Florida Man Charged For Stealing Wi-Fi

baldass_newbie writes "The Saint Pete Times has a story about Benjamin Smith III who was arrested for stealing a wi-fi signal in Saint Petersburg, Florida, where apparently wardriving is considered a third degree felony." From the article: "...xperts believe there are scores of incidents occurring undetected, sometimes to frightening effect. People have used the cloak of wireless to traffic in child pornography, steal credit card information and send death threats, according to authorities. For as worrisome as it seems, wireless mooching is easily preventable by turning on encryption or requiring passwords. The problem, security experts say, is many people do not take the time or are unsure how to secure their wireless access from intruders. Dinon knew what to do. 'But I never did it because my neighbors are older.'"

Comments

Oh crikey, not another one!

[Willeh]

Dupe dupe dupe, even linking to THE SAME FUCKING ARTICLE! Oh wow, it adds some stuff about wardriving and some FUD about *GASP* CHILD PORNOGRAPHY, man the battlestations!

http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/ 06/0217252&tid=193&tid=17

Wake up and smell the noise, admins. I know it's just me screaming in the sea of other people yelling about dupes, but isn't it time to implement some kind of link checker system?

Re:Oh crikey, not another one!

[LinuxHam]

isn't it time to implement some kind of link checker system?

I've been trying to come up with a way to perfectly word my upcoming GreaseMonkeyUserScriptRequest. I want a system where I can donate my mod points to a mod-up or nuke mechanism, and I think a lot more people here would like to see a NoDupes script.

Re:Oh crikey, not another one!

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, I've been trying to come up with a way to counter these organized troll sites, for instance. They keep a database of posts that scored 5's and copy and paste those posts verbatim in new articles to gain karma. Then, they turn around and keep a database of their troll posts so the members know where to spend their karma to boost one another. I permanuke my foes to -6 and built a pretty long list of foes when I stubmled across one of the sites and harvested a couple dozen posters that are boosted by that site.

I'm still figuring out just what I want in a GM script, but some things could include: scanning specific journals for specially-worded "mod-up" instructions to use my donated mod points, and looking for specially coded "dupe" marks to selectively remove duplicate articles from my page view. Modding up and down friends of friends or foes of friends isn't really enough. I want to see a comment nuker without having to establish a "Kevin Bacon number". And a dupe nuker just plain doesn't exist. Can a GM script store data on my local disk? If the dupe nuking post contains an article id, the dupe nuker script can check my "previously read articles" list to see if I've already read the original. Someone has a Peter Pequopille (or whatever) nuking GM script to remove articles so there's already some code out there for removing entire articles. It only needs more logic to figure out from another source which articles to surgically remove. It only serves them right that we use more bandwidth to figure out dupes that shouldn't be displayed. Of course, the little bandwidth used from reading a journal in turn saves the ton of bandwidth that would be used by diplaying the dupes.

Deja Vu

[suso]

Its not WiFi, its DeJa Vu. All over again.

Florida seems to be the snitching capital of the world. Wasn't it there that so
meone told police that 3 doctors where plotting something evil when they overheard them at a resturaunt.

Wardriving a Felony!

[Evil W1zard]

Christ driving around to see what doors stupid ppl have left open should not be a crime. If I drive around my neighborhood and look at how many dumb ppl have left their front door wide open should I be arrested. Breaking in is one thing but just looking is another.

Re:Wardriving a Felony!

[jusdisgi]

Christ driving around to see what doors stupid ppl have left open should not be a crime. If I drive around my neighborhood and look at how many dumb ppl have left their front door wide open should I be arrested. Breaking in is one thing but just looking is another.

That's a horrible analogy. Because it is and should be illegal to walk into somebody's house without permission, even if the door is open.

But that's not what an AP setup like this is like. It's not just "open" ...it's actively inviting people to use its access. It's broadcasting an SSID, and then answering DHCP requests by giving out leases. So, using an AP that was configured like the one in this case is more like driving around looking for signs that say "keg party down the street" then finding the house that says "keg party" on the door, then knocking, and having the door answered by somebody who says "come on in" and hands you a cup for the keg.

This does not hold if the AP is not broadcasting its SSID and using DHCP. If you go sniff the network and setup a static address on it, you've probably done so without permission. But when the system advertises its existence and offers you an IP when you ask, you have just been authorized to use the network.

Re:Wardriving a Felony!

[Otter]

First of all, this is nerd logic that's unlikely to hold up in court. If networks had to be actively configured to be publically available, you'd have a point, but failing to actively secure it is not (to normal people) comparable to your notion of advertising a keg party.

Second, in this case, the homeowner confronted the l33ch twice, and the latter clearly realized that he wasn't welcome on the network.

