I noticed she didn't have an issue interrupting the guy but from 2:45 on, you never hear her voice regardless of gaps in his speech. I wonder if when he mentioned that the internet was only $14.95 and she was just being cheap, did she hang up on him and he just kept going on?
-- Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,
I'm guessing she disconnected. She clearly had just avoided the unpleasant thought that someone somewhere had to pay for that service that she has been using for free all that time. When it finally sunk in, it wasn't what she wanted to hear and just dropped the call.
What is truly a shame is that this is a sample of what a lot of people think - that if it's out there for the taking that it's ok to do so. I liked his comparison to justifying shoplifting at a grocery store. Then this one had the arrogance or ignorance to complain when her "free" service disappeared!
Re:Hehe
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
While mooching someone else's wifi is hardly a good solution, I'm not sure it compares well to shoplifting or that it's "illegal". It's an open network, meaning anyone can connect -- so you can hardly say you're using it without authorization as there is, effectively, a blanket authorization for anyone to connect. Moreover, the signal itself is broadcast over your property, so it's really hard to make an argument for stealing. IANAL, but I don't think you can really compare this to shoplifting or call it illegal.
It'd be like if everything at the grocery store came, by default, with a sticker that said "take me I'm free" and it was up to the grocery store to remove those stickers if they didn't want to give away their product -- and also the grocery store was in your backyard on your property. Still shoplifting?
On the other hand, it's not a good idea for privacy reasons and its definitely *shady* since most open access points did not mean to be open -- but regardless, an open access point is a welcome mat, accidental or not.
But in neither of those cases are there circumstances where it is find to take what is available (the car, the opportunity to enter the house) whereas there are unsecured wireless APs out there, many of them, that are free for you to use as far as the owner is concerned. So you can argue that you thought it would be OK to use the wireless where you can't so easily argue that it would be OK to borrow the car for an hour. Whether the law takes account of this sort of difference I don't know though, I'll leave that question to legal experts or those that claim to be the same.
For those who miss the point, the reference to the "free property rights of horse and carriage" law of 1798 is a joke - there is no such law outside of crappy movies.
The accepted way to let people know you want your AP to be free is to name it something like "FREE" or "FREENET" or "PUBLIC" (if you want to get lots of users, name it something along the lines of "FREEPORN"). Have all incoming http requests redirect to your home box, which should list hundreds of videos - all with "interesting" names - and all just being another copy of a Rick Roll vid. After all, Rick Rolling the Vice Squad == PRICELESS!
In both cases, you are still going to be arrested and convicted. Why? Because it's not YOURS to take.
Not necessarily. Some areas have free and open Wireless providers e.g. some airports and cities plus some people opt to share their network access with others. Hence if you see an open access point it is possible that it is intended to be used. This is hard to argue with an unlocked car or house....although it is also somewhat hard to argue for a network called "LINKSYS" as well!
Don't take legal advice from movies. Good Will Hunting was drama, not a documentary. Other than the movie citation, I was completely unable to find any mention of the way.
At least in 1798, horse thieves could be hung when they were caught, and the law looked the other way. Now, good luck getting away with either stealing the horse, carriage.
You have just as many rights stealing Internet, as you do randomly trespassing on private or federal property. If you think differently, you have a better chance seeing this than this.
-- Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
The use of shared wireless is not stealing. The only purpose for publishing the SSID of an unsecured wireless network is to make the network available to anyone who wants to connect to it. If people want to share their wireless, that's their business - not the court's. If that violates their terms of service that's a contractual issue between them and their ISP.
And talk of hanging people for using shared wireless? That's just madness. To use the same metaphor if your neighbor lets his horses, cattle and dogs roam onto your property or public rights-of-way then securing them isn't theft - it's being neighborly. Accepting the gift of anonymous free speech freely given? There's nothing at all wrong with that.
I like your analogy. So if you find an animal off of the owners property, it's all fair to take them, eh?
I presume since you can apply this to subjugating the paid service of another person, I presume you can apply it to anything else left in the open. Bicycles... Cars... Empty houses... Yup, you have a real grand concept of reality. You'll have a wonderful time in court and prison.
-- Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
Securing is not taking. Making the animal safe does not deprive the owner of the use of it, nor does using the shared wireless. You're reaching so hard it's obvious you have an agenda. What is it?
