Talk:WLAN Authentication and Privacy Infrastructure

The Chinese Government probably will have a backdoor in it, I wouldn't put it past them. ~Anonymous

"his Chinese Government equivalent" - I bet this person has a name. 212.143.17.66

Let 's be fair.

I do not believe that none of the all the goverment in the world not be a backdoor of their own invention or creation to become the world standard.

world talent supporter.

That's why we have published standards - if everybody knows what point A and point B are and how they work together, then people can work-out how to get from A to B on their own and not need to worry about misbehavior on the part of other organizations. It's a lot harder to hide exploits in a standard that anybody can view than in a binary-only implementation release that nobody knows anything about.

We can be reasonably certain that 802.11 doesn't contain any intentional security vulnerabilities, as it has held up to peer review. WPA and WEP are likewise published standards, and have withstood the scrutiny of malicious crackers fairly well. Although security holes have been discovered in WEP, none of these show any sign of being intentionally designed and do not provide either easy or ready access into a system.

Further, it's worth noting that an intentional security hole in a decentralized standard puts whoever put it there at risk, as they must use any standards they create when it becomes required. However, since WAPI is designed with a central server any exploits on that server's end would NOT put those who crafted the exploit in any risk; SPOF is simply not beneficial. 192.235.29.95 18:34, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All your Keys Belong to Us

The WAPI architecture calls for a central Authentication Service Unit. Why am I not surprised... Funkyj 07:40, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]