Hi, I want to secure my WPA network with PEAP-MSCHAPv2 and EAP-TLS. The first one already works (including LDAP server) but the second one fails. This is the output of freeradius -X: n Ready to process requests. rad_recv: Access-Request packet from host 192.168.200.151 port 2049, id=0, length=111 NAS-IP-Address = 192.168.200.151 Called-Station-Id = "0016b6a3ee04" Calling-Station-Id = "001de0121c0d" NAS-Identifier = "0016b6a3ee04" NAS-Port = 3 Framed-MTU = 1400 NAS-Port-Type = Wireless-802.11 EAP-Message = 0x0200000501 Message-Authenticator = 0x31e54d9d928ba685321f40fd2d46667a +- entering group authorize ++[preprocess] returns ok ++[chap] returns noop ++[mschap] returns noop rlm_realm: Proxy reply, or no User-Name. Ignoring. ++[suffix] returns noop rlm_eap: EAP packet type response id 0 length 5 rlm_eap: No EAP Start, assuming it's an on-going EAP conversation ++[eap] returns updated ++[expiration] returns noop ++[logintime] returns noop rlm_pap: WARNING! No "known good" password found for the user. Authentication may fail because of this. ++[pap] returns noop rad_check_password: Found Auth-Type EAP auth: type "EAP" +- entering group authenticate rlm_eap: UserIdentity Unknown rlm_eap: Identity Unknown, authentication failed rlm_eap: Failed in handler ++[eap] returns invalid auth: Failed to validate the user. Login incorrect: [<no User-Name attribute>/<via Auth-Type = EAP>] (from client ap port 3 cli 001de0121c0d) Found Post-Auth-Type Reject +- entering group REJECT expand: %{User-Name} -> ++[attr_filter.access_reject] returns noop Delaying reject of request 0 for 1 seconds Going to the next request Waking up in 0.9 seconds. Sending delayed reject for request 0 Sending Access-Reject of id 0 to 192.168.200.151 port 2049 Waking up in 4.9 seconds. Cleaning up request 0 ID 0 with timestamp +106 Ready to process requests. As client I use Windows XP SP2. I searched a lot in the net and all I found was that the supplicant should be broken because it should send a username along. Well, I can not image this because then this would be mentioned in ANY of these tutorials. Maybe I also need to add a special "default" entry to the users file? I played around but still I did not get it working. Can anybody give me a hint where to start? Regards, Luke
Lukas Haase wrote:
I searched a lot in the net and all I found was that the supplicant should be broken because it should send a username along.
Yes. The supplicant is broken. *Or* you somehow managed to get it to do 802.1X with an empty user name.
Well, I can not image this because then this would be mentioned in ANY of these tutorials.
Maybe I also need to add a special "default" entry to the users file?
No. The supplicant is broken.
I played around but still I did not get it working.
Can anybody give me a hint where to start?
Fix the supplicant. Alan DeKok.
Hi, Am 10.08.2010 22:20, schrieb Alan DeKok:
Lukas Haase wrote:
I searched a lot in the net and all I found was that the supplicant should be broken because it should send a username along.
Yes. The supplicant is broken.
Thank you. Seems so. Windows is broken! ARGH! (Works with a different XP machine) Regards, Luke
participants (2)
-
Alan DeKok -
Lukas Haase