Just found this funny (wireless connections)

[Wayne Foy]

Since my network was hacked a little bit ago, I can tell you, it is NOT fun. Needless to say, I am on WEP security, and MAC address locks, so only those I put into the router are allowed to access the connection.

And besides, I live in Georgia, and in the country. I see you camping on my front yard with a laptop, myself and the 19" 12 gauge are going to meander out to have a chat with you :angry:

 

[Thomas Rogers]

RichardL, I updated my original post after doing some reading.



I too thought the guy in Florida had is case overturned, but I can't find evidence of that...until I read otherwise I think the charges still stand.



Read the Wikipedia link I gave. It seems many if not most states are siding with the argument that unless the owner has given expressed consent then the person connecting is guilty of "gaining unauthorized access to a computer network".



Your Starbucks examples, et al, are different in that the establishments like that are CLEARLY and UNDENIABLY providing the network for use by others. It is questionable whether or not Starbucks could make a claim that it is only made available for patrons, and not those out wardriving.



We have talked about this topic before in a different thread, and I have debated both sides in various venues. Though I understand the argument that an open network is like an unsolicited radio signal, I don't agree with it. People driving by my house can SEE my front door open if one of the kids left it open...but that doesn't give them the right to walk in and snope around...that would be tresspassing. I think that is a more accurate analogy than receiving a radio signal.



TJR

 

[TomT]

My daughter just moved into her second rental (duplex) house within the last year. Has had full internet both places thanks to her neighbors. Me, I see nothing wrong with it but then I don't have a problem with downloading free music or movies either. I think if you have the tech knowledge to do stuff like that (90% of computer users don't) then take advantage of it.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

TomT says:

Me, I see nothing wrong with it but then I don't have a problem with downloading free music or movies either. I think if you have the tech knowledge to do stuff like that (90% of computer users don't) then take advantage of it.

There are electric lock pickers and other electronic devices used by many "hi-tech" crooks that have the tech knowledge and take advantage of it.



Why is it that so many people are so easy to rationalize away and to not see the moral issues with taking stuff that isn't theirs and that hasn't been offered to them simply because our technology has made it easy and/or anonymous?



TJR

 

[TomT]

For the same reason that the music industry and other big business has been ripping you off for years.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

TomT says:

For the same reason that the music industry and other big business has been ripping you off for years.

You do realize that's a rationalization, right?



I will explain...



Any supplier of a good or service presents a value proposition to its customers. That value proposition is an exchange for goods or services for a stated price. The customer agrees that they recognize the value of the good or service to be equal to or greater than the amount being charged the VERY MOMENT they purchase the item.



So, you, I, and everyone else whoever bought music (CDs, lps, etc.) paid a price and entered into a value proposition. We by our actions agreed the price was fair.



If LATER we hear that the suppliers "overcharged" us, or that the musicians received "very little" of the sales price, well, those factors are moot (they just don't apply). Trying to make ourselves out as a victim and the seller the bad-guy after the fact is ludicrous.



Many think big oil companies are ripping us off today...does that make it okay for us to steal gas?



I have seen that many like to knock "big business", until they become a business owner, or start on their dreams of becoming a business owner, then the recognize that their old viewpoints were a little myopic.



TJR

 

[Richard L]

My point is that it would be very difficult to prove that someone is accessing your network if you have an unsecured network simply based on the fact that someone is sitting nearby in a car using a laptop computer.



The fact that the FCC law allows you to receive any radio signals that fall upon you means that they can receive your network. Proving that an unsecure network is not available for public use may be difficult and might be accessed unknowingly. That's why Sattelite TV uses scrambled signals. If you build or purchase a bootleg descrambler, then you are intentionally attempting to access and descramble their information.



In my case, I have a WEP secured network but was experiencing a low quality signal and though that my router or my Wireless NIC card were going bad. I think it was kefguy here, that suggested that I look at what network I was connecting to and sure enough one of my neighbors had installed an unsegured wireless network and I had been using thier newtowrk for 2-3 months or more. I don't feel I broke any laws and I doubt that I would have been convicted of a crime. I'm sure there are many people who are not aware that you can have a secure network, but if you don't set the priority of your network connections, you can accidentally be connecting to someone's unsecured network and think you are connecting to your own network.



..Rich

 

[Thomas Rogers]

I agree with EVERYTHING you say, RichardL.



I feel that there is nothing wrong with receiving the SSID, and your PC automatically attaching to an open wireless network as you drive by.



However, there IS something wrong if you then:



- poke around on that network looking for open file shares



- use that connection to get the Internet



It's that later part that has the guy parked at the curb using a the homeowner's private computer network without their consent.



In your example you didn't willfully and knowingly connect to your neighbors network. It's those willful, knowing actions that trespass on the neighbors computer network WITHOUT their consent that is the broken part of the law.



For example, if LOST while driving in your car and you pull down what looks like an unmarked street, but it's actually a driveway on public property, and it is NOT marked with "No Trespassing", or "Private Property", signs, etc. do you think you COULD get charged with trespassing? Do you think you SHOULD? Compare and contrast that example with deciding to park your car in someone's driveway overnight, and that it is CLEAR that it's someone's driveway....is that okay? Could and should you get towed and fined?



