AmeritecTech
Change we can believe in, 1922
Premium
join:2002-09-06
Houston, TX
| reply to Skippy25
Re: The owner of the "Unsecured" WiFi should be arrested
said by Skippy25  :So find someone on that list that lives by you offering free wifi for your cheap freeloading ass. If you can't find someone, then go ask your neighbors if you can connect to their wireless. I don't freeload.
--
"Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone Not agreeing with them. It's The non-thinkers that ALWAYS come in legions."
-John Callari |
|
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO | reply to Mudpie2
said by Mudpie2 :
Exactly,
I do not endorse rouge behaviour, but I do not want to be placed in that position unfairly either. LOL. |
|
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO | reply to AmeritecTech
So find someone on that list that lives by you offering free wifi for your cheap freeloading ass. If you can't find someone, then go ask your neighbors if you can connect to their wireless. |
|
Mudpie2
@disa.mil
| reply to AmeritecTech
Exactly,
I leave my WIFI network wide open for the simple reason that if someone is using my network (roommate, family member, friend, etc) illegally, "unbeknownst to me", I can not be help liable for the "possibility" that someone accessed my network remotely.
Remember the RIAA case where the RIAA could not prove that the owner of the computer was in fact the person downloading songs because the WIFI network was unsecure and the "accused" DHCP IP address was the wireless router and not the private network IP address/computer name behind the router.
I do not endorse rouge behaviour, but I do not want to be placed in that position unfairly either.
Also, I am not a lawyer nor computer specialist, so I will not "assume" what is or is not legal versus ethical. |
|
AmeritecTech
Change we can believe in, 1922
Premium
join:2002-09-06
Houston, TX
| reply to Skippy25
said by Skippy25 :Regardless of any technological argument you try to make, you don't know if you are suppose to be using it, you can safely conclude in probably 99% of all cases (especially from your home) that they don't want you to use it, so until you receive permission by the OWNER to do so you should stay the hell off of it. How you can connect to it and why doesn’t matter. You can blame them for not protecting it. You can blame the router for penetrating your walls. You can blame science for giving us the technology. And you can blame God for giving us the intelligence. But the bottom line is, you can safely conclude in virtually every single case they don't want you there so it is on you to seek permission to be there. Except that I don't agree with your premise. Many people are happy to offer free access as evidenced by all the listings on nodedb.org.
--
"Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone Not agreeing with them. It's The non-thinkers that ALWAYS come in legions."
-John Callari |
|
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| reply to AmeritecTech
Regardless of any technological argument you try to make, you don't know if you are suppose to be using it, you can safely conclude in probably 99% of all cases (especially from your home) that they don't want you to use it, so until you receive permission by the OWNER to do so you should stay the hell off of it.
How you can connect to it and why doesn’t matter. You can blame them for not protecting it. You can blame the router for penetrating your walls. You can blame science for giving us the technology. And you can blame God for giving us the intelligence. But the bottom line is, you can safely conclude in virtually every single case they don't want you there so it is on you to seek permission to be there. |
|
chris231989
join:2006-02-12
Joplin, MO
clubs: | reply to Skippy25
so what about the other ignorant people that don't know how to stop there laptops from conencting to open ap's. should they be arested also?? |
|
Necronomikro
join:2005-09-01 | reply to AmeritecTech
I mean for a random joe to connect, it needs to broadcast the SSID. I'm aware that you can have it not broadcast and enter that information manually. |
|
roady1
join:2003-11-13
Cleveland, OH | reply to greendragon
Yep...
That's what I said  |
|
greendragon
Premium
join:2003-09-20
Stewartville, MN
| reply to Skippy25
Re: The owner of the "Unsecured" WiFi should be arrested
And I would say that if a person wants to use technology then they should either know how to set it up or hire someone that knows.
The fact that a SSID is being broadcast is not the problem. If you do not password protect it then it is open for anyone to use.
If my neighbor is transmitting the signal into my house and the router is allowing me to get an IP address then I should be able to. However when I ask for permission and it says no, then I cannot. If the neighbor is breaking his ISPs TOS by sharing his connection then he should be responsible for the consequences.
--
Folding for our future!! |
|
AmeritecTech
Change we can believe in, 1922
Premium
join:2002-09-06
Houston, TX
| reply to Necronomikro
said by Necronomikro :And before the nic could ask for an ip, it had to be told by the router that the router was there. What's your point? Not true, the SSID can be entered manually. SSID is broadcast for the purpose of people who do not know what the SSID is, or for convenience.
