Wireless Internet

[Jeff Heiser]

Whether it is legal or not will only be decided in lengthy court cases where in the end the Supreme Court has the final say and will set everyone straight. However, it pays to be aware of some of the laws that could be pressed into service against you in this cyberspace gray area. Even if they don’t hold water, it could be very expensive to prove you had no intent or the law is flawed.

Ethically I have very little problem with it. If I put a telephone out on the sidewalk in front of my house, passers-by may infer that I intend for it to be a public phone. I might just be crazy but, it creates an "easement" or in other words not only does the public enjoy freedom from prosecution, in extreme cases you can be prevented from removing the public convenience that you have created.

Suppose I put a telephone on the sidewalk in front of my house, with a long wire into my home. Is that a public convenience? It is impossible for passers-by to know your intentions; therefore they use the "reasonable man" theory to infer whether it is a public convenience. Since nobody puts personal phones out on the sidewalk where any passer-by can use it, we infer that any such instance must be for the public convenience.

Whether you SHOULD use a "found" wireless hot spot is up to you but, if you do you better be using encryption/protecting your computer, in your hunt for free service you may stumble onto a "honey pot" whose sole purpose in life is to sniff YOUR communications and gather personal information found on your computer. Remember an access point goes both ways. If you connect to a non-secure (“Public”) access point what’s to say someone isn’t there just waiting for the unsuspecting.

I promise this is my last 2 cents on this topic. PROMISE!

God Bless America
Jeff Heiser
Merritt Island Florida

[Countryfolks]

Here are some terms and descriptions to help with the basics of WiFi for those new to the technology. Hope they help.

Skip

Terms

WiFi-- Wireless Fidelity, or, commonly, wireless networking.
Log-- activity record
LAN--Local Area Network
WLAN--Wireless Local Area Network
AP-- Access Point
Router-- An electronic device containing a 2.5 Ghz radio transmitter, receiver, antenna, a "chip" [computer processor] storage capabilities and software/firmware that manages traffic, security, logs, etc. A router used by consumers is commonly used as an AP. Most routers used in the home and many business are connected to a desktop computer by a cable. The router setup and connection to the internet is done via this cable. "Most routers are specialized computers optimized for communications; however, router functions can also be implemented by adding software to a server. Routers used to be called "gateways.""
SSID--Service Set Identifier, also referred to as a network name because essentially it is a name that identifies a wireless network. The ssid on a new router is generic and should be changed at setup. The SSID SHOULD NOT INCLUDE ANY PERSONAL INFORMAITON, ie. name, address, etc.
WEP--Wired Equivalent Privacy, a security protocol for wireless local area
networks (WLANs). Enabling WEP is better than no security at all.
WAP--Wireless Application Protocol, A more secure security protocol than WEP but should be paired with the AES encryption protocol.
MAC--Machine Address Code or Media Access Control layer. The protocol that controls access to the physical transmission medium on a LAN. MAC layer functionality is built into the network adapter and includes a unique serial number that identifies each card/adapter.
Secured-- WEP or WAP security protocol enabled. SSID changed. Access by specific MAC addresss can be specified as can the number of users. The passphrase used SHOULD NOT CONTAIN WORDS FOUND IN A DICTIONARY.
Unsecured--WEP or WAP security protocol not enabled. This can be the result of lack of education in securtiy, lazyness or a deliberate decision.
WIFI CLIENT/NETWORK ADAPTER-- the device in the laptop that connects to the AP. The security configuration and SSID of the AP and the client must be the same for the devices to communicate. This means the connection between an unsecured AP and your laptop is unsecured. The owner of the AP has the same access to your laptop as you do to their computer.
HONYPOT--An AP specifically setup to log unauthorized use. They cannot be distinguished from a standard AP.
PUBLIC ACCESS--Generally refers to a "hotspot", usually locations such as airports, coffee shops, and so on, They will usually display instructions when browser software opens on connection to their AP. It does not refer to an unsecured AP.
http://www.wififreespot.com/faqs.html
HACKER--
http://www.answers.com/hacker&r=67
HIJACKING--
http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery;...d=6&sbid=lc04a

[Montana_1424]

All excellent informaiton here for everyone, including me.
Most of the laws listed refer to unauthorized access to computers, not to a Wifi network, this is a way my corporate lawyer explained it to me, I actually called him today just becasue with all this discussion, I really wanted to know for sure, again. if the network is unsecured, it is fine HOWEVER, if you access a computer on that network, that is illegal, weather the netowkr is open or secured, or if you HACK or HIJACK a system on that netowkr, illegal. he want on to add that a secured netowrk implies no access, therefore if you HACK into it, illegal.
Hope this helps some.
Happy surfing

[richfaa]

I am sure we all learned a lot from these post.WIFI is new so there are a lot of grey areas and as Kozzy45 points out most of the laws refer to unauthorized entry into a Computer not a WIFI network..I am sure that as time goes on things will clear up. I have no more to say on the subject and am out of here..learned a lot..thanks all.

[padredw]

I refrained from comment earlier, but just today I received in email a column from John C. Dvorak that expresses what I believe to be the moral/legal situation. I will quote some of the most relavent portions of his article (which is also probably not exactly legal, anyway I will risk that also:

The problem I have with this activity is with the way it is described—as signal theft. I prefer to call it poaching. There is really nothing being stolen. The other user is paying a flat fee, and the worst that can happen is that his or her bandwidth takes a small hit for an inconsequential moment.
"It's like leaving the house unlocked," I'm told. "Just because there is no lock on the door doesn't mean you can walk in and take things." This is one of the dopey analogies you have to listen to. The analogy is bad. Walking into an unlocked home is not the same as hooking onto someone's Wi-Fi signal that is being broadcast all over the neighborhood. For one thing, no trespassing is being committed. The signal is being given to you. It's more like the unlocked house having a sign on the door saying "Welcome! Please enter!"
Let's drop the house analogy and find something better and more accurate. Here is what Wi-Fi spillage is like. Someone has a house and a big lawn and a sprinkler system that is watering the lawn and spraying the water into the street. You drive into the water spraying into the street and use it to wash your car. Are you stealing the water? It's not your water. Someone else paid for it and you are using it. Just like the Wi-Fi signal.

The way I see it, if someone is shoving a signal down my throat like that, I have every right to use it any way I want to as long, as I'm not doing anything illegal. It's crazy to think that my using that intrusive signal is illegal.

The quotation above is from the PC Magazine Web Page to which I am a subscriber, as well as a paid subscriber to the Mazazine itself. Here is the URL:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1842378,00.asp

[jrgwdenner]

Thanks for sharing that interesting article, padre. I'm sure the people who are charged with a criminal act had to be effecting the network's owner's computer in some way, not just using an open connection.