Slashdot Mirror
FBI Warns Companies About Wireless Warchalking
nobilid writes: "Well-meaning wireless activists have caught the attention of the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation. One of its agents has issued a warning about the popular practice of using chalk marks to show the location of wireless networks."
I'd listen to the FBI dude. After all, when it comes to telecommunications law, they are hard core! Look what happened to worldcom!.. oh wait, they are still in business despite losing 7 billion bucks.... Well... look at qwest!... oh.. no.. wait... they are too....
Maybe it would make more sense to build a centralized website where people can update this information and the system would correllate it with a real time map that a user could print out if they wanted. Traveling to Houston for the week? Print out a map of the wireless areas and take it with you. Seems much easier than anything else and no legal problems.
What about encription, surely that would be enough!!
Well unless you live in London!
Hey, great way to distort the truth and make "wireless activists" sound important! From the headline you would think "wireless activists" had themselves drawn the scrutiny of the FBI.
But all they said was that if you notice a chalk mark advertising your wireless network you should think about securing it. Well duh!
And "wireless activists"? More like geeks with toys. I wonder how long the novelty lasts for the average "activist". It's a network. But without wires! WOW!
The FBI is not saying that setting up free wireless networks is a bad thing. They're warning companies that run WLANs to check for warchalking around their buildings and check their LANs for security. This is what they should be doing, but considering how many idiot admins there are out there, they need the FBI to give them security advice.
Typical.
At least the FBI are warning the companies and not arresting the warchalkers.
to install M$ patches for well known exploits, what are the chances that they'll take the additional effort to lockdown their wireless networks, then modify all their client PC's?
They will only do this after they've been 0wN3d. As per usual.
Wow, reading the header I though that the FBI is going after people who create the warchalk marks. But, if you RTA it's a lot less interesting. Basically, the FBI is saying that companies should be clued in if they get a warchalk marking an open WLAN next to their office. Duh. Dunno why I need the FBI to tell me that.
and i just they were just innocent kids doddling on the sidewalk
Jesus saves souls and redeems them for valuable cash prizes
Has anyone actually come across any examples of warchalking in real life? (it doesn't count if you did it yourself, or if you found out about it from a news article and went to go see it).
I walk and bike around DC more or less constantly and I've never seen one despite keeping my eyes peeled. And I know there's no shortage of WLAN networks here (netstumbled the 20-minute walk home from work and got about 40).
"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
link to the actual Pittshburgh FBI email
better read than the linked article which is kinda light on detail. interesting to note that the FBI states in it that using a 802.11 access point without "explicit authorization" may be a federal crime
Someone disguised as a kid made a hop-scotch pattern next my driveway with chalk. They are out to get me. My foil hat is not working anymore! Help!
Table-ized A.I.
In related news, this same FBI agent has filed another warning. This time, the warning talks about the dangers of writing down your passwords on post-it notes, and leaving ot near your computer.
Oh, what a crazy new world we live in.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Thank god that an FBI member told us this info. I would've never checked to make sure my wlan was secure if it weren't for them advising me to do so. I was always under the assumption that my network was suppose to be insecure. Phew, excuse me while I drown in a pool of my own sarcasm.
Only the meek get pinched. The bold survive.
Wouldn't it just be cheaper for companies just to hire one designated employee to sit around reading Slashdot, The Register and similar websites all day? Since my company is essentially already paying me for this service, they might as well just make it part of my job description...
Stop using chalk! Start using... spray paint! They'll never find out we switched methods. They'll just assume it's kids doing graffiti!
"The FBI is now telling companies that, if they see the chalk marks outside their offices, they should check the security of wireless networks and ensure they remain closed to outsiders. "
Hey, how about you do this even if you DONT see chalk marks?
Don't Tread on Me
They're not all busy hunting down terrorists? Damn, Ashcroft had me fooled all along. I thought that was the FBI's expertise, particularly preventing actions like 9/11 from happening.
is making up these damn terms!
Warchalking PDF
A handy businesscard sized description of the marks and thier uses...
Well-meaning wireless activists have caught the attention of the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation. One of its agents has issued a warning about the popular practice of using chalk marks to show the location of wireless networks."
And in other news...
Careless FBI agents have caught the attention of well-meaning wireless activsts. One of its members has issued a warning about the frequent practice of losing laptop computers, not to mention weapons. As reported by CNN on July 19, 2001, "The FBI reported Tuesday it had tentatively determined that more than 400 firearms and another 184 laptop computers -- including one that contained classified information -- are unaccounted for."