Re:Wardriving a Felony!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's nerd logic, but it's still logic. Unsecured WLANs behave exactly like deliberately open hotspots. If implicit permission is not enough to connect to a computer system, then we better stop using the internet right now, because we're using other people's servers all the time and the only permission we have is that we can access them without authentication.

Re:Wardriving a Felony!

[drewzhrodague]

And that's what seperates wardriving from theft of services, or tresspass, or whatever you want to call it -- crossing the line.

I recommend wardriving, but I do not recommend using networks for which you have no authorization. I interviewed the FBI on this topic, and also went over safe wardriving procedures.

Of course, I could also go to jail for taking pictures of a hospital 3 blocks from my house, but that's another story that I haven't blogged about yet.

Re:Wardriving a Felony!

[InvalidError]

Most open WAPs are open due to uninformed owners and I believe it should be the WAP manufacturers' job to ensure (to a reasonable extent) that users of their products have at least minimal knowledge of the technology they are about to use. If the homeowner is leaving is WAP open out of ignorance, disabling WiFi by default would already force the users to go through the setup/warning sheet at least once in their WiFi life before going live.

A non-default SSID with broadcast turned off, WPA-AES-PSK and MAC whitelist is trivial to setup on most WAPs and clearly tells wardrivers that they are not invited. This becomes even more trivial the 2nd...nth time around.

Re:Wardriving a Felony!

[jusdisgi]

I _understand_ nerd logic (and your web server analogy and obliviousness to my point make for a perfect example thereof)

Look, I'm not oblivious to your point. You're just wrong. Both your assertion that juries can't or won't listen to expert testimony in a trial setting and your assertion that nerd logic somehow isn't correct in a discussion about networking are wrongheaded.

The nerds built the Internet, and if the rest of the world wants to go and try to administer it while disregarding the logic of the nerds, they just won't have an Internet left. And that's that.

But in any case, the logic doesn't have to be this nerdy; we're discussing it at a somewhat higher than layman's level because we can do that here. In court, I think the more direct way to put this issue is this: If this was "unauthorized access to a computer network," then at what point did the owner of the computer network notify the person accessing the network that his activity required authorization? Then you note that people go to websites all the time, and only need to quit doing what they are doing when they are told it's not ok. And wrap it up by noting that there isn't any difference between this AP and the one at Starbucks. At that point, I don't think you've confused your jury, and I think they can see that this type of access is not unauthorized.

Of course, I wasn't trying to make this point to a jury. I was trying to make it to /., which is why the discussion was technical.

Not only is it a dupe...

[scribblej]

It's a dupe of the most commented on story of the week, proving once again that the editors don't even take a passing interest in the site.

Mod Article -1 Redundant

[Elminst]

How many is this in less than 2 weeks for the zonk-meister? at least 6 i think.

Certainties on /.

[revscat]

A few things bring peace to my mind, because they are utterly predictable and can be counted on no matter what chaos the world is currently embroiled in.

1. GNAA trolls
2. "Netcraft confirms..."
3. "In Soviet Russia..."
4. "I didn't read the article, but have an opinion about it anyway."
5. "But Clinton..."
6. Dupes.

I'm beyond caring.

Re:New Slashdot Poll:

[Anonymous Coward]

There should be a moderation option for the editors and stories. Let through too many dups or junk stories, and you don't get to post new stories and you lose editor status for a while.

So are we all felons here?

[downward dog]

People have used the cloak of wireless to traffic in child pornography, steal credit card information and send death threats, according to authorities.

So shouldn't these people be charged for these crimes, and not for using a technology that makes these crimes possible? Why not:

People have used the postal service to traffic in child pornography, steal credit card information and send death threats, according to authorities.

People have used computers to traffic in child pornography, steal credit card information and send death threats, according to authorities.

People have used telephones to traffic in child pornography, steal credit card information and send death threats, according to authorities.

Re:It's dupe-a-licious!

[ergo98]

What, seriously, is so wrong with 'dupes'? Not everybody reads /. 24 hrs/day

Often I only get a chance to visit Slashdot once or twice a day, yet lately I've identified virtually every dupe. It's not like there are thousands of stories a day and the editors just can't keep on top it - there are only a dozen or so stories, and in this case the title instantly and obviously revealed that it was a dupe.

I've a year to patent this in the US...

[exp(pi*sqrt(163))]

A big LED on your access point that flashes "Unsafe" when your network is connected up but doesn't have encryption switched on.

