Winerin
Premium
join:2002-03-30
Woodland Hills, CA
 ·Pacific Bell - SBC
1 edit | reply to jc100
Re: That's a good thing
Yes, I think the government should "step in and take over" law enforcement--which does not make sense since government is in charge of enforcing the law. If I failed to lock my car (and that does not make me stupid, mind you) and someone steals something inside and gets caught, I would hope they get prosecuted. Yes, it would be nice if people would could be educated on wireless security, and computing security as a whole, but that does not mean they shouldn't be allowed to use computers nor ignored when theft occurs. |
|
joako
Premium
join:2000-09-07
/dev/null
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| said by Winerin  :Yes, I think the government should "step in and take over" law enforcement--which does not make sense since government is in charge of enforcing the law. If I failed to lock my car (and that does not make me stupid, mind you) and someone steals something inside and gets caught, I would hope they get prosecuted. Yes, it would be nice if people would could be educated on wireless security, and computing security as a whole, but that does not mean they shouldn't be allowed to use computers nor ignored when theft occurs. Theft is illegal. Of course they are going to prosecute (if they catch) someone that breaks into your car... locked or unlocked.
But I don't think using an unsecured wifi network is a crime. Look at the low level processes that take place:
1) Your computer sends its MAC address and other details to the router
2) The router grants or allows access to the network based on the provided information.
3) Now on the network the PC provides identifying information such as MAC address and hostname and requests a DHCP lease
4) The router either responds with a DHCP lease or it denies the request based on its configuration.
Sorry, I don't think ignorance is an excuse. If I let someone into my house and offer them a glass of soda I can't turn around later and say they broke into my house and stole a glass of soda.... same goes for the wireless. Ignorance is no excuse... use even WAP or MAC address filtering and then I'll be sympathetic to the computer-n00bs... read the manual the info about encryption is right there!
--
09:F9:11:02:9D:74:E3:5B:D8:41:56:C5:63:56:88:C0 |
|
JoeOnSunset
Doublethink Is Doubleplus Ungood.
Premium
join:2002-11-25
Ormond Beach, FL
| This is totally stupid. The fact is, unauthorized access to a computer network is already a crime in most jurisdictions. The only issue is, it's hard to prove a wi-fi freeloader is "unauthorized," since an open network is, by definition, OPEN.
To anyone who thinks that setting up a WiFi network configured as open is analogous to leaving your car unlocked: you're wrong. Analogies like these do not work in the world of networks. (Also, the internet is not a series of pipes, okay.)
A network is a RESOURCE, not a physical object like your car or your house. And it has a SYSTEM TO ADVERTISE ITSELF that STATES WHETHER it is OPEN ACCESS, or CLOSED.
Just because you're ignorant of that, and that hardware manufacturerers aren't responsible enough to educate you, doesn't mean legislation is warranted--unless perhaps it's legislation mandating that WiFi routers come with a big red notice. |
|
Winerin
Premium
join:2002-03-30
Woodland Hills, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
1 edit | It is true, it is hard to prove unauthorized access. That is another issue and not what I was debating. I'm pretty sure that there are some out there that could care less on who uses their wireless access. Casual access (intentional or not) really shouldn't be a crime in itself, I do agree that much.
in regards to what is considered theft, however, most "unlimited" services are capped. If someone downloaded a bunch of stuff that caused you to get frozen, then in a sense something was stolen (bandwidth).
That would be an extreme case as it probably would take a lot of data to cause an account closure. However, something does not have to be tangible to considered stealable.
I am all for more education on computer security. But someday it may come down to forced encryption and security (i.e. registering your hardware MAC to your provider) if you want to or not. If it comes that far, then we place even more power to the government since we couldn't find a more independent solution. |
|
TamaraB
Question The Current Paradigm
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Brooklyn NYC
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to JoeOnSunset
said by JoeOnSunset : ... Just because you're ignorant of that, and that hardware manufacturerers aren't responsible enough to educate you, doesn't mean legislation is warranted--unless perhaps it's legislation mandating that WiFi routers come with a big red notice. Here is the crux of the entire thread. When my neighbor bought his first laptop (an HP with XP), he turned it on, and after putting in all his info, and answering yes to everything (this guy never owned a computer before), he was presented with a pretty desktop Connected to my OPEN wireless network. He came running over shouting "I have Internet", I got updates! how do I use email??
OK? WindoZ, in league with the wifi card manufacture made his laptop find and connect to the net automagically.
Like putting "do not take with alcohol" printed in red on some medications, it is the responsibility of the manufacture to put a warning on their hardware/software stating that if you don't do X and Y, you will be sharing your connection with anyone who wants to use it. This entire issue boils down to the industry catering to the lowest common denominator, to the dumbest of the dumb.
If I sold a car which came with a hard to remove sign saying "drive for free", and I made the doors hard to lock, and the keys hard to remove, whose fault is it if the car is used by a neighbor? The owner? Or the manufacture. You answer.
Apply this same normal life-logic to the issues of botnets, trojans, and viruses. Who is at fault? The same money-grabbing corporations, who sacrifice security for profit.
Bob
--
Motor Vessel - Tamara B.
43' Long-Range Trawler
Cape Elizebeth ME.
