By Juan Pineda

This article takes a deeper look at the concepts presented during my recent talk at Open Tech 2025, integrating the findings of my academic research on wireless security conducted for the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC).

In 2025, wireless security is no longer a purely local network concern—it has become a battle for control of the radio spectrum. What once required bulky antennas and dedicated laptops has evolved into an “instrumentalization of IoT”: tiny, low-cost, open-source devices that not only challenge WiFi security, but now intercept and manipulate protocols such as Bluetooth, Zigbee, RF (Sub-GHz), and even satellite signals.

This technological evolution has dramatically lowered the barrier to entry for network assessments, creating new opportunities for defense—but also significant risks that urgently require regulation.

The Evolution of Hardware: From WiFi to Spectrum Sovereignty

The current trend is not just miniaturization, but versatility. Attackers and auditors no longer carry a different tool for each task; instead, they rely on modular platforms that function like hacking Lego sets, combining ESP32 chips, radio frequency modules, and community-driven firmware.

1. WiFi Pineapple: Hak5’s Legendary Platform

Talking about WiFi auditing inevitably means talking about the WiFi Pineapple. Over multiple generations, this device has evolved from a modified router into an enterprise-grade tool:

• Generations and Models: From the iconic Nano and the powerful Tetra (with dual radios for 2.4 and 5 GHz), to the current Mark VII. The latest version refines the experience with an extremely intuitive web interface and the PineAP engine, which automates large-scale network impersonation (Rogue AP).
• WiFi Pineapple Pager: The newest addition to the ecosystem. Disguised as a retro pager, it hides hardware capable of tri-band attacks (including WiFi 6) and Bluetooth 5.2. It represents the pinnacle of stealth, allowing reconnaissance and automated attacks via DuckyScript while the auditor moves freely through a building.
• Key Capabilities: Its greatest strength lies in the ability to create Evil Twin networks so quickly that user devices connect automatically, without human interaction—enabling full traffic interception (MitM) and remote management via Cloud C2.

2. Flipper Zero: Much More Than a “Cyber Dolphin”

Flipper Zero broke conventions by introducing a gamified, portable multi-tool. Its operation revolves around a “character” (a digital dolphin) that levels up as the user interacts with electronic systems—masking a powerful multiprotocol communication arsenal beneath a playful appearance:

• Operating Mechanism: It includes a Sub-GHz antenna (300–928 MHz) capable of capturing, decoding, and cloning garage remotes, parking barriers, and IoT sensors. It also integrates NFC readers/emulators, RFID (125 kHz), infrared (capable of controlling almost any TV or air conditioner), and iButton.
• WiFi Expansion: When connected to an external ESP32-S2-based board, the Flipper transforms. With firmware such as Momentum or the powerful ESP32 Marauder, it can perform vulnerability scans, capture handshakes, and execute real-time deauthentication attacks—all controlled from its small LCD screen.

3. M5Stack (M5StickC PLUS2): The Power of DIY IoT

Open-source hardware has proven that compromising a network does not require a large budget. The M5StickC PLUS2 is a microcontroller based on the ESP32-PICO-V3-02 chip that, despite fitting in the palm of a hand (48 × 25 × 13 mm), offers remarkable technical capabilities for its size.

• Technical Characteristics: It features 8 MB of Flash and 2 MB of PSRAM, allowing it to manage local databases and complex captive portals. Its color display and built-in battery make it ideal for rapid field audits. Its true power is unlocked with firmware such as Bruce.
• Attack Capabilities in a Laboratory Setting: This small device can perform beacon spam (creating hundreds of fake SSIDs to confuse users) and deploy highly effective captive portals (Evil Portal).
• Data Management: A notable technical feature is its use of the LittleFS file system in internal memory. This allows it to store detailed logs of users who fall for the captive portal (searched SSIDs, entered credentials, IP addresses) and later act as a mini web server so auditors can conveniently download the information via a browser.

The Democratization of Hardware: Beyond Commercial Brands

It is crucial to understand that the WiFi Pineapple, Flipper Zero, and M5Stack are only the most visible and polished examples of a much broader market. Because hardware specifications are open and electronic components are extremely affordable, we are witnessing a DIY hacking phenomenon.

Anyone with basic knowledge of electronics and computing can purchase an ESP32 or ESP8266 chip for less than USD 5, download open-source firmware such as Spacehuhn’s WiFi Deauther, and assemble a functional attack device in minutes.

This ecosystem is fueled by:

• Open Specifications: Shared PCB designs that allow low-cost custom board manufacturing.
• Community Libraries: GitHub repositories providing ready-made code to manipulate complex protocols without building them from scratch.
• Modularity: Easy integration of high-gain antennas, GPS modules, or SD cards into generic development boards—creating “Frankenstein tools” that can be even more powerful and specialized than commercial solutions.

