Wi-Fi Freeloader Arrested

said by Scilicet:

The arrests have led to plenty of confusion in the media and among law enforcement over what constitutes a crime.

It seems quite clear to me. Freeloading is theft, period.

said by knightmb:

I see wireless access the same way. Everyone knows that this little device allows *any* computer to connect to it and get Internet access. If you don't want that, then you secure it, even if it's just plain old 64 bit WEP, it's better than nothing. If someone breaks into it and then starts stealing bandwidth after you already put in the "no freeloaders sign" encryption on, then I can see it being a good reason to arrest someone for stealing.

said by djrobx:

There's a huge difference there: Intent. There's nothing nefarious about jumping onto a neighbor's wifi and surfing the web. It is highly unlikely that the neighbor who set up the unsecured access point would ever know it was happening.

said by Techman21:

Say I were to have a database that allowed employees to telnet into it, as long as they know the correct IP as it is not advertised on the net. Yet a guest account was left for those employees that forget their passwords. And a non employee was to access the database. That guest account is not saying come one come all and join in. If unauthorized access was still achieved by that non-employee I'm certain that a court would find a case in the favor of the company as its intention was not to allow others outside of the business access the site.

Granted that is somewhat of a poor example.

said by djrobx:


I equate using an open access point for light tasks as someone pulling into my driveway to do a 3 point turn-around real quick. Legally it's probably tresspassing,and it's something one probably shouldn't do, and is not real courteous, but no lasting harm is done so I just tolerate it. No harm no foul.

said by knightmb:

If you have a sign outside of your door that says "free money" and a huge pile of money next to it. Are you going to arrest everyone that comes up to grab some cash and yell "thief!".

I see wireless access the same way. Everyone knows that this little device allows *any* computer to connect to it and get Internet access. If you don't want that, then you secure it, even if it's just plain old 64 bit WEP, it's better than nothing. If someone breaks into it and then starts stealing bandwidth after you already put in the "no freeloaders sign" encryption on, then I can see it being a good reason to arrest someone for stealing.

Anything else is just media hype and people looking to get 15 seconds of fame as far as I'm concerned.

said by Skippy25:

And you getting in the car and driving it around is still illegal.

I can park the damn thing on your front porch with the keys in it and the motor running and you still can't legally enter it, nor can you legally take it for a joy ride.

said by Skippy25:

It is like that in most places to bhe best of my knowledge (don't even get me started on that law), but that is not the point. You still can't take that car for a joy ride just because it is there.

said by waldoooo:

using someone else's connection without permission is stealing whether or not its secure. If I park my car on the street and accidentally leave it unlocked, does that make it right for someone walking by to take my laptop on the seat? Signal theft is wrong, its taking something you are not paying for.....

said by Buchanon Nykad :

Here's a counter argument. If you forget to lock your front door, does that give permission for anyone to take whatever's inside? (Feel free to include your address)

said by fiberguy:

.... and let the usual banter of...

1) It's stealing
2) Secure it in the first place
3) It's there so I will take it
4) ... insert 1 of a thousand things we've all heard before.

Guys... come up with something new. This thread is already a bore with 9 messages.

said by marigolds:

Here's the question. You can receive those signals, but can you decode them? Think about military band GPS and satellite TV. Both signals are legal to receive but not legal to use without express permission.

said by BF69:

If people don't want their signal "stolen" then SECURE it. PERIOD. How lazy do you have to be to not do that?

As far as the library thing. Well it's a PUBLIC library paid with PUBLIC tax $$ so what difference does it make if someone is using the signal from inside or outside?

said by Scilicet:

The arrests have led to plenty of confusion in the media and among law enforcement over what constitutes a crime.

It seems quite clear to me. Freeloading is theft, period.

said by marigolds:

Wifi is always encrypted.

said by hopeflicker:

"but only because he was using an open hotspot to peruse child-porn".

That's why he was arrested.

said by Sean:

What happens then?

said by jap:

A bunch of righteous dingbats at BBR spout off about it with great conviction.

“Wi-Fi is a wonderful technology if used wisely,” said Jacknis. “Protecting your computer involves little to no cost. Setting up a Wi-Fi network with basic security takes just a few minutes and there are available free or low-cost personal firewalls to stop intruders from gaining access to your personal computer.”

The proposed law would address many of these risks. The way the law reads, all commercial businesses that use wireless networks and maintain personal information would be required to have “secure networks that protect the public from potential identity theft and other potential threats such as computer viruses and data corruption.” For example, a retail establishment that uses a wireless network to process credit card transactions would be required to install a firewall, one of the easiest and least expensive ways to guard a network from attack. They would have to file a note of compliance with the county.

Businesses that offer public Internet access would be required to post a sign stating that the network has been secured with firewall protection and stressing the need to use discretion.

As part of the proposed legislation, the County will provide ongoing public education outlining steps that residents should take to help protect themselves from the threat of identity theft through the use of computers and other electronic devices. This effort will track the latest technological advances in order to provide up-to-date and meaningful assistance to all county residents.

said by Middieman:

Secure your system. (Or don't complain.)

-=[Middie]=-

said by Middieman:

...and since you can't keep wifi inside your own home, it's no longer private if it's not secured.

It is NOT the same as leaving your car parked on the street and unlocked. It's more like people leaving cars of theirs all over the place, including other people's lawns and driveways.

Secure your system. (Or don't complain.)

-=[Middie]=-

said by HotRodFoto:

Hmmm so is picking up radio waves now considered theft as well? Give me a break...it is NOT theft. Not by a long shot. All these analogy's are awful. Picking up a wifi signal is no different than sitting outside a drive-in movie and picking up the sound on your radio. That isn't considered theft. And the analogy fits perfectly.

said by Jameson:

I really dont understand why that its a crime. If you do not want people connecting to your access point why not put WEP encryption on it? I mean thats what encryption is for isnt it? I mean, when i drive around and am looking for open access points i figure that the people did not put encryption on their device because they wanna share it. I just dont really understand how thats a crime.

said by GeekJedi:

Basically, I shoudn't HAVE to do anything to prevent people from accessing my network. Unless I state to you that it's OK, you should not connect.

I shouldn't have to leave notes on everything I own saying "don't take me" just because those things are easily accessable.

Really, the rule should be that unless the AP's name is "FREE WIFI" or "FREE ACCESS" or something explicit like that, you should stay off.