MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126701838 · doi:10.1145/3433174.3433584

Exploiting Race Condition for Wi-Fi Denial of Service Attacks

2020· article· en· W3126701838 on OpenAlexafffund
Karim Lounis, Mohammad Zulkernine

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Authentication Protocols Security
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer securityDenial-of-service attackExploitComputer scienceVulnerability (computing)Authentication (law)Internet privacyThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wi-Fi is a wireless communication technology that has been around since the late nineties. Nowadays, it is the most adopted wireless technology in various IoT (Internet of Things) applications. Although Wi-Fi security has significantly improved throughout the past years, it is still lagging behind. Many vulnerabilities exist allowing attackers to generate different types of attacks. These attacks can breach the authentication, confidentiality, and data integrity of Wi-Fi networks. In terms of attack impact, attacks on availability have a higher impact. In fact, breaching nowadays systems does not only result in data corruption but may also result in the loss of human lives. Therefore, more consideration should be brought to attacks on availability. In this paper, we present three attacks on Wi-Fi availability. These attacks cause a denial of service on Wi-Fi users by preventing them from connecting to a legitimate network. We adopt the evil twin scheme and exploit a race condition-based vulnerability to generate the attacks. Also, we propose countermeasures to fix the exploited vulnerability and mitigate the attacks.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Authentication Protocols SecurityFrench-language works237,207