Any good lawyer could prove this bogus

[lugar]

Making some basic assumptions (the wireless was using an SSID, was unencrypted, and a DHCP server was available), any lawyer can make the valid claim that the wireless access point was intended for the public to use:

- SSID was advertising the availability of the access point.
- Absense of encryption re-enforces the fact that this was not a private network.
- DHCP giving an IP address is as good as saying "have a seat, enjoy the connection".

A good analogy would be to have a big sign in front of your house saying "Cookies inside!" (SSID). You leave the door propped open (lack of encryption). You have someone inside pull up a chair and invite the person to sit down and enjoy said cookies (DHCP).

If you don't want people on your wireless, take appropriate steps to protect yourself. Someone breaking encryption to get access to a network is illegal. Connecting to an unprotected network should not be.

Mod the stories

[KrunZ]

No we should simply just have a moderation on the entire posting:
() Dupe
() Old stuff
() Interesting ...

... and then we could draw some statistics on the editors.

Re:Mod the stories

[Stankatz]

That'll never happen. What would happen when the Slash-vertisements get modded down.

In other news...

[scottdj]

Taking an unlocked car no longer considered stealing!

Taking things from an unlocked home no longer considered burglary!

Don't think those are valid analogies? How about:

Staying in an unlocked home while the owners are out of town no longer considered illegal entry!

Re:In other news...

[Surt]

How about staying in an unlocked home with a sign on the door that says 'come on in and stay a while!'.

Re:New Slashdot Poll:

[geeber]

And then we could have one that goes something like

Most pedantic Anonymous Cowards

(a) lack a sense of humor
(b) don't have a sense of humor
(c) are humorless
(d) are not amused by CowboyNeal poll options

Victimless Crime?

[CrazyTalk]

What about those that just need internet access to check their email? Whenever I visit my parents, who have no computer (let alone a broadband internet connection) I take my wireless laptop and find a nearby unprotected network to surf and check my email. Should I be arrested? Who does this REALLY hurt? Similarly, I wouldn't mind someone tapping into my own wireless network at home for similar use.

Re:It's dupe-a-licious!

[NanoGator]

" If you're so offended by people pointing out (and being offended by) dupes, then perhaps you should just avoid threads with names like "It's dupe-a-licious"."

Mmmmhmmm. Except almost every god damn comment in this thread is "dupe!!!!!!!!!! bitchbitchbitchbitchbitchbitch!" I'm whining about excessive dupe bitching, not bitching about dupes. What's irritating about it is every comment bitching about dupes is serving an ad. Basically, the people against dupes are begging Slashdot to post them. Dumb fucks.

"so you picked an odd target for your rant"

I didn't pick your comment as a target because I checked everybody's posting history and thought yours was the one to blast first. I picked yours because of your ridiculous overreaction to the dupe.

"With dupes like this, if I truly want to get involved in the discussion, I might have to carry it out in two different places, with different participants, etc. And the discussion won't be quite as good. That's all."

Unlikely and unlikely. If your motivation for being anti-dupe was about having 'good discussion', then I would expect that it wouldn't matter if a dupe happened or not. If your 'that is all' reasoning were really true, I wouldn't expect you to threaten to leave Slashdot.

Of course I can only speculate, but I think your real reason for bitching about dupes lies somewhere in between trying to make an 'insightful' post and annoyance at... well actually I don't get what's so annoying about dupes. Unless, of course, you're watching Slashdot a little too much and you are offended that they haven't entertained you with something 'new'. Honestly, just skip the damn story if it's not interesting.

Slashdotters sure get noisy for the most frivilous of reasons. They're like Star Trek fans. It's really fucking obnoxious.

Re:Slashcode Dirty Dupe Detect

[suwain_2]

Here's a simpler idea:

1.) The admins actually read the site
2.) The admins remember, "Hey, that was our biggest story yesterday," and therefore don't post it again
3.) There is no step three.

Pretty simple, eh?

office building

[garyrich]

Yes, it's a bad analogy. A better one that I've been using for ~15 years is an office building. Doors in an office building are there to be opened. If you have a door to your private office that opens on a public hallway -- lock it or expect that people will walk in from time to time. Some kid walking the halls and twisting doorknobs is not trespassing, stealing, or anything else except maybe being a pain in the butt. Even if you put a little "private" sign on the door you should expect people to open it from time to time and they are still not trespassing or stealing.

Similarly, network services are there with the expectation of being used. If you don't want them used, the burden is on you to restrict them. If you don't you have no grounds to complain.

As an aside, I think law enforcement hates the idea of this for the same reason they hate all forms of anonymity - it gives plausible deniability that some particular person comitted some particular crime.

Re:It's dupe-a-licious!

[KUHurdler]

put it in the dishwasher and run it on the top shelf with no detergent. Then let it dry out for a few days. solved many-a-problems that-a way.