Proactive Defense: Threat Modeling and Frameworks

The proliferation of these tools—both commercial and homemade—should not be met with panic, but with methodology. This is where Threat Modeling becomes essential.

Following Adam Shostack’s philosophy, threat modeling is a systematic process that answers four key questions: What are we working on? What can go wrong? What are we going to do about it? Did we do a good job?

To make this process technically sound, frameworks such as MITRE ATT&CK are indispensable. For example, a WiFi Pineapple attack maps to the Adversary-in-the-Middle tactic (T1557), helping Blue Teams understand what logs such a “keychain-sized device” would generate and how to implement early detection mechanisms.

Damage Potential and Ethical Duality: A Double-Edged Sword

As detailed in my master’s research, the true risk of these devices lies in the democratization of technique. What was once the exclusive domain of experts is now accessible to any enthusiast with USD 50 and an internet connection.

• Impact on Privacy: These devices do more than disrupt service (DoS). Their interception capabilities enable mass exfiltration of banking credentials, session tokens, and personal data through captive portals that are visually indistinguishable from legitimate ones.
• Low-Cost, High-Impact Attacks: Hiding an M5StickC PLUS2 in a meeting room allows passive, stealthy data collection for days. Automating Rogue AP attacks on the WiFi Pineapple Mark VII removes human error, dramatically increasing impersonation success rates.
• Ethical vs. Malicious Use: From an ethical standpoint, these tools act as a thermometer that measures the level of insecurity in a corporate network. Without them, auditors could not simulate real-world attacks to strengthen defenses. In unauthorized hands, however, they become instruments of corporate espionage and infrastructure sabotage. The key difference lies in informed consent and professional scope.

The Urgent Need for Regulation: A Comparative Legal Framework

The ease with which these tools can be purchased through e-commerce platforms presents an unprecedented legislative challenge. In my Master’s Thesis, I conducted a comparative analysis of Colombian and Uruguayan regulations, concluding that hardware possession is not the issue—the lack of awareness regarding the criminal consequences of misuse is.

• Legal Framework in Colombia (Law 1273 of 2009): A regional pioneer in defining cybercrime with severe penalties. Article 269A (Unauthorized Access to a Computer System) and Article 269C (Interception of Computer Data) punish WiFi manipulation and traffic sniffing with prison sentences ranging from 4 to 8 years. Article 269H adds aggravating factors if the attack targets financial sector networks or exploits a professional relationship of trust.
• Legal Framework in Uruguay (Law 20.327 of 2024): Uruguay recently updated its Criminal Code to include Article 297 BIS (Unlawful Access to Computer Data) and Article 297 TER (Unlawful Interception). These provisions sanction unauthorized access and interception of non-public transmissions with prison sentences of 6 to 24 months, with increased penalties if data is publicly disclosed or state systems are affected.
• Toward a Responsibility-Based Model: Regulation should not focus on banning hardware—which would hinder cybersecurity research and innovation—but on establishing traceability registries and professional certifications. Organizations must implement clear wireless security policies that treat these devices as active threats within their risk modeling.

Final Reflections: A Wireless Future Under Scrutiny

The silent revolution of wireless devices forces us to immediately rethink perimeter security. The findings of my research lead to several key conclusions for the future of organizational defense:

1. The Disappearance of the Physical Perimeter: Office walls can no longer be trusted. An attacker with a hidden device in a briefcase or under a table can compromise the network from within—without brute force—by exploiting the automated trust of our devices.
2. From Reactivity to Continuous Monitoring: Relying solely on strong passwords (WPA2/WPA3) is insufficient against automated Evil Twin attacks. Organizations must evolve toward spectrum monitoring systems and anomaly detection capable of identifying unauthorized radios in real time.
3. Education as a Firewall: No defensive technology is effective if end users continue connecting to “free” networks or ignoring certificate warnings. Cybersecurity training must be as accessible and dynamic as the attack tools circulating today.
4. Positive Instrumentalization of Hardware: The same hardware that concerns us should be used to train our teams. The best defense against accessible tools is deep technical knowledge and the ability of network administrators to conduct controlled red team exercises.

Ultimately, the challenge is not the device itself, but our ability to adapt. Continuous threat modeling and the use of strategic frameworks such as MITRE ATT&CK are no longer optional—they are requirements for surviving in a wireless ecosystem that is increasingly transparent to attackers and opaque to defenders. Understanding the risk is the first step toward neutralizing it.