An analogy is just this, an analogy. If you do not want somebody you do not know to use your wireless connection, you need to secure it. At least you need to prove in the court that you tried to secure it. If the network does not have any protection _/AND/_ the SSID is being broadcast, this is simply an invitation for anonymous utilization. Yes there are lousy APs that do not not offer any protection and broadcast SSID by default, but this does not mean the owner has no liability. S/he should have RFTM before plugging it in... Coming to your analogy, yes not using (at least) WEP is putting the animal out of your property, but if you do not announce its existence, there is a small chance an ordinary passerby would notice the fact. As wireless access is not a horse, and without a SSID broadcast, you would need to look harder to see the network. Admittedly a semi-professional attacker would see the network and utilize it for whatever purposes he wants. However a semi-professional attacker should be -by definition- able to penetrate any wireless network. Also when in the court of law, you can say "yes your honor, I am stupid and misinformed _by the producer of this gadget_, however I at least _tried to secure_ my network".
Please keep in mind that IANAL and the legal system I live in is not based on Common Law, but in several occasions I needed to act as an advisor/consultant to our legal system, I saw that trying to do something -albeit stupidly- is better than being a completely ignorant fool.
I'm guessing she disconnected. She clearly had just avoided the unpleasant thought that someone somewhere had to pay for that service that she has been using for free all that time. When it finally sunk in, it wasn't what she wanted to hear and just dropped the call.
I use unsecured wireless networks all the time, and I quite frankly have no problem with using a service that somebody else paid for. They obviously don’t care if other people use it, and I feel no reason to refuse a gift.
-- Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
So long as you give it back when the owner needs to use it, I don’t think he has much justification to complain that you plowed two rows with his mule.
-- Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
You have just as many rights stealing Internet, as you do randomly trespassing on private or federal property.
Yes: Unless marked as private property, posted no trespassing, or secured in some way (e.g. fenced), I have every right to be there unless or until I’m asked to leave.
-- Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
I can name quite a few places that you can go and either get shot at or arrested for being near.
You should realize by now, everyplace is private property of some sort. Even property that you own, you are only leasing from the government. If you don't pay your lease (taxes), they'll reclaim it.
It may have been nice to believe in such things years ago, but it's not the reality of today.
-- Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
Well, lets start with, you aren't 3 years old and you have lived in the same society that the rest of us do. You were taught the same social graces as the rest of us, which hopefully includes using the restroom and not messing your pants. Well, assuming you do remember to wear pants out of the house.
-- Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
Actually, having lived out in the country for many years, it is pretty obvious.
If you're on a road, you're on public property. Well, technically state owned property.
If you leave the road, you're on private property, or you're on state owned property.
I use the term state to apply to any government body.
If the state has designated an area to be for public use, sure you can go wandering off. If it isn't, you're trespassing. Just because the state owns property, and you pay your taxes, doesn't mean you're welcome going on it. I found that out the hard way a long time ago. Wandering around on state property that had unmarked trails, we were approached by the local Sheriffs department. We had been spotted by one of their helicopters, who sent a patrol after us. We were not, under any circumstances, allowed on that property, regardless of the lack of markings.
-- Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
Which is completely and totally irrelevant to the topic at hand.
Good job.
-- "City hall" in German is "Rathaus"
Kinda explains a few things......
Leo is not right on some details
by
dch
·
· Score: 1
1. When you log into most webmail servers (hotmail, google in the early days, facebook, etc) the password is not transmitted "over the air, unencrypted". Most of the time the password page (and the password submission) is encrypted with ssl, but after that they drop back to regular non-encrypted http for reading of the email. So the password is encrypted, but reading the emails are not. Also the cookie (which could be seen as a temporary password) is sent not encrypted during the reading of the email. This means that someone could take that cookie and get onto the email account while that cookie lasts. So he is almost right but they do not get the actual password.
2. Secondly there is this program called SSLStrip which could allow the attacker to get her all her actual passwords including bank passwords and information. Now with a few exceptions she could detect that the encryption was stripped off, but if she is as clueless as she sounds she would probably not notice. As I mentioned there are some exceptions that would make it so she would not notice at all (browser bugs not dealing with null characters in the cert domain name, and others).
I have a write up about this at my blog: http://clarkehackworth.com/content/intoduction-ssl-strip-and-building-better-browser
Re:Worthless "Tech Guy"
by
Faerunner
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
It's called showmanship and every radio broadcaster out there does it, if he wants to keep his listener numbers high.
The woman actually seemed like she understood the basics of "stealing" internet service, but certainly didn't have much common sense if she had to call in just to agree with the guy's accusation that she's stealing.
Personally, I'd like to see some changes in the current systems before we go accusing people of theft for hopping on a wireless signal. For one thing, Windows automatically detects networks in the area, and a lot of the time will attempt to connect whether people ask it to or not. For the technologically inept, this method of connection may ensure that they can get on their neighbor's open signal without ever knowing what they're doing. And the basic router setup (Linksys routers appear to be ubiquitous) makes it easy to get online through an insecure network, because most people barely recognize how to use an included antivirus program, let alone a wireless security protocol. What it comes down to is that between the router default settings (broadcast without security) and the windows default settings (attempt to connect to the nearest network), it could be argued that idiot consumers aren't being given the house door and the key to unlock it; they're being given a house with an already-unlocked door, and told that if they want to get the key to lock the door they have to read the instruction manual - and for those people, reading a tech manual is equivalent to reading Latin.