> One of its agents has issued a warning about the popular practice of using chalk marks
Warn? WARN?! Why warn when you can just outlaw chalk! It's this kind of thinking that's getting government computers hacked and innocent civilians killed.
...why is it that only nerds come up with good things. Why don't everyone start chalking, when there's some good resource to steal...erm... use. Like, we could chalk the neighbour's wifes excellent pizza, another neighbour's apples, that lady who is always ready, local tobacco shop which sells marijuana as well. The list could go on and on! We could also invent a fancy name for it, though "war" is cool already :)
Have they banned chalk yet? Soon the chalk companies will be in same kind of trouble the Sharpee people are!
The FBI is telling companies, "If you see this symbol outside your building, it probably means that your network is accessable from the outside. Make sure this is what you want." What's so wrong with that?
"Do I dare disturb the universe?"
OK, these "wireless activists" go around searching for insecure wireless networks, and when they find them, instead of telling the owners of said networks about the problem, they covertly mark the information down so that others can use that network illegally.
...
How the hell is this in any way "well meaning"?!
I swear, only on slashdot
-[Blaine]- "'Oh dear,' says God, 'I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic."
At least the FBI are warning the companies and not arresting the warchalkers.
Well maybe that's because warchalking isn't ILLEGAL... All they're doing is walking around with a laptop and noting when someone else is broadcasting networking signals in an area. It's against federal law to attack the computers on that network, or misuse their bandwidth to mess with other people's computers, but putting a chalk mark on a wall to signify that the schmucks inside need to tighten their security is probably the least destructive thing they could do to them. It's like publicly announcing a security hole in a Microsoft product, except they do so by taping a notice to the door of Microsoft's front lobby. Sure, it's public so anyone can read it, but the number of people who pass by it is very small (compared to putting this info on a web page like another poster mentioned), and most of those people are are very likely to be the Microsoft employees themselves...
Once people start checking for these things, more advanced hax0rs ("advanced hax0rs"? Didn't know they exsisted...) will use those cool markers that you can only see under blacklight!!!
The FBI agent in question issued the warning for
Pittsburgh, home of Carnegie Mellon University (so what?) Well CMU has one of the most elaborate wireless networks in the country, and a whole bunch of guys who are experts at using it (and probably are responsible for many of the chalkings).
Also, I have an access point I was using at my old school in Indiana where very few other people
had wireless setups (Purdue only had it in 2 buildings, but that has expanded since I left). Anyway, my point is that from my room in a Pittsburgh townhouse, Kismet found 2 other access points, and I'm sure that would only grow if I went war-walking with my laptop. I'm no longer using the access point, because even though it might sound cool to share your connection, if you can't control who is using it, you run all kinds of risk for legal liability. If someone were to use an access point I owned to trigger DDOS attacks, I would be the one to get screwed, and wireless just makes doing that a little too easy.
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
...watches "Click Online" on the BBC. That will shut up a lot of people who say they are completely clueless. :-)
RMN
~~~
I mean, there I was, along with my buddies from the pub playing hop-scotch, when the federales busted us for drawing lines on the sidewalk.
Also, what the fsck is a "subnet mask"?
When only law enforcement agencies are allowed to hack into wireless networks then the terrorists have already won.
Wearing pants should always be optional.
"Well-meaning wireless activists". Yeah. I am sure they are "well-meaning". If you saw these marks, would you understand them? Or are they for other people who understand them to breach your security and get on your network. Do not make this sound like some noble cause because it is not!
Have you ever TRIED telling someone that you're not employed by that they have security issues? (If you're an employee, it's still a hard enough issue sometimes, depending on politics).
I had a friend who had a friend who ran a webshop, with everything running NT. We benignly poked around for all of about 90 seconds probing for 2 known NT holes (had been known about for over a year at that point) and found the entire database for a local HR company completely exposed via the web (SQL Server 7 I believe it was). Repeated phone calls and emails to that shop went unnoticed. Notifying the HR company that their data was exposed and that they should notify their webshop resulted in threats of lawsuits and other less legal retaliatory measures for 'hacking', 'breaking in', etc.
Walking in to someone's house through their open front door is seen as bad, even if you're simply trying to tell them that their door is open and they should close/lock it because of burglars. Hell, you might even be a master locksmith, but they'll probably still call the police.