Requesting an IP is a roughly equivalent transaction to asking for entry into someone's house. As long as you represent yourself appropriately, ("My name is Bob and I sell vacuums" / "I am a computer using a wireless card with MAC ID xxxxxxxxx") granted access was not obtained fraudulently.
--
"Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone Not agreeing with them. It's The non-thinkers that ALWAYS come in legions."
-John Callari |
|
Necronomikro
join:2005-09-01 | reply to Skippy25
And before the nic could ask for an ip, it had to be told by the router that the router was there. What's your point? |
|
AmeritecTech
Change we can believe in, 1922
Premium
join:2002-09-06
Houston, TX
| reply to Skippy25
said by Skippy25 :Wrong, your NIC was shooting HEY CAN I HAVE AN IP. At least learn the basics for what your DA is going to argue. I know, your next response is going to be that the router say yeah you can have an IP so all is good as permission was granted. I would say your fraudently accepted that IP and should be arrested for it. In what way did I commit fraud? I didn't spoof a MAC to pretend that I am an authorized computer and I didn't guess or brute any passwords. And why do you need to call me a dumb ass to discuss this with me?
--
"Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone Not agreeing with them. It's The non-thinkers that ALWAYS come in legions."
-John Callari |
|
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| reply to AmeritecTech
Wrong, your NIC was shooting HEY CAN I HAVE AN IP. At least learn the basics for what your DA is going to argue.
I know, your next response is going to be that the router say yeah you can have an IP so all is good as permission was granted. I would say your fraudently accepted that IP and should be arrested for it. |
|
AmeritecTech
Change we can believe in, 1922
Premium
join:2002-09-06
Houston, TX
| reply to Skippy25
said by Skippy25 :Regardless, it is not free nor does the owner need to make it clear that it is not free as that should be a given. You have it ass backwards. Instead of assuming everything is free for the taking by default just because it is there and you can access it, why don't you assume you need permission to take it first. The burden is on you, not the owner. It is people like you that think anything you are not specifically told to leave alone you can mess with that cause a vast majority of the problems in every society. It isn't yours, you know it isn't yours, so STFU and move on to one that you know is being offered publicly. I'm puzzled why you'd choose to respond to that particular post, but whatever.
A router that is shouting at my wireless card "HEY BUDDY, HAVE AN IP!" is not even trying to keep me out, indeed, it is inviting me.
--
"Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone Not agreeing with them. It's The non-thinkers that ALWAYS come in legions."
-John Callari |
|
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| reply to AmeritecTech
Regardless, it is not free nor does the owner need to make it clear that it is not free as that should be a given. You have it ass backwards. Instead of assuming everything is free for the taking by default just because it is there and you can access it, why don't you assume you need permission to take it first. The burden is on you, not the owner.
It is people like you that think anything you are not specifically told to leave alone you can mess with that cause a vast majority of the problems in every society.
It isn't yours, you know it isn't yours, so STFU and move on to one that you know is being offered publicly. |
|
ROCINANTE 2112
Original Member 007
join:1999-06-29
Hartsdale, NY
clubs:
| reply to AmeritecTech
..and here is another one. The terrorist activity itself is obviously the point of contention. Is there actually a law that states that if someone grabs your signal to conduct terrorist activities, then you are partially liable? How does ignorance of the law apply here? If there isn't a law, then this would be a civil case. Perhaps in the court of public opinion someone would be considered liable, but where is the intent? What would "reasonable" people do? Is there negligence involved? What is the cause and effect? Do reasonable people purchase routers to allow others to conduct illegal activities? Of course not, and it does not matter if they are secured or not.
--
CRUNCH THIS! |
|
AmeritecTech
Change we can believe in, 1922
Premium
join:2002-09-06
Houston, TX
| reply to ROCINANTE 2112
said by ROCINANTE 2112 :Wow, logical fallacies and invalid analogies are making a comeback in this thread. Why is the attitude of "innocent people deserve bad things to happen to them when they make mistakes" so pervasive on this board? Ignorance of the law and of technology is no excuse. If terrorist activity or other criminal activity takes place from an unsecured wireless connection, it may indeed be appropriate to make them partially liable for anything that takes place.
--
"Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone Not agreeing with them. It's The non-thinkers that ALWAYS come in legions."
-John Callari |
|
