doc.: IEEE /0792r0 Submission May 2011 IEEE WGSlide 1 IEEE i is Secure Date: Authors:

doc.: IEEE /0792r0 Submission May 2011 IEEE WGSlide 2 Abstract This document outlines the IEEE 802 response to ISO/JTC1/SC6 on the WAPI NP process

doc.: IEEE /0792r0 Submission May 2011 IEEE WGSlide 3 IEEE 802 provided input into the WAPI NP proposal voting and resolution process D ONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJ Oct 09: N14123 WAPI NP proposal Feb 10: N14228 WAPI NP voting results Oct 10: N14436 Initial WAPI NP disposition Mar 11: N14620 Revised WAPI NP disposition Dec 09: N14142 IEEE 802 comments on WAPI NP proposal Jan 11: N14551 IEEE 802 comments on WAPI NP disposition J2011 Timeline of IEEE 802 participation

doc.: IEEE /0792r0 Submission Unfortunately, that input was ignored and is now being rejected May 2011 IEEE WGSlide 4 D ONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJ Oct 09: N14123 Justification of WAPI NP based on assertion that i is insecure Feb 10: N14228 Apparently IEEE 802 input was not considered in WAPI NP vote Oct 10: N14436 IEEE 802 input is ignored, incorrect claims about i are repeated Mar 11: N14620 IEEE 802 input is dismissed on the basis that it is too late! Dec 09: N14142 IEEE 802 rebuts all assertions regarding the claim of i insecurity Jan 11: N14551 IEEE 802 again rebuts all assertions regarding the claim o f i insecurity J2011 Timeline of IEEE 802 participation

doc.: IEEE /0792r0 Submission May 2011 IEEE WGSlide 5 N14123: WAPI NP justification entirely based on assertion that i is insecure Single assertion to justify WAPI NP: –“It is a well known fact that current WLAN international standards contain serious security loopholes which need to be dealt with by enhanced security mechanisms.” Evidence to support this assertion: –“Can your neighbors router make yours sick?”– Hu, et al, 2008 –“A Wi-Fi virus outbreak? Researchers say it’s possible”– article in Network World, 2008 –“Practical Attacks Against WEP and WPA”– Beck and Tews, 2008 –“A Practical Message Falsification Attack on WPA”– Ohigashi and Morii, 2009

doc.: IEEE /0792r0 Submission N14142: IEEE 802 rebuts all claims of i insecurity “Can your neighbor’s router make yours sick?” –Assumes either no security, or WEP, on an AP. WEP has been deprecated in favor of i! Says nothing about i. “A Wi-Fi Virus Outbreak? Researchers say it’s possible” –Refers to paper by Hu et al– i.e. no security or WEP, not i “Practical Attacks against WEP and WPA” –WPA attack is against TKIP and its MIC, Michael, which is not a one-way function, and whose security is not assumed strong. TKIP was designed in 2003 with a 5 year expectation of validity. Paper says nothing about mandatory aspects of i (i.e. it addresses WPA not WPA2). “A Practical Message Falsification Attack Against WPA” –An improvement on paper above-- it’s WPA, no mention of WPA2 May 2011 IEEE WGSlide 6

doc.: IEEE /0792r0 Submission N14228: Significant Lack of Consideration of IEEE 802 rebuttal during WAPI NP vote US NB –Two comments made challenging the statement that i is insecure (apparent consideration of IEEE 802 rebuttal). –Seven other substantive comments submitted. UK NB –Comments alluding to technical concerns. –Mostly focused on “standalone security issue”. No other NB submitted comments –Silence implies the rebuttal was not considered. May 2011 IEEE WGSlide 7

doc.: IEEE /0792r0 Submission N14436: Repeats, and extends, invalid claims regarding i security IEEE 802 rebuttal of previous claims are completely ignored. Asserts that “Security loopholes in the current IS (ISO/IEC ) have been reported in the security literature”. Additional, new, unsubstantiated claims –WAPI can protect against fake STA/AP attacks and i cannot. –In N14123, N14399, N14402 and N14410 all “comprehensively address weaknesses in existing network security”. –Specific security problems were asserted during i fast track ballot in May 2011 IEEE WGSlide 8

doc.: IEEE /0792r0 Submission N14551: IEEE 802 Rebuts New Claims of i insecurity Repetition of N14123 –Already addressed by N14142! Unfortunately N14142 was ignored. N14410 refers to IEEE Security Issues: A Survey –This notes that security was not designed into IEEE , says nothing about IEEE (or ISO/IEC )! N14399, N14402 and N14410 make claims on lack of mutual authentication between STA, AP and AS –RFC4017-compliant EAP methods perform mutual authentication, the AP/AS distinction is logical and in many deployments does not apply, the 4-way Handshake confirms AS has disclosed PMK to AP and provides implicit authentication. Claims made during Fast Track Balloting of i –Same sort of non-mutual authentication assertions. May 2011 IEEE WGSlide 9

doc.: IEEE /0792r0 Submission N14620: IEEE 802 Objections and Rebuttal of invalid claims of insecurity dismissed After ignoring comments, they are dismissed on the basis that the comment disposition is no longer concerned with the WAPI NP proposal! –“This comment is focusing on the Justification of ISO/IEC 20011, but it should be noted that the NP ballot has passed; the main comment and contribution in this state should be focused and changed to the editing and commenting of WD text.” Comments are ignored for an extended period of time and then dismissed as invalid because they are made too late! –This improper behavior is an insult to IEEE 802. May 2011 IEEE WGSlide 10

doc.: IEEE /0792r0 Submission IEEE 802’s Current View of the Process is Best Summarized in Conclusion of N14551 IEEE 802 respectfully requests consideration: –… the fundamental justification for a WAPI NP in SC6 is based on the assertion that there are security loopholes or flaws in mandatory security components included in (and its amendments). However, no valid or credible evidence has been provided to support this assertion. The reality is that mandatory security components included have no known “security loopholes”. This statement is practically supported by the use of in millions of systems worldwide, in high security applications, by governments, financial institutions, telecommunications providers, enterprises and consumers. IEEE 802 requests SC6 do not consider any assertions that mandatory security components included in (and its amendments) are insecure when deciding whether to authorize the WAPI NP proposal. Alternatively, IEEE 802 invites any SC6 NB to provide valid and credible evidence to the WG of “serious security loopholes”. May 2011 IEEE WGSlide 11

doc.: IEEE /0792r0 Submission IEEE 802 Requests SC6 to Undertake Further Action Remove all existing, and unsubstantiated allegations regarding the security of i from official SC6 documents –Particularly the WAPI NP proposal and all associated comment dispositions. Provide credible evidence of security issues with mandatory features of i –Stop accepting unsubstantiated assertions regarding i security. Halt any new project activity whose justification relies on invalid assertions of security issues with i May 2011 IEEE WGSlide 12

doc.: IEEE /0792r0 Submission May 2011 IEEE WGSlide 13 References