MD Bill Would Criminalize Theft of Wireless Access

Pickens writes "A bill presented by Delegate LeRoy E. Myers Jr. to the Maryland House of Delegates would criminalize purposely surfing the Internet on someone else's wireless connection. The bill would make intentional unauthorized access to another person's computer, network, database, or software a misdemeanor with a penalty up to three years imprisonment and a fine of up to $1,000. The Maryland public defender's office has submitted written testimony opposing the specific ban and penalty suggested in Myers' bill. Noting that wireless connections are becoming common in neighborhoods, the written testimony says: 'A more effective way to prevent unauthorized access would be for owners to secure their wireless networks with assistance where necessary from Internet service providers or vendors.'"

Comments

come here, sweetheart

[BorgCopyeditor]

You say "no," but your router says "yes."

Re:come here, sweetheart

[drooling-dog]

You say "no," but your router says "yes." You were modded "funny", but that's quite literally what is taking place. Nobody's "stealing" anything; your router is being asked for permission, and it's not only granting it, it's assisting by providing an IP address for you to use and telling you where you might find a good DNS server or two.

Now the owner of that router might say, "But I didn't know it was doing that on my behalf!" I suppose it's a little like coming home to find that your kid has been inviting people into your house who you'd rather not have there. But that's an issue to be settled between you and your errant kid, isn't it? Law enforcement generally isn't interested.

Since there is no groundswell of outrage from people who are providing bandwidth to their neighbors - unwittingly or not - you have to assume that the "victims" here are the ISPs: Comcast, Time-Warner and the like. That guy who checks his email or the weather using "free" wireless is, in their eyes, $50 a month in lost revenue. Not that they could possibly influence legislators in a state like Maryland, of course...

Re:come here, sweetheart

[haystor]

Why would you go about discounting prices for illegal immigrants before discounting for legal residents? Sorry, you're from out of state, you have have to pay more than the out of country guys -- except the ones that applied properly -- of course.

Re:come here, sweetheart

[bendodge]

So this assumes they have the same level of wages? Because as far as I can tell, this is not usually the case. I don't care what level of wages they have. The government can't save you. We need a public education campaign. It doesn't matter how sincere and compassionate a politician sounds, she has to get the money from somewhere. And that somewhere will either be your pocket or a printing press.

What happened to American independence? A few generations ago, people would rather live on beans and potatoes than accept money from the government. John Maynard Keynes and FDR have ruined the federal government. It happened to Rome, and it will happen to us. When people believe there is such thing as a free government lunch, we are ruined.

Re:come here, sweetheart

[EdelFactor19]

I dont care how its done; the government has no place in telling us what to do with the internet access we pay for and on routers we pay for. If you don't want someone using your router thats your problem.. If they crack your encryption; obviously that falls into many already existing anti hacking laws (or make that the law)

adding any CRIMINAL or CIVIL law for someone connecting to your UNENCRYPTED access point only encourages stupidity, lack of reponsibility and negligence. If you left a hose running plugged into your house that extended to the driveway, and i was running by and was thirsty, I'd pick it up turn on the spiggot and drink some... if you dont want me to then do one of three things: turn the damn thing off at the end of your house; put the hose away; or waste money on some crazy lock on it lol. Suggesting that the government take on the problem is an exercise in futility; it will only waste our time and money and rights.

Furthermore suggesting that the "makers of the devices" do anything differently has a similar net result. It is not their problem; it is yours. Do with it what you want. If you are too unintelligent to push the "EZ Security" (re crappy unadjustable settings" button on a linksys; or follow the extremely basic guide in the instructions, and are also too unintelligent to either ask a friend for help, call tech support, or find help elsewhere then you have to deal with the consequences. There are a lot of reasons you probably dont want wep or name your security method enabled by default; namely setting the damn thing up. What do you do when your device is having a problem or you forget the password?

There are other interesting a better ways to go about the problem. MAC address filtering can work well, as can limiting the number of leases allowed.

The bottom line is that this is an area that the government has absolutely no business talking about, getting involved with, or passing laws regarding. Especially the federal government. They've got plenty of important things to waste their time on that ACTUALLY matter and should be decided by them. Lastly, how is being fined or sent to jail even remotely not get categorized as excessive punishment worse than the crime? If you pay anything at most it should be some factor of the cost of the fee for internet service paid by the place you stole it from.

