Slashdot Mirror
N.Y. County Mandates Wireless Security
Mynister writes "CNN has an article about Westchester County NY forcing small business to use basic security on their wireless networks. From the article "The law also requires that businesses offering Internet access -- coffeehouses and hotels, for example -- post signs warning that users should have firewalls or other security measures.""
So, what if you're blind you insensitive clod!
But really, if it uses encryption out of the box, people are going to get angry when there system can't connect to it because people don't read documentation: they just plug it in and let it rip most of the time.
"Minimum security measures" shall include, but not be limited to: (a) installing a network firewall; (b) changing the system's default SSID (network name); or (c) disabling SSID broadcasting.
Any commercial business that stores, utilizes or otherwise maintains personal information electronically shall be required to take minimum security measures as defined herein to secure and prevent unauthorized access to all such information.
So it does look like just changing the SSID would be enough to fulfill the requirements of the law; however, the real purpose of the law was just to bring wireless security to the attention of these businesses. If it inspires a few of them to take a minute to evaluate their wireless security and then do something about it, chances are they will do more than just change the SSID. The fines available aren't severe enough to compel anyone into compliance.
What?
There's a name for that kind of guy...
"Busybody"
And it's not a good name. I'd hate to be his neighbor. Are you suggesting that Westchester county ask for vigilante^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H volunteer network scanners? How about we ask that your neighbors check to see if you're violating any of the "laws of nature" in your bedroom?
--
BMO
But I just had to RTFA on this one, and it only applies to businesses where CC#s are stored on the network (which should be limited to Visa and Mastercard headquarters), not your average joe who couldn't be bothered to RTF huge notice duct-taped to his new router saying to enable wep/wpa/anything. Or that's how I read it anyways.
How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
yup, even with wep/wpa you can sniff the ssid off packets.
-nB
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
I already have several calls from clients who want me to shut off open access in their places of business. Yes, they have firewalls and are protected, but the DA Jenine Pirro has come out and said how open wireless hotspots help pedophiles and stalkers and these business owners do not want to get involved with this political hot potatoe in any way whatsoever. Their feeling is that it simply is not worth the risk anymore.
Ummmm... pretty much every single enforcement agency (public or not, examples: the BSA, your local community board) has a mechanism for the public to report violations.
It really depends on how the enforcement agency feels about what you're reporting. If they don't care, you get ignored and called a busybody.
To put it in perspective: Would you make the same complaint about people who reported building or health code violations?
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
They could probably mandate the signs and they have some authority over the operation of businesses, but if the place is offering free WiFi on (all together now) "unregulated spectrum", they can't do much about it. If your landlord, University, airport operator, etc. can't prevent someone from setting this up or doing it in a particular way, why the hell should Westchester? And, btw, the law doesn't just cover 802.11a/b/g - it would cover using a GSM/Edge/CDMA/whatever-based data service, the way I read it. It just refers to any company offering "wireless internet" as doing business in Westchester, and merely hooking up to the "internet" without cables as "wireless internet". Seems like that would cover Verizon, T-Mobile, AT&T/Cingular, etc.
The FCC regulates radio spectrum and the Internet, because both are Interstate services.
Local laws making bandwidth stealing a crime will also likely get overturned in federal court.There's something in this country called the SEPARATION OF POWERS. It gives the federal government the right to regulate: "Interstate Commerce". Since radio waves don't respect state boundaries, courts have determined they are INTERSTATE in nature!!
The Internet has also been defined as an Interstate service.Local Govts have NO RIGHT to regulate EITHER of these! Recently, Florida passed a law making the operation of a pirate radio station within the state a felony. It WILL be struck down by the first appeal of any conviction. Why? AGAIN, because the states DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to regulate Interstate Commerce!!
r. I would hope before calling the police you had the courtesy of asking you neighbor to be more quite/considerate of your needs, etc. and if that failed followed that up with you landlord. Really that should have been sufficient but if he was really obstinate than I could understand you need to call the police if it was effecting your sleep, work, etc.
That I did - I think I spoke to him 3 times about the noise, and stuff like throwing junk over his balcony onto the patio, etc. First time we were civil, second time he was pissed but still shut the music off, third time we got into a shouting match at 3 AM and I called the cops afterwards, fourth time he was having a lovely party with blaring music and his buddies slamming the floor with (I hope) impromptu wrestling matches...That was it. About a month after the last time I had to call the police, I got a sudden email from the property manager saying he was moving out a couple months before his lease was supposed to end.
I am assuming from you comment that you probably did try to resolve the issue on your own but I think must people would not especially the busybody types of the world and that is what really upsets me.
Yeah, it's hard to say. I think my wife and I are more patient than most, but I can definately see how other people wouldn't even try talking first, especially someone older - and especially if the law in question doesn't require asking nicely first.
I went to the Westchester County Student Legislative Day a few weeks back, and the WiFi law was actually one of the subjects of the "mock legislative session."
I played the role of a member of the press, which basically enabled me to engage in some level of dialogue with my fellow student representatives. I asked them how changing what the network is called when it pops up in Windows is at all conducive to creating a secure network, at which point they tried to convince me that businesses would have to install a firewall. It went something like this:
Him: "I'd like to call your attention to this section, where it specifically mentions a 'network firewall'."
Me: "I'd like to call your attention to the word 'or'."
The one kid I was arguing with told me he thought his copy of the law was different, but it wasn't. So they dealt with it:
Him: "Okay, to appease this reporter, I'd like to propose an amendment, and change the word 'or' to 'and'."
It passed, by the way. Kinda scary.
For every karma whore there are four more people with mod points to kill.