I agree with a lot you said.  Philippe Hanset had mentioned 'unathenticated 
TLS', which appears to do what you want to do, but it appears it isn't very 
well supported yet.    I haven't found much on it.

Ryan H Turner
Senior Network Engineer
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
CB 1150 Chapel Hill, NC 27599
+1 919 445 0113 Office
+1 919 274 7926 Mobile

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Coehoorn, Joel
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 11:25 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.1x vs web-portal

<rant>What I really want to provide is an HTTPS-like experience for my users 
that just works: an SSL layer that doesn't care who you are, but still provides 
meaningful encryption for the last 50 meters where your traffic is moving 
through the air for anyone nearby to snoop.

I'm annoyed that so many encryption solutions are coupled to authentication. 
The two don't need to be linked. You don't have to log into an https site to 
get encrypted traffic, and you shouldn't have to log into a wifi network to get 
encryption either.

My ideal scenario is that someday I'll be able to install the same wildcard ssl 
certificate that we purchase for our web sites to each access point or at a 
controller, change a setting for an SSID to use this certificate for 
encryption, and as long the certificate is from a well-known/reputable vendor, 
user devices will just work.

I include guest devices in this category. I want someone -- anyone, but 
especially visiting admissions candidates --- to be able to turn on their 
device for the first time and have the experience be easy: no capture, no guest 
registration, no prompt to agree to terms of service, just choose the SSID and 
they're online.

Sure, I could use a shared key scenario and just publish the key, but that's 
not the same thing. If anyone knows the key, anyone can decrypt the traffic, 
and it still requires an extra step to get online.

I honestly couldn't care less about the authentication part of this. I don't 
need to know right away that it was Jane Smith's computer committing whatever 
nefarious deed. The immediate reaction to that kind of thing is the same 
regardless of the name of the person behind it. As long as I can target a MAC 
address or have reasonably static IP addresses (I do), I'm happy enough using a 
captive portal rule on a specific machine after the fact to identify a user for 
those times when enforcement issues come up. College-owned machines here do log 
user names all the time, so it's just student-owned devices where this is 
necessary.

Sadly, I don't believe this kind of wifi exists today. Certificate-based 1x 
comes close, but the need to install/configure devices with a supplicant breaks 
it. I would settle for 1x, if I could count on it working for my students. 
Personally, I place blame on the WiFi Alliance, certifying devices that don't 
work for this feature as well as they should.

Currently, we're working to provide two WiFi options: one that's completely 
open (and I mean completely), and one that uses 1x and prompts for a user's 
Active Directory login. Anyone can walk on campus and get online at a basic 
level. Really. I don't care. Guest (and even neighbor) use is a drop in the 
bucket compared to what our regular students demand. But if you need encryption 
you'd better hope the site or service supports https. We encourage students to 
use the 1x SSID whenever they can, and try to educate about the importance of 
encryption. Most don't care, and choose the open network, but at least the 
option is open to them.</rant>





[Image removed by sender.]


Joel Coehoorn
Director of Information Technology
York College, Nebraska
402.363.5603
jcoeho...@york.edu<mailto:jcoeho...@york.edu>




[Image removed by sender.]


The mission of York College is to transform lives through Christ-centered 
education and to equip students for lifelong service to God, family, and society



On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Ian McDonald 
<i...@st-andrews.ac.uk<mailto:i...@st-andrews.ac.uk>> wrote:
Isn't that really a client supplicant issue though? You can send back a reason 
for authfailure, and then the client could prompt for a replacement password.

--
ian
-----Original Message-----
From: Fleming, Tony
Sent:  20-11-2013, 14:22
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.1x vs web-portal

I can tell you we use dot1x here with AD credentials and it doesn't lend itself 
to a good end-user experience. Our security policy requires password expiration 
after 60 days. When a student's password expires we see an increase of wireless 
related complaints (typically blaming the performance/signal of the wireless 
network) not realizing their password has expired and new credentials need to 
be applied in their wireless profile.
The other AD credential issue we have is related to lock-out. If a student 
mistypes his/her password to lock-out their account all of their devices stop 
connecting to the wireless network.

Having said that, we are eyeing certificate based 802.1x. Not having a lot of 
experience with PKI we are trying to gauge the effort level of deployment.
Not trying to highjack the thread here - but I am curious if anyone has some 
real world experience spinning-up a PKI (from scratch) using CloudPath with 
certificates. What is the effort level?

Tony

-----Original Message-----
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>]
 On Behalf Of Jason Cook
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 1:30 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.1x vs web-portal

List seems to sum it up pretty well.

I think user wise dot1x is better ....... "once setup". So while it may be more 
of a pain to configure for some users, once configured the experience is much 
better as they walk on to campus and are connected.

Having a captive portal is probably a good option for those that can't get 
dot1x working .

I'm interested in the 10% though, do you get them all connected in the end? 10% 
seems quite a high percentage

--
Jason Cook
Technology Services
The University of Adelaide, AUSTRALIA 5005 Ph    : +61 8 8313 
4800<tel:%2B61%208%208313%204800>


-----Original Message-----
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>]
 On Behalf Of Hanset, Philippe C
Sent: Wednesday, 20 November 2013 9:56 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.1x vs web-portal

from the top of my head...

###What's bad for the user:

-Captive portal: no encryption over the air, pesky re-authentication and 
timeouts, no authentication of the infrastructure  (yes, when you accept that 
SSL Cert from RADIUS you actually authenticate the infrastructure)

-802.1X: finicky supplicants, and, without a good installer, long config 
instructions. Strongly authenticated (can't escape the system ;-)

###What's bad for the network engineer (and user stuff as well...):

-Captive portal: CPU capacity of portal (802.11ac!!!), clients taking IP 
addresses and air time even if not authenticated, authentication can be defeated

-802.1X: bugs from various vendors. A pain the troubleshoot when not working. 
Certificate Expiration and help desk calls resulting from it

add yours!

Philippe

Philippe Hanset
www.eduroam.us<http://www.eduroam.us>


On Nov 19, 2013, at 2:10 PM, Jeff Kell 
<jeff-k...@utc.edu<mailto:jeff-k...@utc.edu>> wrote:

> On 11/19/2013 4:05 PM, Peter P Morrissey wrote:
>> Can anyone name an application that does not have strong encryption?
>>
>> I'm not arguing against 802.1x, because it works very well for us as users 
>> don't have to authenticate constantly on a portal, and we seem to do a very 
>> good job getting them on initially, but I am having a hard time 
>> understanding the encryption benefits lately.
>
> Does FireSheep or Ettercap ring any bells?
>
> Jeff
>
> **********
> Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent 
> Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
>

**********
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

**********
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

**********
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

**********
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

**********
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

<<inline: ~WRD000.jpg>>

Reply via email to