It's just not that easy to tell the network owners they are vulnerable. You may very well face 'hacking' charges.
creation science book
One of its agents has issued a warning about the popular practice of using chalk marks
The point of a referal link is so we can find out what you are talking about, not to send us to another page with another bad link explaining what Warchalking is.
So, the FBI, they of the "terrorists, what terrorists? oh, them in the plane" mentality, finally get round to spotting that corporate America is merrily beaming its data out to anyone who wants to look for it and who gets written up as being to blame? The hackers. Not the IT security consultants pocketing the greenbacks for another audit.
Two questions:
1) don't the FBI have better things to do than worry about a few geeks and their chalk?
2) why this blame culture against hackers? they're the ones finding the weaknesses (for free) that the paid-for consultants missed?
I bet dude that is investigating the chalk markings was sent by bruce willis himself to make sure we don't screw up the future with knowledge of knowing where each WLAN node is.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
2002-08-16 16:33:47 FBI warchalking (articles,news) (rejected)
There's a great article at Extreme Tech that discusses 802.11b insecurity and what you can do to make it secure enough to make it uninteresting to the casual bandwidth thief - particularly if there are enough wide open networks in the vicinity.
In a nutshell:
1. Enable WEP. Yes it can be hacked but it does add a barrier to entry that the casual wardriver won't bother with if there are other wide open networks around.
2. Change the default SSID. Don't change it to your company's name or your street address as it makes it easier to zero in on your location.
3. Disable "broadcast SSID" if your access point allows it. That way the SSID of the client must match the SSID of the access point. Having it enabled allows any SSID to be accepted.
4. Change the default password of your access point. Programs like NetStumbler display your access point MAC address which can then be used to determine what make and model your access point is. Once it's known what you've got, the default password may be easily known.
5. Control access via MAC addresses. Yes, MAC addresses can be spoofed but it requires an extra level of sophistication for the would-be bandwidth thief to get in.
6. Disable DHCP in your wireless router. Allow access via static IP's from your NIC's MAC addresses. Yes, IP addresses can be sniffed out but it's another barrier put up for the casual "drive by".
7. Change your IP subnet. If you're using a wireless router and you've disabled DHCP, change the default subnet addresses as well, otherwise it's easy to guess a valid IP address.
8. Move your access point away from windows. Move it to the center of your building to make the signal to the street that much weaker.
9. Buy access points with flashable firmware. Helps you keep up with changing security protocols rather than being stuck with the ones that came with the access point.
10. Some access point manufacturer's have non-standard security features. Orinoco access points are able to "close" thier networks by not broadcasting thier SSID. They also have additional (not 802.11b standard) authentication features such as RADIUS servers.
11. Use VPN. Virtual Private Networks add a level of encrytion and authentication to your network
Yes, these methods can all be easily circumvented to somebody that really wants to get in. As long as you try to make it a pain in the arse to get in, then the crushing masses of 802.11b networks out there that have zero barriers to entry make your little bubble a waste of time.
Notice,
If you are in a business that leaves it's doors unlocked at night, and you notice that someone writes "DUL" (which is engineer speak for doors unlocked) in chalk outside of your office building you might think about locking your doors at night.
When installing doors many people forget to lock them, and malicious users can check your doors and gain access to your company's building.
first crop signs
now chalk signs.
atleast the first signs had to do with intelligent life forms
-Phiber
bad example - anyone else could see the lock on the front door too, any could bring to bear their knowledge of locks on that with or without your symbols. It's much harder to 'see' invisible bandwidth availability that it is to see the type of lock on a door.
The store owner probably wouldn't press charges against a locksmith who happened to walk by the store, stick his head through the open door and say 'hey, I see this lock here is insecure - you should get it replaced with a better lock'. Random Joe walking in off the street to company X saying 'hey, your wireless network is insecure - trust me' is not going to get the same respect. There aren't federal laws about looking at someone's lock on a front door. There ARE federal laws against 'looking' at someone's network (you have to interact with it at some level to gain ANY knowledge about it at all).
creation science book
Realistically, why bother?
If the FBI is concerned with the unauthorized use of wireless networks, they'd be better off cracking down on Starbucks, airport coffee bars, or even Bryant Park, NY.
