Apple Wifi Hack. Hoax!?

mikeandike22 0 326 Views

Recently one of the most talked about things is this Apple Wifi hack that was demonstrated by a group called SecureWorks at one of the largest security conferences, Defcon. Here is a link to the video so you guys can watch the video yourselves. Now Here is a link to an article similiar to most articles saying that this video is a hoax. Now if you have watched the video and read an article or similiar one than a question comes to mind. Why are the people writing all these articles and going on and on about something you would already know?

In about the first 10 secs of the video the demonstrator from Secureworks explains that this attack is not a Mac specific hack and that they are in fact using a 3rd party Wifi card with 3rd drivers. He also states the same disclaimer at the end of the video. In most of the articles the first thing they will say is that it is a hoax and that they were really using a 3rd party card/drivers and not the built in Mac book card. Now I dont get it did these "Journalists" just miss the first and last ten or so seconds of the video? They couldnt have the demonstrator made it a clear fact that this is not exclusively associated in anyway with Apple's Wifi card, or Apple's operating system. Which would be another article claim that this doesnt effect just OS X. Again yea you would know if you had watched the video. I could see the article being about how the exploit doesnt work with those cards and drivers then saying its a hoax, but I highly doubt SecureWorks would show off something like that at a huge security conference.

The part that really gets me is that even those these facts are clearly stated that articles like these are popping up all over the blogosphere and on sites like Digg. How could so many professional columnists miss the bigest part of the video which proves the point of the article. I dont see how you can argue about something that was already stated to be true. [FLAME]And the Mac fanboys of the internet certainly are adding to these articles. I have commented on several of these articles posted on Digg and stated simply that they should already know this. Then As I suspected I get digged down and a whole list of comments follows about how this article is great and how SecureWorks should be sued and other ridiculous claims. This always seems to be the case and point with the Apple fans on any Digg story involving something to do with Apple. Another point today someone posted an article about the taskbar feature in the windows version of iTunes and last time I looked it had close to about 2000 views. That is a lot of views for a feature I would consider fairly well known. While going the comments I noticed how someone said "well apple did create itunes" and I corrected them and said no they didnt they bought it just like final cut pro. Again a slew of fanboy hate.[/FLAME]

Dani AI

Generated

A concise, practical clarification and what to do next (adds to the points raised by and ).

The demo shown at Defcon targeted the low‑level Wi‑Fi stack (firmware/driver code that parses 802.11 frames) and used hardware/drivers that permit raw frame injection and monitor mode. That makes the demo hardware/driver specific rather than a universal flaw in macOS itself — which is why the presenter used a third‑party adapter. The important takeaway is not the headline “Mac hacked” but that poorly written firmware or drivers can be provably exploitable when an attacker can send crafted link‑layer frames.

Practical checks and mitigations you can apply now:

  • Confirm what adapter and driver your Mac is using (System Information or from the CLI).
  • Keep macOS and any third‑party driver/firmware up to date.
  • Treat external USB Wi‑Fi adapters with extra caution: they often require vendor drivers and are more likely to expose injection/monitor features.
  • Use modern encryption (WPA2/WPA3), disable auto‑join for unknown networks, turn off Wi‑Fi when not required, and use a VPN on untrusted networks.

If you want to verify capabilities (responsibly, on gear you own): check hardware with macOS tools or boot a Linux live USB and use common wireless tools to see whether the adapter supports monitor mode and injection. Example commands to identify interfaces on macOS:

networksetup -listallhardwareports
system_profiler SPAirPortDataType

Do not attempt active testing on networks you do not own or have explicit permission to test — that is illegal in many jurisdictions.

For readers and writers: watch original demonstrations fully and read vendor responses before amplifying claims. Sensational summaries often obscure the real lesson: secure driver/firmware hygiene matters, and platform headlines rarely capture that nuance.

Member Avatar for happygeek
happygeek 2,411 Most Valuable Poster

The trouble is that there are far too many wannabe journalists, and not enough experienced, trained, professionals.

While I am all for the whole blogging concept (duh) and even have a certain respect for many of those participating in 'people journalism' the problem seems to be that far too many people are willing to accept anything 'published' online as fact. This is compounded by the Google effect, where a search reveals a large volume of hits all saying the same thing. That the thing is wrong doesn't matter, by virtue of volume it has become the accepted truth.

This is where professional journalists used to come in, acting as filters for the rumor mongers and gossip spreaders, removing fact from fiction (on the whole) and presenting the former whether wrapped in opinion or straight from the bottle, facts nonetheless.

Yes, I am biased.

Yes, I am a member of the National Union of Journalists in the UK.

Yes, I am bitter about how a profession is being devalued.

Yes, I wish that lazy journalism, Google journalism, could be stopped - but I doubt that will happen any time soon. Expect things to get much worse before they get any better.

Member Avatar for mikeandike22
mikeandike22 18 Nearly a Posting Virtuoso

I couldnt agree more. Just because something is on the front page of digg more and more people will assume that the article is true (which in this case they are, but the arguement has already been proven) and not even bother to look at the originating content.


LOL case and point I submitted this story to digg and right off the bat someone commented saying that this same story had already been submitted and obviously did not bother to read it.

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.

Edit Preview