From: Diederik de Haas <didi.debian at cknow.org>
To: iwd at lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/2] Encrypt secrets using systemd provided key
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2022 00:46:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5088724.FFhpVOcMN3@prancing-pony> (raw)
In-Reply-To: ee74931c2e0f54601f0b83e802e8969731405329.camel@gmail.com
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1829 bytes --]
Hi James,
On vrijdag 21 januari 2022 23:30:44 CET James Prestwood wrote:
> > I did/do wonder why my passphrase is stored in plain-text and not in
> > a form which I can get through the wpa_passphrase* utility (I don't know
> > the proper term for it though). Maybe that's what others have been
> > interested in too?
>
> I was unfamiliar with wpa_passphrase until now, but all that appears to
> be doing is deriving a PSK from the SSID/passphrase, not 'encrypted' by
> any means. In IWD this is "PreSharedKey" in the profile. Ultimately
> (for WPA2) you only need the PSK to connect to a network so storing the
> PSK directly is just as insecure as the passphrase.
I followed https://wiki.debian.org/WiFi/HowToUse#WPA-PSK_and_WPA2-PSK and then
removed the commented out line (thus the plain-text passphrase)
I _think_ it was way more prominent and recommended on that page when I first
read it, quite some years ago.
I knew it wasn't (actually) encrypted, but assumed it to be a (one-way) hash.
I know you can connect to the (WPA2) network with just the PSK, so it won't
prevent connecting to it, if that value is known.
If I wanted to allow a friend access to the same wireless network, I could
give the PSK, without revealing my actual passphrase, which _feels_ more
secure. (Which may be a false sense of security, which is actually worse)
> What I am proposing actually encrypts the passphrase/PSK using a secret
> key, only known to the IWD systemd service.
My reasoning was that if the request/interest came from people equally
'clueless' as I am, then not seeing the plain-text passphrase, but only the
'hash'/PSK, is what they were actually asking.
If it was from knowledgeable people, then yes, actual encryption is very
likely what they were after.
HTH,
Diederik
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2022-01-21 23:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-21 23:46 Diederik de Haas [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-01-21 22:42 [RFC 0/2] Encrypt secrets using systemd provided key Diederik de Haas
2022-01-21 22:36 Marcel Holtmann
2022-01-21 22:30 James Prestwood
2022-01-21 22:22 Diederik de Haas
2022-01-21 20:54 Marcel Holtmann
2022-01-21 20:49 James Prestwood
2022-01-21 20:35 Marcel Holtmann
2022-01-21 20:19 James Prestwood
2022-01-21 15:20 Marcel Holtmann
2022-01-21 0:41 James Prestwood
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5088724.FFhpVOcMN3@prancing-pony \
--to=iwd@lists.linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox