Ethereal-users: Re: [Ethereal-users] Comparision of Ethereal with Airopeek and Network Observer
I have never seen the wifi version of observer so i can not comment on it.
There are some recent additions (and some not so recent ones) to the
wifi dissection in ethereal,
very recently detection and flagging of weak wep keys were added
(will be in the next version of ethereal)
I do think that IF you have the wep keys, that ethereal can decrypt
the traffic for you. I have never tested that myself since
1, i am not using/interested in wep
2, i have never seen a wifi trace.
I have heard that there are often issues with capturing wifi traffic
due to several reasons.
If your capturing is successful on linux or xxxBSD please tell us
about your experiences of what worked and what didnt work.
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 14:49:54 +0530, Jahagirdar VS
<l39igrb02@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 10:06:07AM -0800, Guy Harris gharris-at-sonic.net |ethereal| wrote:
> > Jahagirdar VS wrote:
> > >I am trying to compare Ethereal with Observer and Airopeek.
> > >
> > >My primary concern is Sniffing and analysing WLAN traffic.
> > >
> > >Googling did not revel any direct comparision between these tools.
> > >Requesting information on your experience with these tools.
> >
> > If you're capturing on Windows, then, unless you're *only* interested in
> > 802.11 data packets, and don't care at all about 802.11 management and
> > control packets, Airopeek and possibly Observer will probably work
> > better, as they have their own drivers that allow running the network
> > adapter in monitor mode and that supply non-data (management and
> > possibly control) packets, with 802.11 headers.
> >
> > If you're capturing on Linux or {Free,Net}BSD (and possibly other BSDs),
> > then Ethereal is better, as Observer and Airopeek don't run on any OS
> > other than Windows.
> >
> I need to capture all 802.11 packets (data-control-management, Even those with
> errors or not adhering to protocol) that can be seen by a WLAN Device, I am
> open to changing my OS to get the best out of the tool. Till recently I was
> using an outdated version of Observer (with support for 802.11b cards only) for
> my work. Now I am looking at alternatives before I decide on upgrading my
> license.
> Recently I managed to install Linux on a Laptop with the necessary madwifi
> drivers and have started evaulating Ethereal for Packet capture and analysis.
> At first cut Ethereal looks as good as (or even better in some respects) than
> Observer for the kind of work I do(debug and testing of WLAN devices). So I am
> trying to find out Ethereal strengths and weaknesses compared to its commercial
> couterparts.
>
> regards
> Jahagirdar V S
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ethereal-users mailing list
> > Ethereal-users@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-users
>
> --
> "I used to think that the brain was the most wonderful organ in my body. Then I realized who was telling me this." - Emo Phillips
> Jahagirdar .V.S
> IC Design Engineer , Texas Instruments (India) Ltd.
> 91-80-25099129(O) 91-80-28540394(R)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ethereal-users mailing list
> Ethereal-users@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-users
>
