Robust Secure Network (attempt #3) • EAP – Extensible Authentication Protocol • TKIP – Temporal Key Integrity Protocol • AES – Advanced Encryption Standard

  5. Explanation of Terms (cont.) • CCMP – Counter mode with Cipher block Chaining Message authentication code Protocol • ICV – Integrity Check Value • MIC – Message Integrity Check • RADIUS – Remote Authentication Dial in User Service • IV – Initialization Vector

  6. Evaluation Methodology • Authentication Capability • Encryption Strength • Integrity Guarantees • Prevention of Attacks • Identity Protection • Ease and Cost of Implementation • Power Consumption • Novel Ideas

  7. Authentication capability

  8. Encryption Strength

  9. Integrity Guarantees

  10. Prevention of Attacks

  11. Identity Protection

  12. Ease and Cost of Implementation

  13. Power Consumption

  14. Novel Ideas

  15. Analysis of WEP

  16. Authentication capability

  17. Encryption Strength

  18. Integrity Guarantees

  19. Prevention of Attacks

  20. Identity Protection

  21. Ease and Cost of Implementation

  22. Power Consumption

  23. Novel Ideas

  24. Scores of WEP • Authentication Capability (0/8) • Encryption Strength (0/16) • Integrity Guarantees (0/4) • Prevention of Attacks (0/6) • Identity Protection (4/4) • Ease and Cost of Implementation (17/18) • Power Consumption (2/4) • Novel Ideas (0/2) Total Score = 2.44/8 = 30.56 %

  25. Analysis of WPA

  26. Authentication capability

  27. Encryption Strength

  28. Integrity Guarantees

  29. Prevention of Attacks

  30. Identity Protection

  31. Ease and Cost of Implementation

  32. Power Consumption

  33. Novel Ideas

  34. Scores of WPA • Authentication Capability (6/8) • Encryption Strength (14/16) • Integrity Guarantees (2/4) • Prevention of Attacks (4/6) • Identity Protection (0/4) • Ease and Cost of Implementation (5/18) • Power Consumption (1/4) • Novel Ideas (0/2) Total Score = 3.32/8 = 41.49 %

  35. Analysis of RSN

  36. Authentication capability

  37. Encryption Strength

  38. Integrity Guarantees

  39. Prevention of Attacks

  40. Identity Protection

  41. Ease and Cost of Implementation

  42. Power Consumption

  43. Novel Ideas

  44. Scores of RSN • Authentication Capability (6/8) • Encryption Strength (15/16) • Integrity Guarantees (4/4) • Prevention of Attacks (4/6) • Identity Protection (0/4) • Ease and Cost of Implementation (4/18) • Power Consumption (2/4) • Novel Ideas (0/2) Total Score = 4.08/8 = 50.95 %

  45. Graphical Results

  46. Comparison of categorical performance

  47. Main contributors to each protocol’s success

  48. Conclusion • We have defined specific metrics for protocol evaluation. • We evaluate different wireless security protocol based on these metrics. • Questions ?

More Related