Fix: stricter handshake validation to avoid aircrack-only false positives (fixes #419)

[JustGuardian]

This modification is a fix for #419 . That behavior happened because Wifite considers a handshake “captured” if any validator (tshark, cowpatty, or aircrack-ng) returns a positive result but I've noticed aircrack-ng every time reports a handshake as valid even when no real EAPOL exchange is present in the capture file. The fix introduces stricter validation, requiring at least one between tshark or cowpatty to confirm the handshake before it’s accepted.

Summary by Sourcery

Bug Fixes:

• Prevent aircrack-ng alone from counting as a valid handshake to avoid false positives

[sourcery-ai]

Reviewer's guide (collapsed on small PRs)

Reviewer's Guide

Refine handshake validation by enforcing stricter checks: only accept captures validated by tshark or cowpatty and reject aircrack-only/hcxpcapngtool results to eliminate false positives.

Class diagram for updated handshake validation logic

classDiagram
    class Handshake {
        +has_handshake()
        +tshark_handshakes()
        +cowpatty_handshakes()
        +aircrack_handshakes()
        +hcxpcapngtool_handshakes()
    }
    Handshake : has_handshake() updated
    Handshake : Only returns True if tshark or cowpatty detects handshake
    Handshake : aircrack-only and hcxpcapngtool-only results are ignored

Loading

Flow diagram for new handshake validation decision process

flowchart TD
    A["Start handshake validation"] --> B["Check tshark_handshakes"]
    B -- "Found" --> E["Return True (valid handshake)"]
    B -- "Not found" --> C["Check cowpatty_handshakes"]
    C -- "Found" --> E
    C -- "Not found" --> D["Reject (Return False)"]

Loading

File-Level Changes

Change	Details	Files
Stricter handshake acceptance logic requiring tshark or cowpatty confirmations	Replaced OR-based combination of all validators with sequential checks for tshark then cowpatty Removed aircrack_handshakes() and hcxpcapngtool_handshakes() from validation path Updated inline comments to explain preference for strict validators and rationale	wifite/model/handshake.py

Possibly linked issues

• Wifite does not work in wpa mode no more #419: PR fixes Wifite's false handshake validations by requiring stricter checks from tshark or cowpatty, not just aircrack.

---

Tips and commands

Interacting with Sourcery

• Trigger a new review: Comment @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
• Continue discussions: Reply directly to Sourcery's review comments.
• Generate a GitHub issue from a review comment: Ask Sourcery to create an
  issue from a review comment by replying to it. You can also reply to a
  review comment with @sourcery-ai issue to create an issue from it.
• Generate a pull request title: Write @sourcery-ai anywhere in the pull
  request title to generate a title at any time. You can also comment
  @sourcery-ai title on the pull request to (re-)generate the title at any time.
• Generate a pull request summary: Write @sourcery-ai summary anywhere in
  the pull request body to generate a PR summary at any time exactly where you
  want it. You can also comment @sourcery-ai summary on the pull request to
  (re-)generate the summary at any time.
• Generate reviewer's guide: Comment @sourcery-ai guide on the pull
  request to (re-)generate the reviewer's guide at any time.
• Resolve all Sourcery comments: Comment @sourcery-ai resolve on the
  pull request to resolve all Sourcery comments. Useful if you've already
  addressed all the comments and don't want to see them anymore.
• Dismiss all Sourcery reviews: Comment @sourcery-ai dismiss on the pull
  request to dismiss all existing Sourcery reviews. Especially useful if you
  want to start fresh with a new review - don't forget to comment
  @sourcery-ai review to trigger a new review!

Customizing Your Experience

Access your dashboard to:

• Enable or disable review features such as the Sourcery-generated pull request
  summary, the reviewer's guide, and others.
• Change the review language.
• Add, remove or edit custom review instructions.
• Adjust other review settings.

Getting Help

• Contact our support team for questions or feedback.
• Visit our documentation for detailed guides and information.
• Keep in touch with the Sourcery team by following us on X/Twitter, LinkedIn or GitHub.

[sourcery-ai]

Hey there - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!

Prompt for AI Agents

Please address the comments from this code review:

## Individual Comments

### Comment 1
<location> `wifite/model/handshake.py:75-79` </location>
<code_context>
    def has_handshake(self):
        if not self.bssid or not self.essid:
            self.divine_bssid_and_essid()

        #return len(self.tshark_handshakes()) > 0
        # Prefer strict validators. Do NOT accept aircrack alone as proof.
        # Tshark requires the full 4-way (strict) — keep it.
        if len(self.tshark_handshakes()) > 0:
            return True

        # cowpatty can be reliable for 2&3 captures
        if len(self.cowpatty_handshakes()) > 0:
            return True

        # Do NOT treat aircrack-only as valid (aircrack is informative but not definitive)
        return False

</code_context>

<issue_to_address>
**suggestion (code-quality):** We've found these issues:

- Lift code into else after jump in control flow ([`reintroduce-else`](https://docs.sourcery.ai/Reference/Default-Rules/refactorings/reintroduce-else/))
- Replace if statement with if expression ([`assign-if-exp`](https://docs.sourcery.ai/Reference/Default-Rules/refactorings/assign-if-exp/))
- Simplify boolean if expression ([`boolean-if-exp-identity`](https://docs.sourcery.ai/Reference/Default-Rules/refactorings/boolean-if-exp-identity/))
- Remove unnecessary casts to int, str, float or bool ([`remove-unnecessary-cast`](https://docs.sourcery.ai/Reference/Default-Rules/refactorings/remove-unnecessary-cast/))

```suggestion
        return len(self.cowpatty_handshakes()) > 0
```
</issue_to_address>

---

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨

• X
• Mastodon
• LinkedIn
• Facebook

_{Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.}