Your example about the illegal descrambler box (cheater box)...again, that's willful. If, however, your cable company goofs up and accidentally sets up your box to get a service you aren't supposed to get, is that willful on your part? Nope. Let's say you then WATCH that service for two or three months...is that willful...probably NOT, legally, but is it wrong (you betcha...no different than POCKETING the money without saying anything when a cashier gives you back too much change).



C'mon folks, everything you need to know about doing what's right your mom and kindergarten teacher tried to teach you when you were 5. Didya all forget?



TJR

 

[TomT]

Many think big oil companies are ripping us off today...does that make it okay for us to steal gas?

Lets just say if I went to an Exxon station today and filled up and it only registered 12 gallons even though I knew I had gotten 15 gallons, I would probably not say anything.

My hatred for the music industry goes much deeper than just general rationalization though. But that's a long story that I won't get into. I don't just rationalize. There are some very dishonest people running big companies out there that could give a rats ass about the employee/consumer. For those companies I'm not going to worry about my little insignificant ripoffs.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

I understand and sympathize with everything you say, TomT. You feel that your bad behavior is justified because it is directed towards those that you feel are behaving worse.



Like I said before, most things we need to know about behaving correctly we learned when we were 5....that was about the time I heard the old saying: "Two wrongs don't make a right!"



TJR

 

[TomT]

We just have different views of morals TJR. It's like some people, including myself believe in an "eye for an eye" while others believe retaliation solves nothing. I respect yours and I am not saying I'm right, it's just the way I am, and I doubt if I will ever change. At least I have a clear conscious (as long as I can justrify it).

 

[Fred]

Maybe if enough people do it, it won't matter anymore if it's illegal. Sorry. :lol:

 

[Dale Carlson]

Just a thought, but what do any of you KNOW (not think - KNOW), if the FCC in any way defines the use of open, non-secured radio frequencies for the the purpose of TRANSMITTING, vice receiving.



This raises my curiosity because while receiving is one thing, transmitting, to me is quite another. See, you can't maintain ANY type of network, wired or wireless, without also transmitting data. So, the second that our theoretical wardriver clicks on a web browser, or an email client, or a P2P application, his intent is to transmit AND receive on that open, non-secured network (networking purists will note that two-way communication has already taken place between the laptop and the access point, but this handshaking process is, in most modern operating systems, usually automatic. What I'm alluding to is "intent").



Just wondering - curious mind(s) want to know. I also wonder if the prosecutors in Florida had thought about that.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

I respect you TomT for not feeling guilty about what you do.



I find it interesting that many people that illegally download, or in this case use a neighbor's wireless network without their permission, do so and rationalize the behavior, rather than just simply say: "Yup, it's not a nice thing to do, but I do it anyway because I think I can get away with it!"



I say that because that, IMHO, is the reality of the issue, and everything else is a rationalization and a justification.



I am NOT saying you are doing that, just sharing my POV and basis for opinion, the same way you did with me, TomT.





Oh, and kefguy, you are right. There is nothing wrong with receiving the SSID and even automatically connecting, IMHO, but then "KNOWINGLY" using the network resources to send and receive (email, internet, IM, etc.), is again, IMHO, willful trespass and theft of service.



TJR

 

[TomT]

LOL. It's weird because I really do have a major quilt complex. I shoplifted once when I was about 14 and I've never forgoten it or forgiven myself. I can't take a pen home from work without thinking about it relentlessly until I bring it back. Yet I have absolutely no problem with downloading illegal music or software. Guess I need a shrink. :wacko:

 

[Richard L]

TJR and kefguy.

You both make very good points about "Intent". The confusion is that many people who are not familiar with many details of computer networking can purchase a laptop PC with a wireless network card built in and assume that the wireless network signals are like TV or Radio broadcast, or similar to Cell phone networks.



I have been involved in IT technology for about 38 years through all the changing technology and I was not aware that my computer could automatically switch to my neighbor's unsecure network instead of using my properly configured WEP secured network. What is someone who has little or no IT experienc or exposure supposed to do. ????



I personally feel that all wireless routers should by default be configured to implement a minimum WEP security key and that the end user has the option to reconfigure to an open unsecured network only after explaining the potential security risks.



...Rich

 

[Dale Carlson]

Rich,



Probably couldn't agree more that the default security settings should be enabled, but don't count on it. All of the manufacturer's are well aware that this is the same generation that couldn't figure out how to program the clock on a VCR. I was just reading today that a large electronics store reduced the returns on wireless equipment to zero after the store started installing the systems for free.



BTW, WEP is soooooo 2003. Like I said before, WPA/WPA2 is the current standard for wireless encryption.



Oh yeah, Windows XP does give a warning if you are connecting to an unsecure network, and asks you if you still want to connect to it. Unfortunately, like most notices, most users click right through without giving them a second thought.