This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Cryptography: Computer science Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cryptography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cryptography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CryptographyWikipedia:WikiProject CryptographyTemplate:WikiProject CryptographyCryptography articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computer science (assessed as Low-importance).

The article is not clear. What are a and b? Where does IVs enter the picture? They are not mentioned in the algorithm description. Moreover, the article discusses only WEP. Does this attack apply only to WEP (in which case I think it should be renamed) or does it apply to RC4 in general?

Agreed. The pseudo code presented is only for RC4. Though RC4 is considered cryptographically broken - as the wiki page will attest - the vulnerability described in the article pertains to a particular implementation. It is really unclear how WEP uses IVs in conjunction with RC4. Moreover, what makes these IVs weak? How does it relate to RC4? I'm not an expert on the subject, so it would be nice for someone more knowledgeable than I to come clear this up. 76.165.248.106 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:41, 22 March 2009 (UTC). reply

There is a good summary of the attack in the RC4 article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rc4 -- Jbarcelo ( talk) 09:52, 17 February 2011 (UTC) reply

I like you naming the attacker "her"! /Jonas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.229.79.146 ( talk) 06:40, 7 December 2008 (UTC) reply

This is probably due to Alice_and_Bob. Arlo James Barnes 20:14, 3 March 2018 (UTC) reply