Frankly, I'm surprised people still bother to hack from home. If I was looking to break into a guarded system, the FIRST thing I'd do would be to on a casual jaunt for a warhacking hotspot. The explosion of public 802.11 spaces opens up completely unprecedented possibilities for physical and network anonymity. The REAL question becomes what happens when someone actually uses this type of vulnerability to cause real and substantive damage to someone. Is Starbucks criminally negligant when one of their network users DOSes the DOD?
If the FBI wants to get companies to lock-down 802.11 services, all they need to do is remind firms of their legal liability for "unauthorized" uses of unguarded 802.11 networks.
Warchalkers have questioned the scare stories surrounding the phenomena, saying that anyone with malicious intent is unlikely to publicly mark their target.
It's not the warchalkers themselves that are the great security risk, it's the people who are going to use the open WLANs for malicious purposes who otherwise wouldn't have done the legwork to go out and find the open holes.
Here's Google's cache of http://www.warchalking.org.
--
The Grid Report
1. Enable WEP...and enjoy the 20% bandwidth loss. Airsnort.
2. Change the default SSID. SSIDs are not needed to zero down on the AP. Triangulation and GPS are effective enough.
3. Disable "broadcast SSID". The beacon frames can easily be captured otherwise. Attack by enabling your cards monitor mode (not to be confused with promiscious mode which only captures packets on the current network), sniffing all air traffic.
4. Change the default password of your access point. However, I'd like to point out even changing ones password can be insecure. My access point, and I'm sure others as well, send the admin password in a urlencoded form, unencrypted, in plaintext for anyone with a monitor-mode NIC to sniff.
5. Control access via MAC addresses. Spoofing as trivial as ifconfig eth0 down; ifconfig eth0 hw ether 00:00:00:00:00:01; ifconfig eth0 up. On OpenBSD use sea.c. Use arping to sniff MACs.
6. Disable DHCP in your wireless router. Static IP addressing, subnet range determined from arping. Private addressing:
7. Change your IP subnet. See above.
8. Move your access point away from windows. No match for high-gain antennae.
Hope this helps an aspiring black hat! Remember, no network is completely secure. WaReZ anyone?
Oh, come on. Let's call it like it is, shall we? It's not "well meaning wireless activists," it's "cheapskate freeloaders on the lookout for free bandwidth."
Lost: Sig, white with black letters. No collar. Reward if found!
Roberta Norris -- AP
The Democrats in Congress today announced a new "War on Payment," joining the "War on Terror," "War on Drugs," "War on Poverty," "War on War," and the lesser known "War on A-Bunch-Of-Other-Stuff-That-Makes-A-Complete-Mocke ry-Of-The-Horror-That-War-Really-Is." Democrat leaders say that Payment is a looming threat to American peace and prosperity and that we must all work together to eliminate it before everyone runs out of money with which to pay for things.
President Bush has embraced the War on Payment, hoping to capitalize on its rising popularity. Some of the more conservative members of the Republican party, however, are worried that the President has again forgotten which party he is in. One party official, who has requested anonymity, has stated: "What does that idiot think he's doing? This War on Payment is nothing more than Marxism! I'm going to vote for Gore in the next election--at least I know what side he's on!"
Some Democrats have admitted to confusion over the President's emphatic support but are happy with it, however confusing it may be. Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) said, "I'm very pleased with the President's selling out, I mean, cooperation on this issue as I was pleased with the work we did together on the education bill last year. The President really is quite a fine turncoat! I mean, uh, visionary. Yeah! that's it! Visionary!"
Fact: Most people who have insecure networks don't know that they are insecure.
Fact: People who know about vulnerabilities are are in a position to correct them will often do nothing unless it is public knowledge.
Given these facts, it is actually a service to warchalk (as long as the companies know what it means, thank you very much FBI). It is an anonymous way to warn someone that they have an insecure network and makes it a public enough statement that they can't ignore it. It is a services just as it is a service to post software vulnerabilities. Some people who are suddenly forced to address known issues may not like it, but it is good for them, and good for society in general.
The phrase "warchalking" is derived from the the hacking term "wardialling".
Hackers would programme their computers to search for all phone lines that returned data tones - ie, networks that they could hack into. This exhaustive searching was known as "wardialling".
Hence "warchalking", a similar process that uses chalk markings.
Also, driving around looking for unsecure wireless networks to tap into and possibly exploit is called "wardriving".
Who makes this stuff up? Well, I guess we all do.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
The phrases "wardriving" and "warchalking" derive from the early days of computer hacking when curious users programmed their computers to search for all phone lines that returned data tones. The exhaustive searching was known as "wardialling". ... which is derived from the name of the popular '80s movie "war games" (starring matthew broderick) where the prototypical "hacker" hero uses an automated modem-dialing program to test all possible phone numbers for accessible modem-connected computers. The movie brought into the public eye such programs, which were traded among early "hackers" on BBS and other systems and called "War Dialers."
sorry. i think part of the article was cut off there at the end...
- Entertaining Bits from the Ancient Kernel Tree
Another old story already reported elsewhere.
IBM got in trouble for chalking ads
I thought they got in trouble for PAINTING ads. Is that incorrect?
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
The FBI is taking a serious notice on Wardriving. Here's a SecurityFocus article on how they are setting up Honeypots, FBI stings to catch warchalkers, although it claims they are just trying to get a feel for whats really out there.
They should hire people who read carefully and don't off ranting on their own tangent like some wet behind the ears *kid* who's only interested in his own problems, rather than the one the company pays him to work on?
Just a guess.
KFG
National Chalk Association. Chalk doesn't kill people, guns kill people.
Loan Officer : We are gonna have to take your house if you don't pay your mortgage. Homer : I'll take the numbers off my house. Loan Officer : We'll look for the house with no numbers. Homer : I'll take the numbers off my neighbor's house. Loan Officer : We'll look for the house next to the one with no numbers. Homer : D'oh!
Dumb name in light of the current state of the world.
They should change it to: 'Terror Chalking'...
-- My Weblog.
I'm no computer geek like most slashdotters but it seems as though 802.11b is pretty easy to hack. It seems like it's fairly easy, even though all security features are enabled, for people to "sniff" packets for information and get onto the wireless network. As I said I'm no techie but with passwords for email, webmail, server access ect. being broadcast, is it really this easy for someone to sit in a car across the street and steal all the information they can find on a wireless network? Why is it not possible to have a secure solution that even someone like me could set up?
Perhaps they should just start arresting everybody that they don't pay any attention to?
It strikes me as being very plausible that the laws on the books could be interpreted as making something as simple as turning on a laptop running Windows with a wireless LAN card in the area of somebody else's wireless network a crime, particularly if it is argued that warchalkers are doing this with the specific purpose of determining whether or not it is possible to use a network that doesn't belong to them.
.mil sites, or downloading MP3s).
That is indeed one possible interpretation. And the FBI hints that they think it might be interpreted that way in their letter on the subject.
But there is another interpretation possible.
For decades - essentially since permission systems came into being - many computer users have treated file and account permissions not just as technological means of protection (like locking a door), but as expressions of intent (like latching a screen door to indicate that permission to enter is required).
Even before there were laws and court decisions on the subject there were often company policies. And in the absense of company policies there was courteousy and custom. Oversimplified: If a file was read-any it was OK for anybody to look at it, without prior permission and without notice afterward. If it was read-user-only, even a system administrator would normally ask before "breaking the lock" and examining the contents.
Now with the WEP encryption scheme totally cracked, its usefulness as a technological means of protecting data is over. (That will have to be done with firewall configurations.) But its usefulness as an EXPRESSION OF INTENT is unimpaired.
And many owners of wireless gateways - commercial or otherwise - may wish to allow them to be used as a convenience by users in the area. Some reasons a business might do this are:
- To allow visitors (business partners, salesmen, job applicants, etc.) to use their laptops. (Use an encrypted tunnel from the laptop to the home office for business, surf the web or check mail while waiting, etc.) This is in the same category as providing a phone in the waiting room, a drinking fountain, an outlet for laptop power, and not charging a fare to use the elevator.
- To provide internet access to passers by in the hope that others will do the same, thus making it available to THEIR employees in the field.
- To attract customers (i.e. coffee shops).
- To "be a good neighbor" or "make a statement" about internet freedom, by letting nearby residents and passers-by access the net through their link. (There are a number of companies who do this.)
So it's not unreasonable to assume that an open wireless LAN might be deliberate.
A reasonable interpretation of 802.11 and firewall configurations as expressions of intent might be:
- WEP enabled: Ask for permission.
