Slashdot Mirror
Warspying in San Francisco
hak_fan writes "SecurityFocus has a story on a group of radio hobbiests in San Francisco who occasionally go out warspying for wireless cameras in the 2.4GHz band, using some customized equipment. Their latest expedition turned up some interesting finds."
1. WWW
2. Porn
3. Profit!
Is it spying or is it not?? Depends on what your definition of 'is' is. ;-)
Let's say I do encrypt my video signal to keep one of these 'warviewers' from picking it up. Then someone else comes along and figures out how to decrypt it. (e.g. 802.11b) The argument would be (and is?), 'well you shouldn't have used wireless technology that can be cracked so easily--because I can crack the encryption it's OK for me to look at your information.' Does that mean that if I run an encrypted 802.11b network, that someone has the right to sit outside my house and collect personal information or access my network because there are tools that allow access to even encrypted 802.11b networks?? I guess it would be 'my fault' for not switching to 802.11a/g or something with WPA??
Let's extend your example. Suppose I have a 5 ft fence, but a neighbor who is 5' 11". Does that mean it's OK for him to look over my fence anytime he/she wants because the fence isn't high enough to obstruct his view? If I open the curtains on my window, does that mean someone has the right to come along and take pictures of what I'm doing inside because I'm not obstructing their view?
Wardriving/warviewing is nothing more than stealing a resource from somone else. So, because a geek or a nerd wants to do for 'technological' reasons, that makes it OK?? If the guys in the article thought they weren't harming anyone, then why are they so quick to run away when the police start to notice them? Would it be OK for a spammer to use an unencrypted or encrypted 802.11b wireless network to send spam? No! So, why is it OK for us to use those same kind of signals to spy on people?
I think we are just trying to rationalize spying on people by saying it's just harmless fun, and no one is being bothered. I doubt that any of the companies or citizens with wireless cameras put out signs on the outside of their buildings saying 'please use your wireless tools to tap into our signal'. It's one thing if someone wants to make a camera or wireless access point a public resource. That's why devices have IP addresses, and why some hotspots turn off encryption. The argument that it's not encrypted so it's OK to pick up the signal is pretty weak. It's akin to saying that it's OK to walk through your front door because you didn't lock it.
I'll say for the record that I'd approve of doing this so that private citizens can monitor surveillance cameras like the ones sprouting up all over NYC and London. However, there has to be some system to prevent abuse both from government/police and private citizens. As far as private or corporate wireless devices or cameras, I say they should remain off limits unless there's a good reason to suspect illegal activity.
As techies, can we at least we honest about what we're doing, and stop trying to rationalize everything?? I understand the temptation/interest in figuring things out and finding ways to pick up wireless signals, get into networks etc. Let's at least be honest about what we are doing, which is hacking/cracking. We have a long, honored tradition of doing this kind of thing. I'm sure we'll all done this at one time or another. I think some people are comparing warviewing to turning on your radio and listening to a free broadcast. Warviewing has more in common with walking into an unlocked radio station at night and playing a few CD's just because you can. Let's at least admit that we might be doing something slightly unethical.
Just my $0.02.....
--Mark