WPA-PSK "expert" question

All,

I've been having problems with WPA-PSK and it has been suggested to me that
I should reduce the passphrase length. I will try this, but having tried to
find out more about WPA, I'm not sure why this would help (although I'm not
saying it won't!).

So can a WPA-PSK "expert" tell me how this might help? My reading indicates
that WPA always uses the same number of "security bits/key" on a message
regardless of the size of the passphrase so its not clear to me why reducing
the size of the initial passphrase would help.

Aside: Note that I'm not saying that a small passphrase is "as secure"
because presumably the odds on finding it are reduced since there is less
initial randomness.

Paul DS.
--
Please remove the "x-" if replying to sender.

"Paul D.Smith" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:426f6ac8$0$294$(E-Mail Removed) t...
> All,
>
> I've been having problems with WPA-PSK and it has been suggested to me
> that
> I should reduce the passphrase length. I will try this, but having tried
> to
> find out more about WPA, I'm not sure why this would help (although I'm
> not
> saying it won't!).
>
> So can a WPA-PSK "expert" tell me how this might help? My reading
> indicates
> that WPA always uses the same number of "security bits/key" on a message
> regardless of the size of the passphrase so its not clear to me why
> reducing
> the size of the initial passphrase would help.
>
> Aside: Note that I'm not saying that a small passphrase is "as secure"
> because presumably the odds on finding it are reduced since there is less
> initial randomness.
>
> Paul DS.

Paul, I think you might get a better response by posting this message in
'uk.comp.home-networking' They do seem quite a knowledgeable lot in there
regarding WPA and the like.

I can't answer your question, although I do use WPA-PSK with a 64character
passphrase.

Regards

Bother - I meant to cross-post!

> > All,
> >
> > I've been having problems with WPA-PSK and it has been suggested to me
> > that
> > I should reduce the passphrase length. I will try this, but having tried
> > to
> > find out more about WPA, I'm not sure why this would help (although I'm
> > not
> > saying it won't!).
> >
> > So can a WPA-PSK "expert" tell me how this might help? My reading
> > indicates
> > that WPA always uses the same number of "security bits/key" on a message
> > regardless of the size of the passphrase so its not clear to me why
> > reducing
> > the size of the initial passphrase would help.
> >
> > Aside: Note that I'm not saying that a small passphrase is "as secure"
> > because presumably the odds on finding it are reduced since there is
less
> > initial randomness.
> >
> > Paul DS.
>
> Paul, I think you might get a better response by posting this message in
> 'uk.comp.home-networking' They do seem quite a knowledgeable lot in there
> regarding WPA and the like.
>
> I can't answer your question, although I do use WPA-PSK with a 64character
> passphrase.
>
> Regards
>
>

"Paul D.Smith" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I've been having problems with WPA-PSK and it has been suggested to me that
>I should reduce the passphrase length. I will try this, but having tried to
>find out more about WPA, I'm not sure why this would help (although I'm not
>saying it won't!).

The only benefit of testing with a shorter passphrase is that it is
less likely to differ between one end and the other


Peter.
--
Return address is invalid to help stop junk mail.
E-mail replies to (E-Mail Removed) but remove the X and the Y.

"Peter" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Paul D.Smith" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>I've been having problems with WPA-PSK and it has been suggested to me
>>that
>>I should reduce the passphrase length. I will try this, but having tried
>>to
>>find out more about WPA, I'm not sure why this would help (although I'm
>>not
>>saying it won't!).
>
> The only benefit of testing with a shorter passphrase is that it is
> less likely to differ between one end and the other

Of course, if you keep it handy in a .txt file like I do then you can cut
and paste with the certainty that it is correct at both ends.

Not true. Read my latest "Update" post. To avoid doing anything stupid, I
used really simple passphrases for my testing such as "123456..." and
increased 8 characters at a time from the earlier, working, passphrase. Up
to 32 characters, all worked, beyond that - all bets were off!

Paul DS.