- WEP disabled, DHCP enabled, packets routed to/from the internet: It's OK for anyone to use this port as a convenience. (The sysadmin has INSTRUCTED the system to ACTIVELY ASSIST anyone trying to connect - or has at least not turned it off if it came out-of-the-box that way.) Please don't abuse our hospitality by cracking our machines, soaking up enough bandwidth to impair the business functions (like streaming video during business hours) or getting the company in legal trouble (like launching DoS attacks, cracking
Now if it's "WEP disabled, no firewall between the port and the LAN machines" the message is "clueless system administrator" - a professional behaving in an unprofessional manner. (The implied intent would be "our business is wide open for you to review" - and that's not a reasonable expectation.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
"If you notice these symbols at your place of business, it is likely your network has been identified publicly," warns the guidance from the FBI.
The FBI are obviously masters of the obvious here...
There's no "I" in Linux.. err..
> The first poster spoke of *kids*, you responded with a rant about *grads.* Focus dude.
Ok, I know you're just fucking with me and trying to get a rise out of me, but I think anyone reading your statement would get the impression you were accusing me of being a "wet-behind-the-ears *kid*". Am I wrong?
Ok, the original poster is suggesting that a college student is a *kid*, and you are suggesting that a college *graduate* is not a kid.
What the difference? 0-4 years in age? At what point does someone become qualified to work in a particular position. The day after graduation? What about 6 months before graduation, or are they miraculously much more intelligent the day after graduation?
I guess I don't see the different between a "college kid" and a recent "college grad", since we all know a college degree doesn't dictate skill, just how much bullshit you are willing to put up with (work ethic).
This problem keeps coming up; well meaning individuals that find a problem are then punished for their attempt at a good deed.
Without some protection for these individuals, no one will report problems for fear of legal entanglement. This obviously leaves the establishement exposed to those that do have less altruistic motives.
It sounds like something that Homeland Security should be taking on, that would actually have a benefit to our country's security.
Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.
Geeks in general like the war chalking idea, it gives them the net when they are out. Hence they aren't so likely to begin h@x0Ring networks once they get the opportunity, otherwise people will take heed to secure their networks and ruin the fun of wireless networking. Besides if people were so interested in hacking someone's computer, why not do it the easy way, there are tonnes of IIS servers just waiting to be hacked.
Such users are much closer to the street and have less blocking mass between the transmitter and the street compared to a business user. These users are far less likely to change default security settings and passwords. Yet as a source of freeloading bandwidth or disguizing an attack they are very fruitfull. It is like those X10 cameras that they push to consumers, most of which someone with a few dollars of parts picked up at an electronics store can see the signal from your cameras from the street. But this is not a fact at all warned against by the hucksters pushing these devices everywhere you look.
Activist? I don't know if you'd use that term for anybody just going around marking the locations of wireless networks. You're encompassing an awful lot of everyday "normal" people if you use those weak standards as your activist baseline.
Then there's this bit about the curious hacker...
"Before now many curious hackers have gone on "wardriving" expeditions which involve them driving around an area logging the location of the wireless networks. Many companies using wireless do not do enough to make them secure and stop people outside the organisation using them."
I guess we know the author is obviously slanted with the "Hacker's Manifesto" side of the issue as these "curious" hackers are trespassing on pivate property; And you simply can't make the argument that since the door was open, they have a right to be there. Yep, they're curious and gee, we just happened to gloss over the fact they're breaking and entering, volating the law, etc, thus the FBI "trival" interest, right?
Even if I agreed with the philosophy, this is simply a badly written story. Yeck.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
... just go outside and look for chalk markings in the form of a open circle on your walls!
There's your network ! Maybe they even mention the speed of it so you can be sure it's working fully.
At certain cities you have multiple persons checking for your network and it's all at no cost!
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
"... On average, enabling 64-bit WEP encryption extracts an approximate 5% performance penalty. Depending on your need for security versus speed, that penalty may be a little or a lot. The same average 5% penalty applies when WEP is enabled in high speed mode."
I'm afraid that using the words "activists" and "war" prejudice others in advance. In reality, I think "trainspotting" has more in common with "wardriving" than the so-called "activists" would like to admit. For those who don't know what trainspotting is (aside from the movie), it's a slightly offbeat hobby wherein people watch trains go by, writing down the make/model of the trains and cars to compile lists and share with other enthusiasts. Now doesn't that sound familiar? Substitute the words "SSID/WEP/signal strength" for "make/model" and you've got a pretty good analagous situation. I haven't heard anyone call it "wartraining", though.
So, we now have a new periodic network security procedure to put on our daily/weekly to-do calender. Go out and walk around the building(s) to see if we have been warchalked. At least, we'll get a little exercise...