Can't find any weak packets with Kismet

I'm trying a Proof-of-Concept crack of my own home wireless network.
The plan is to use Kismet to capture cryptographically weak packets.
As it is a small network, my only goal right now is to capture AT
LEAST ONE "weak" packet. Once I've captured at least one of these, my
concept is proven.

To simulate a busier network than I've actually got (one WAP and two
clients), I am running a script on one of the WEP clients that sends
an anglish language dictionary file in cleartext from one machine to
another in an endless loop. This appears to saturate the network just
fine. I am running Kismet on the other WEP client.

Kismet detects the network just fine. The SSID shows up and it
displays as a WEP network. However, after running the above-described
script for 8 hours, I don't see what I expected to see. When I look at
my network in detail, I see:

Packets:
Data: 58
LLC: 38578
Weak: 0

I haven't been able to figure out the difference between "Data" and
"LLC" packets yet, but I expected to see a non-zero value in the
"Weak" slot.

Can anyone out there please explain why I haven't got any weak packets
yet? Here's the network details:

Using Linksys WAP11 access point with 40-bit WEP encryption enabled.
Client is a Windows XP machine using an Engenius wireless PCMCIA card.
This card uses the Prism2 chipset.
Sniffer is running Kismet with linux-wlan-ng drivers and a Hawking
Technologies PCMCIA card (Prism2).
The WAP11 is hard-wired to a linux server.
Network traffic consists of an infinite loop running on the windows xp
machine that uses netcat to transfer an ASCII file to the linux server
and repeat ad infinitum.

Anyone that can explain why I'm not seeing the weak packets, please
do.
Anyone that can tell me how I can manipulate this traffic in order to
detect some weak packets, please do also.

Thx.

-JamesP
:wq

There aren't necessarily any weak packets. The weak IVs can be avoided
altogether without violating the 802.11 standard in any way. I think Orinoco
does this, and I wouldn't be surprised if other chips with the right
firmware or driver upgrades do it.

That doesn't mean WEP becomes uncrackable, it just means it will take
significantly more data (and time) to do it.

"James" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> I'm trying a Proof-of-Concept crack of my own home wireless network.
> The plan is to use Kismet to capture cryptographically weak packets.
> As it is a small network, my only goal right now is to capture AT
> LEAST ONE "weak" packet. Once I've captured at least one of these, my
> concept is proven.
>
> To simulate a busier network than I've actually got (one WAP and two
> clients), I am running a script on one of the WEP clients that sends
> an anglish language dictionary file in cleartext from one machine to
> another in an endless loop. This appears to saturate the network just
> fine. I am running Kismet on the other WEP client.
>
> Kismet detects the network just fine. The SSID shows up and it
> displays as a WEP network. However, after running the above-described
> script for 8 hours, I don't see what I expected to see. When I look at
> my network in detail, I see:
>
> Packets:
> Data: 58
> LLC: 38578
> Weak: 0
>
> I haven't been able to figure out the difference between "Data" and
> "LLC" packets yet, but I expected to see a non-zero value in the
> "Weak" slot.
>
> Can anyone out there please explain why I haven't got any weak packets
> yet? Here's the network details:
>
> Using Linksys WAP11 access point with 40-bit WEP encryption enabled.
> Client is a Windows XP machine using an Engenius wireless PCMCIA card.
> This card uses the Prism2 chipset.
> Sniffer is running Kismet with linux-wlan-ng drivers and a Hawking
> Technologies PCMCIA card (Prism2).
> The WAP11 is hard-wired to a linux server.
> Network traffic consists of an infinite loop running on the windows xp
> machine that uses netcat to transfer an ASCII file to the linux server
> and repeat ad infinitum.
>
> Anyone that can explain why I'm not seeing the weak packets, please
> do.
> Anyone that can tell me how I can manipulate this traffic in order to
> detect some weak packets, please do also.
>
> Thx.
>
> -JamesP
> :wq