From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 9 10:04:11 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8174916A4CE for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 10:04:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from web40311.mail.yahoo.com (web40311.mail.yahoo.com [66.218.78.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7C05E43D1F for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 10:04:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from m_evmenkin@yahoo.com) Message-ID: <20040209180410.18522.qmail@web40311.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [66.35.239.94] by web40311.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 09 Feb 2004 10:04:10 PST Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 10:04:10 -0800 (PST) From: Maksim Yevmenkin To: Tony Frank , Zhang Weiwu In-Reply-To: <4027C569.1080308@cw.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: freebsd-bluetooth@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: need suggestions on making a wireless network using bluetooth X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 18:04:11 -0000 > > >Encryption is a good idea for any wireless network. > > >I believe bluetooth has a little more in this respect over 802.11 but > > >I do not know any sure statement whether by itself it is enough. > > >Eg you may need to run IPSec or similar over any wireless link to secure > > >your data. > > I don't mean bluetooth has better encryption ... I mean bluetooth cannot > > pass through walls, making it diffcult to listen network traffic outside > > the building:) > > While bluetooth is primarily designed as a short-range cable replacement, > it does use the same frequency range as 802.11 (2.4Ghz). > > I have seen bluetooth modules that can reportedly work at up to 100m. that is correct. > Practical experience in an office environment shows I can do LAN/dial up > easily over a distance 15-20m without direct line of sight to a handset. that is also correct. the range can be increased by using better antenna and increased power. > The bluetooth layer2 encryption can however be tougher to crack than the > WEP used in 802.11. Of course it only works if you enable it. personally, i do not think bluetooth link encryption would be harder to break then say WEP. i do not think that anyone actually looked into this. i recall an article about flaws in bluetooth link encryption but i can not find the link at the moment. as far as i know no one found/published the way to put of the shelf bluetooth device into monitor/promiscuous mode as one can do with prism based 802.11 cards (this statement *doesn't* mean that it cannot be done). that is the only thing that is preventing anyone from snooping on bluetooth network. i did mentioned bluetooth scanners/protocol analyzers in my previous email. have a look at http://www.palowireless.com/bluetooth/testequip.asp if (when) bluetooth gains more popularity as 802.11 then someone will find a cheap and easy way to snoop on bluetooth network. there is nothing you can do about it. > Personally when using any fixed/wireless network for sensitive > application I would use encryption at layer3 also (IPsec) at minimum. again i agree. i have one thing to say though. if someone really wants to get your data, he/she will. one way or another. there is still a human factor. you still need to communicate with the rest of the world using public internet etc. thanks, max __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html