site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Uniqs:
1601
Share Topic
Post a:
Post a:
page: 1 · 2
AuthorAll Replies

Unreasonable

join:2007-10-15
Portland, OR

reply to joako

Re: Security Security Security

said by joako See ProfileThere you are stepping the boundary. The AP is asking for a password. You know it's not an AP you own or you were contracted to work on. Just because it's the default password means nothing. Your brute force attempts are no different than if the password had been changed by the owner.

Wachovia leaves the default combination on their safe.. is it ok to open it up?
[/BQUOTE :


Which answer you want?

The one where I split legal hairs, or the common sense one?

It's unclear what you mean by 'ok.'

Is it legal?

Technically, no.

Would I ever be convicted of anything?

Highly unlikely. No attempt at penetrating past the gateway is made.

And of course I'm protected by practicality.
There isn't any evidence other than my own admission.
I'm not hacking anything.
These aren't secure systems monitored by professionals.
No one is going to complain.
If they wanted to, they wouldn't have any logs to back them up, and if they did - what are they going to do - scan the state for my mac address?

I can just visualize Homeland Security coming after me for unauthorized securing of access points.
Oh, wait - I can't.

I don't really care if it's ok anyway - it relieves my boredom and that's what really matters in the larger scheme of things.

openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2

reply to TamaraB
I agree.



bent
and Inga
Premium
join:2004-10-04
Loveland, CO
Reviews:
·Comcast

reply to Unreasonable
I use their invariably open print shares to advertise my computer consulting business. The ultimate spam.

"If we got into your network this easy, so could the bad guys.
Call 555-1212 for your free security analysis."

J/k, but I have printed funny messages on open printers on unsecured wireless networks.
--
»www.lp.org/issues/family-budget.shtml

"That government is best which governs least" - Thoreau



dglenn

@BELIEVEWIRELESS.NET

reply to BF69

Proportionate Punishments

To put things in perspective: just over a year ago here in Baltimore, a drunk idiot without a driver's license swiped the keys to his girlfriend's mother's car, totalled that car and two parked cars on my block (one of them mine, as a result of which, since I'm poor, I had to go without a car for a [expletive]ing year before I was able to get another one) and damaged two more cars on my block to a lesser degree ... after which he shot holes in the stolen car with an illegally-owned handgun to try to convince people he'd been carjacked and wasn't the one driving he wrecked it.

He got the maximum sentence possible for the charges that were filed against him. A whole whopping sixty days. I don't know how much of that he served, whether good-behaviour bonuses kick in on such a short sentence or not, etc.

Sixty days for depriving three people of their transportation and causing additional monetary harm to two more while being an actual danger to anyone else on the road that night...

...versus what, three years for piggybacking on somebody else's signal for a spell?

I can see both sides of the "should it even be a crime or not" debate (I do have an opinion, but I can see the sense in both viewpoints), but in any case the punishment proposed is way out of line with other penalties for more serious crimes. Something is seriously out of whack here.

Wednesday, 30-May 22:44:22 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics