Slashdot Mirror


Wardriving Worries Residents

sphynx99 writes "This article describes how residents of an upscale neighborhood in Arizona are worried about wardriving, a "new method of privacy intrusion and identity theft". Nothing to worry about, though; "The Scottsdale Police Department plans to create a cyber-crimes unit next year."

14 of 530 comments (clear)

  1. In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Scottsdale residents are concerned people are looking into their homes when their blinds are open. Police plan to start a blind closing service.

    1. Re:In other news by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Better analogy yet:

      The Scottsdale residents have UHF video cameras in their bedrooms, and are concerned with people driving around with portable UHF TV's and watching them have wild monkey sex.

      Protecting against wardriving is as simple as not using wifi, if you're too stupid to secure it.

    2. Re:In other news by Chas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Still better.

      Scottsdale residents are actively broadcasting wild monkeysex. But want to arrest and sue anyone who actually looks at it.

      If you open up your home and invite people in (and that's essentially what an unsecured wireless network IS), don't be surprised if they see something you wouldn't want them to see.

      Now if they crack your WEP key, etc. THEN you have a right to bitch.

      Otherwise STFU!

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
    3. Re:In other news by sndtech · · Score: 5, Informative

      Definitely time for the rest of the nation to get with NH's laws regarding wifi. If you don't take adequate measures to secure your wifi AP then you are responisble for anyone accessing your network and for any damages they cause.

  2. Stupid people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Heaven forbid they setup their networks properly and save taxpayers thousands upon thousands of dollars. Why be responsible when you can just whine to the government?

  3. repeat after me by ophix · · Score: 5, Informative

    purely passive wardriving is NOT a crime.

    now connecting to their access point and using their internet/network for whatever... that might be, i am not a lawyer, so i cannot say. what i do know is that RF signals are not owned, for if they were i could sue for criminal trespass when the other guy's signals cross my property.

  4. Bleigh by Gentlewhisper · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Instead of wasting tax payers' money, they should just use wired lans.

    Why should the poor pay taxes to subsidize all these extra expenditure made for the sake of those who are wealthy?

    I'm talking about those in the bottom of the scrap heap here. Those who don't even have computers, Joe Sixpacks.. like.. Homer!

    Now, why would Homer have to pay more taxes so that Burns can have a safe wireless lan?

    Those people who buy a wireless router should pay for a tax at time of purchase!

  5. Get to work, geeks! by Bull999999 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    residents of an upscale neighborhood in Arizona are worried about wardriving

    Geeks living in that area should consider advertising their services. Improving computer security and making money while doing it sounds like win-win situation to me.

    --
    1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
  6. Re:Finally by Izago909 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you choose to live in a glass house, when blinds are cheap, you for-go the right to bitch about people looking in on you. An ounce of prevention goes a long way. Now, if a hacker breaks your encryption and your MAC filtering, then you can complain.

  7. Re:Finally by Fjornir · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I'm not so sure you're looking at this the right way... First though, I want to make it abundantly clear that my comment is only meant to apply to open wireless networks. That said, let's take a pretend CB radio session as an example. I tune into channel 7 and PigPen and the RubberDuck are talking back and forth about the Mt. St. Helens eruption. There's a pause in their conversation and I hop in and say, "PigPen, this here's the ManOnTheStreet, so tell me good buddy, what's on the frontpage of CNN right now?" and PigPen responds, "RubberDuck, she's just blowing more ash for a month or two. ManOnTheStreet, Tiger Woods just married hisself some hot lookin' swedish model, and man can you see her tits but good through that dress of hers!"

    Obviously PigPen could have ignored me. Or told me to go check myself. There was no requirement he answer my query. Same goes for any transaction that happens on the public airwaves -- like the wireless networking bands. I'll go so far as to say that MAC spoofing, or hacking the WEP key is definately wrong... But unless an open network is considered to be open am I liable if my linksys wireless nic connects to your default-settings linksys wireless hub instead of my default-settings linksys wireless hub?

    --
    I want a new world. I think this one is broken.
  8. Re:it's called eavesdropping by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    its whether the communication is conducted via a method the user has a "reasonable expectation of privacy" using

    That's a standard that the existance of the concept of wardriving shoots a nice big hole through...

    A wide-open 802.11x access point can be seen as an open invitation onto that network. Afterall, there are many public places that intentionally set their networks to be wide open in order to encurage use by visitors/customers.

    The lack of intent doesn't have much to do with it... if you set up a wide open network, you're giving an internationally recognized signal. One should know the customs of what they're dealing with lest they unintetionally make such a signal.

  9. Re:WEP? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA by tyldis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You need a few gigabytes of packets to crack WEP. The way most people use their wireless networks I wouldn't worry too much. Also, if you change your WEP once a week (or more often if you use it extensively) you are pretty much safe.

    The only risk you have is your neighbour (no sane person will wait for a gig outside your house).

    MAC-filtering can also be effective, although you could still suffer a DoS attack from someone who has cracked your WEP, but that's just a friendly remainder to change your WEP.

    Of course, the best would be to use WPA[2] combined with a logon service like NoCatAuth, where you effectively kill all routing unless they authenticate.

    For Joe Schmoe WEP suffices.

  10. Educating the public. by BorgCopyeditor · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It's occurred to me that if it really is simple enough to set up a secure wireless network, then that information ought to be easy enough to communicate. What is really the problem, then, is not that the good people of this town are "too stupid" to set these things up, but that no one has yet communicated to them effectively the message that they should care about securing their networks. This is really a matter of educating the public. Word of mouth would be a good start, and surely the manufacturers bear some responsibility, but I wonder if a few well-placed (and respectful) e-mails to local newspapers in this town could also help.

    Just think, people don't really know how to fix their own cars, but they know enough to know what sorts of problems might crop up, and more importantly, enough to do what needs to be done to maintain their cars reasonably well within the limits of what they, as nonexperts, can do. The only reason people know this is that there has been a culture passed from one person to the next of this kind of practical knowledge. Maybe some geeks should do their part to help disseminate the (frankly not very extensive) knowledge necessary to secure home wireless networks.

    --
    Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
  11. SBC/Yahoo, and their un-holy marriage. by agent · · Score: 5, Informative
    SBC/Yahoo took upon them selves to install an 802.11b WiFi NIC into their latest DSL "modem". It is enabled by default with 64 bit encryption, and (now this is where I am not 100% sure) the WEP key is printed on the bottom of the unit. The SSID is "2WIRExyz" where xyz is in the set [0-9].

    I post my wireless research here. http://mb.citiwireless.com/

    If you liked what I had to say, please show you appreciation by making a contribution to the FreeNet project.
    http://freenet.sourceforge.net/

    Have Fun,
    -Steve

    Huhhhh, I said marriage. http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=marriage%2 0AND%20mediatype%3Amovies