Re:come here, sweetheart

[LunaticTippy]

I bought a router, plugged it in, and it starts broadcasting as Linksys. I go to my computer and there are 3 unsecured Linksys APs visible. How do I know which one is mine? If I pick the wrong one do I really need to go to jail?

I go visit my next door neighbor and he says "Yeah, I have an unsecured Linksys router. Go ahead and use it, that's what it's there for!" How do I tell which one of those 3 I have permission for? Again, if I pick the wrong one do I really need to go to jail?

Let's simplify. There is only one Linksys AP. I have permission from the owner. A 2nd person sets up an AP the same way - my computer will automatically connect, and will look the same to me. I will have absolutely no idea I'm using one I don't have permission to use. Do I now go to jail? For something someone else did?

abra-ca-de-ridiculous!

[PC and Sony Fanboy]

Yeah, and I suppose that sitting in someone else's light, or perhaps walking on their lawn should be criminalized too?

Yes, we pay for the internet, but if you don't secure your network, and the pedestrian use doesn't impair your surfing experience... no harm, no foul. At least, thats what I think - but I'm still not running the world *sigh*

Stupid rednecks!

[tjstork]

It's funny, because, the most pre-eminent security guy in the USA, Bruce Schneir, who wrote THE book on cryptography, actually leaves his home WAP open so that people can squat on it. He thinks that if we all had our own open WAPS, we could all sorta squat on each other's wans, be much more effective as a society overall. Really, what this law is is an attempt to criminalize a culture of sharing.

Re:Stupid rednecks!

[h3llfish]

>> Yeah, its a big conspiracy d00d!

Are you sure that it isn't? Ask yourself, why did the Maryland government feel a need to address this issue at all? Because they had been flooded by emails from constituents who were furious over their stolen bandwidth? Or because telcos/cablecos/ISPs realized how easy wireless makes it to share a connection with your neighbor? I can't say for sure either way, but I know which of the two groups has more pull with most politicians.

Yeesh

[InvisblePinkUnicorn]

Given how silently Windows is able to connect to a wireless network, I don't see how this law would last. Computer novices with brand new laptops will just turn them on and start surfing the net without having a clue about what an ISP is, how the internet work, or even how they are connecting to the internet. They know there is this thing called the "internet" and that when they click on the big blue "e", they are accessing the internet. Where do you draw the line between the innocent bystander and the criminal?

i agree with the public defender

[suck_burners_rice]

The public defender is absolutely right. If you don't want other people surfing on your connection, it takes seriously five seconds to click a checkbox and enter a password on your router. If you leave your router open to all connections, that should legally mean that you desire to share your connection with others, since that is what will inevitably occur with such a setup. Leaving your router open like this is akin to bringing a box of donuts to work and leaving it open on the lunchroom tables.

This Is Rapidly Becoming Less And Less Of An Issue

[Odiumjunkie]

Here in Toronto, Bell is already sending out wireless dsl routers with 128 bit WPA-PSK pre-configured, and the key printed on the base of the router. Hopefully, that'll soon be the norm everywhere.

Once everyone is using WPA, this is a non-issue. Even if an exploit is discovered that makes cracking WPA trivial, breaking encryption on someone else's network is clearly illegal, and it will be safe to assume that any unencrypted network is intended for public access.

I, for one, will not mourn the passing of a thousand light/water/keyhole/car-left-with-keys-in-ignition/radio/tv-through-window analogies.

Re:what about my network?

[BlowHole666]

So what your saying is if the child molester outside looks at the kiddie porn in his car and he gets traced. Your fucked. All you have is a mac address, all the District attorney will say is you threw the computer out. There are things worse then p2p.

Re:what about my network?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does stuff like this get modded up? If someone downloads illegal material over your link, so what? The parent has already said that they block most p2p programs so the chance of this happening is pretty low. Besides, unless I'm wrong (IANAL) posession of said material is what is against the law. Does AT&T get charged with a crime when someone downloads illegal material over their network?

Re:I don't like that word "purposely" in there...

[trolltalk.com]

How many people will be so intimidated by the whole process that they'll just accept whatever plea is offered?

Ditto those who don't have the several thousand dollars to hire a lawyer?

Ditto those who don't have the courage to tell the prosecutor "go fuck yourself - see you in court, numnuts - and you'd better have LOTS of proof ..."

Ditto those who don't want to "rock the boat"

Ditto those who can't afford to take time off work.

When a case goes to trial, even when you win, you usually end up losing. Its not like the other side has any "skin in the game." They still get paid, win or lose. Justice? Not for us.