See her Here. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to joako
said by joako :Theft is illegal. Of course they are going to prosecute (if they catch) someone that breaks into your car... locked or unlocked. But I don't think using an unsecured wifi network is a crime. But it IS a crime whether you think so or not. Some people think smoking pot shouldn't be a crime. It is. If a law is on the books then it's a crime whether you agree it should be or not. If you don't think it should be a crime then you need to petition you state government to change the law.
So if I think stealing a rich persons wallet shoudn't be a crime, since they have so much money, then I guess it's ok to do since if I think it's not a crime it's not a crime. |
|
joako
Premium
join:2000-09-07
/dev/null
·AT&T U-Verse
| said by BF69 :said by joako :Theft is illegal. Of course they are going to prosecute (if they catch) someone that breaks into your car... locked or unlocked. But I don't think using an unsecured wifi network is a crime. But it IS a crime whether you think so or not. Some people think smoking pot shouldn't be a crime. It is. If a law is on the books then it's a crime whether you agree it should be or not. If you don't think it should be a crime then you need to petition you state government to change the law. So if I think stealing a rich persons wallet shoudn't be a crime, since they have so much money, then I guess it's ok to do since if I think it's not a crime it's not a crime. Where is it a crime? Under what law?
--
09:F9:11:02:9D:74:E3:5B:D8:41:56:C5:63:56:88:C0 |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by joako :Where is it a crime? Under what law? Under the bill being proposed, idiot. |
|
joako
Premium
join:2000-09-07
/dev/null
·AT&T U-Verse
| said by BF69 :said by joako :Where is it a crime? Under what law? Under the bill being proposed, idiot. So its not a crime, only a proposed crime!
--
09:F9:11:02:9D:74:E3:5B:D8:41:56:C5:63:56:88:C0 |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by joako :said by BF69 :said by joako :Where is it a crime? Under what law? Under the bill being proposed, idiot. So its not a crime, only a proposed crime! Um that's kind of the way things work. At one time a man could leglaly rape his wife. It wasn't a crime. Now he can't, because it is NOW a crime. |
|
irsean
join:2001-05-10
Redlands, CA
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to joako
said by joako :said by Winerin :Yes, I think the government should "step in and take over" law enforcement--which does not make sense since government is in charge of enforcing the law. If I failed to lock my car (and that does not make me stupid, mind you) and someone steals something inside and gets caught, I would hope they get prosecuted. Yes, it would be nice if people would could be educated on wireless security, and computing security as a whole, but that does not mean they shouldn't be allowed to use computers nor ignored when theft occurs. JUMPIN' JESUS on a Pogostick!!!
Unauthorised use of WiFi is nothing like stealing a car. It's more like looking at a person getting undressed when they're too stupid to close the curtains.
Speaking of theft...isn't your sig a violation of law, theft, in fact?
--
Message of the Day
There is no message of the day |
|
jc100
join:2002-04-10
| reply to Winerin
If you failed to lock your car, and left it running, you would also be liable. Why? Well the cops couldn't criminally charge you, but your insurance could hold you as negligent. I mean, you gave a thief the right situation to steal. Sure you didn't intend for it to happen, but you set it up for it to. Therefore, the thief would face criminal charges and you'd probably get stuck buying yourself a new car. See, that's what happens when stupid choices are made. People should not setup wifi if they don't know how to properly secure it. The same with driving. If you're too damn lazy to lock your doors or take out the keys, then don't drive. It's all part of being an adult where choices and responsibility are key. If you aren't able to make them, then the other choice is DON'T said items. Simple. The government doesn't need to waste its money or manpower telling or enforcing what one should already know. |
|
jc100
join:2002-04-10
| reply to Winerin
Wine,
You totally have missed the boat.
1) One theft of a car would be very similar to theft of wifi. The person leaving themselves open is negligent. As I stated above, if you leave your car running with the doors unlocked, you ARE RESPONSIBLE if it gets stolen. Sure the police will not press charges against you (though they could if say a child got into it and harmed people). Most likely, your insurance company would refuse to pay any claim due to the overall ignorance that went behind leaving your car running with the doors open. Similar to wifi, if you leave it open and people use it, it's your own damn fault. Learn the technology or the item in use, before enacting it. That's part of being an adult. The government HAS NO RIGHT to step in and enforce that fact. You pay for the internet, the equipment, etc, it's your responsibility to set it all up properly. Not doing so leaves you open to whatever headaches might arise from such negligence.
2) Unlimited is UNLIMITED. ISPS that advertised this have gotten in a LOT OF TROUBLE or changed their marketing. You do not promise customers something you cannot adhere to. Therefore, there is no stealing when one is promised the world and then some. |
|
nitzan
Premium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
 ·ViaTalk
 ·Comcast
| reply to BF69
said by BF69 :Um that's kind of the way things work. At one time a man could leglaly rape his wife. It wasn't a crime. Now he can't, because it is NOW a crime. Oh, I think I get it now!!
What you're trying to say is, Stealing WiFi is the same as stealing someone's car, and then raping their wife, right??
You get extra points for calling people names, idiot.
jeez. hopping on an OPEN network should NOT be a crime. I'm sure each and everyone of us here on the forums has done it at least once in their life.
What, you want YOUR taxes wasted on some poor schmoe going to jail because they used their neighbor's open network a couple of times to read their email during an internet outage? |
|