Re:Worthless "Tech Guy"
by
Crimsonjade
·
· Score: 1
He said someone could sniff the traffic. Her personal firewall is irrelevant here.
SO like i said... Windows will not automatically connect to an access point unless you specifically tell it to...
If you have it automatically connecting to coffee shops etc. you deserve whatever happens.
My bad. I guess I meant to say that it automatically detects every network in range if the wireless is turned on, and pops up a notification (unless you disable them) which alerts you to the fact that there are networks in range should you desire to connect. Not quite as bad as automatically connecting, but if you do choose to connect to a network it offers the default of auto-connecting to that network in the future.
Yes, they did... Sort of.
by
KingSkippus
·
· Score: 1
Okay, I'm pretty sure Gmail never sent passwords over the clear. Like everybody else, they used encryption only for establishing credentials.
Actually, Gmail used to have a login scheme where you could send your username and password as GET parameters encoded in the URL. If you weren't using encryption between your computer and router and that URL went out over the air, yeah, someone could have pulled it right out of the URL itself.
Re:Worthless "Tech Guy"
by
benjamindees
·
· Score: 1
reading a tech manual is equivalent to reading Latin.
Tech manuals are frequently wrong. Believe me, I've written tech manuals and read Latin. Latin is nothing compared to some tech manuals.
I ran across one just a few weeks ago. The latest Panasonic televisions run embedded Linux, and connect to the internet to download programming information. They have an ethernet jack. The tech manual calls this a "PC Connection". It says that, in order to use a wireless network, you need a "Wireless Repeater".
-- "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
If you're that inept, your AP at home is likely "Linksys", or perhaps you've used one in a coffee shop or something. The next time it sees that SSID, it connects automagically unless you turn it off.
Re:Worthless "Tech Guy"
by
clone53421
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
It is covered under the same laws that prevent you from walking over to your neighbors house and plugging in an extension cord to use their electricity.
Trespass?
If they left their extension cord draped over my privacy fence, damn right I’d be within my rights to plug my radio in.
-- Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
Re:Worthless "Tech Guy"
by
clone53421
·
· Score: 1
Certain versions, and certain wireless configuration utilities, may very well do just that. Are you familiar with all of them?
If nothing else, it notifies you that wireless networks are within range, and suggests that you connect to one of them... and guess which ones you’re able to connect to? The open ones.
-- Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
Re:Worthless "Tech Guy"
by
clone53421
·
· Score: 1
If you have it automatically connecting to coffee shops etc. you deserve whatever happens.
Free internet is what happens.
If somebody intentionally wants to give their internet away for free, that’s great by me. If they’re too dumb to know that they’re even doing that, well, that isn’t my problem.
-- Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
if you can get arrested for using someone else's wireless signal, then they can get arrested for trespassing.
if the signal wasn't in your house, you wouldn't be able to use it!!
if you can get arrested for using someone else's wireless signal, then they can get arrested for trespassing. if the signal wasn't in your house, you wouldn't be able to use it!!
But then, you would be arrested for trespassing by transmitting your HTTP requests into THEIR house.
If they left their extension cord draped over my privacy fence, damn right I’d be within my rights to plug my radio in.
Exactly! Just like the time when a neighbour of mine parked his car on my driveway while he was shoveling snow off his driveway... I went out and slapped a "for sale" sign on that puppy and made an easy $3,000. He was pissed, but I told him "if something of yours comes on to my property, it's mine to use any way I want".
Good thing he doesn't know about the time his wife came over to drop off some mis-delivered mail...
Re:Worthless "Tech Guy"
by
clone53421
·
· Score: 1
Since the car magically rematerialized when he decided he wanted it back, I really don’t see why he would be upset.
Oh wait... it didn’t.
But if the aforementioned hypothetical neighbour with the extension cord doesn’t like the electric bill I racked up, he’s free to yank the cord back over to his side of the fence.
-- Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
If they're going to beam THEIR microwaves onto MY property, then I'll be damned if I'm not going to beam microwaves of my own right back at them.
She knew she was stealing.
by
newdsfornerds
·
· Score: 1
What a moronic waste of skin.
-- Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.
Re:Worthless "Tech Guy"
by
newdsfornerds
·
· Score: 1
I doubt many ppl have been convicted of stealing WiFi. I agree that "borrowing" WiFi should not be a crime.
I keep hearing people say "they have to make it (computing) simpler" and "I just want to use my computer for email and all this other stuff just gets in the way." This attitude never lasts. People always want to do "other things" after a while. Most features are there because somebody uses them. The idiot consumer will always be with us and he doesn't want to put any effort into learning how to use his system.
-- Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.
Slashdot Mirror
I noticed she didn't have an issue interrupting the guy but from 2:45 on, you never hear her voice regardless of gaps in his speech. I wonder if when he mentioned that the internet was only $14.95 and she was just being cheap, did she hang up on him and he just kept going on?
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,
1. When you log into most webmail servers (hotmail, google in the early days, facebook, etc) the password is not transmitted "over the air, unencrypted". Most of the time the password page (and the password submission) is encrypted with ssl, but after that they drop back to regular non-encrypted http for reading of the email. So the password is encrypted, but reading the emails are not. Also the cookie (which could be seen as a temporary password) is sent not encrypted during the reading of the email. This means that someone could take that cookie and get onto the email account while that cookie lasts. So he is almost right but they do not get the actual password. 2. Secondly there is this program called SSLStrip which could allow the attacker to get her all her actual passwords including bank passwords and information. Now with a few exceptions she could detect that the encryption was stripped off, but if she is as clueless as she sounds she would probably not notice. As I mentioned there are some exceptions that would make it so she would not notice at all (browser bugs not dealing with null characters in the cert domain name, and others). I have a write up about this at my blog: http://clarkehackworth.com/content/intoduction-ssl-strip-and-building-better-browser
It's called showmanship and every radio broadcaster out there does it, if he wants to keep his listener numbers high.
The woman actually seemed like she understood the basics of "stealing" internet service, but certainly didn't have much common sense if she had to call in just to agree with the guy's accusation that she's stealing.
Personally, I'd like to see some changes in the current systems before we go accusing people of theft for hopping on a wireless signal. For one thing, Windows automatically detects networks in the area, and a lot of the time will attempt to connect whether people ask it to or not. For the technologically inept, this method of connection may ensure that they can get on their neighbor's open signal without ever knowing what they're doing. And the basic router setup (Linksys routers appear to be ubiquitous) makes it easy to get online through an insecure network, because most people barely recognize how to use an included antivirus program, let alone a wireless security protocol. What it comes down to is that between the router default settings (broadcast without security) and the windows default settings (attempt to connect to the nearest network), it could be argued that idiot consumers aren't being given the house door and the key to unlock it; they're being given a house with an already-unlocked door, and told that if they want to get the key to lock the door they have to read the instruction manual - and for those people, reading a tech manual is equivalent to reading Latin.
He said someone could sniff the traffic. Her personal firewall is irrelevant here.
SO like i said... Windows will not automatically connect to an access point unless you specifically tell it to... If you have it automatically connecting to coffee shops etc. you deserve whatever happens.
My bad. I guess I meant to say that it automatically detects every network in range if the wireless is turned on, and pops up a notification (unless you disable them) which alerts you to the fact that there are networks in range should you desire to connect. Not quite as bad as automatically connecting, but if you do choose to connect to a network it offers the default of auto-connecting to that network in the future.
Okay, I'm pretty sure Gmail never sent passwords over the clear. Like everybody else, they used encryption only for establishing credentials.
Actually, Gmail used to have a login scheme where you could send your username and password as GET parameters encoded in the URL. If you weren't using encryption between your computer and router and that URL went out over the air, yeah, someone could have pulled it right out of the URL itself.
reading a tech manual is equivalent to reading Latin.
Tech manuals are frequently wrong. Believe me, I've written tech manuals and read Latin. Latin is nothing compared to some tech manuals.
I ran across one just a few weeks ago. The latest Panasonic televisions run embedded Linux, and connect to the internet to download programming information. They have an ethernet jack. The tech manual calls this a "PC Connection". It says that, in order to use a wireless network, you need a "Wireless Repeater".
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
If you're that inept, your AP at home is likely "Linksys", or perhaps you've used one in a coffee shop or something. The next time it sees that SSID, it connects automagically unless you turn it off.
Learn about Photography Basics.
It is covered under the same laws that prevent you from walking over to your neighbors house and plugging in an extension cord to use their electricity.
Trespass?
If they left their extension cord draped over my privacy fence, damn right I’d be within my rights to plug my radio in.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
Certain versions, and certain wireless configuration utilities, may very well do just that. Are you familiar with all of them?
If nothing else, it notifies you that wireless networks are within range, and suggests that you connect to one of them... and guess which ones you’re able to connect to? The open ones.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
If you have it automatically connecting to coffee shops etc. you deserve whatever happens.
Free internet is what happens.
If somebody intentionally wants to give their internet away for free, that’s great by me. If they’re too dumb to know that they’re even doing that, well, that isn’t my problem.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
if you can get arrested for using someone else's wireless signal, then they can get arrested for trespassing. if the signal wasn't in your house, you wouldn't be able to use it!!
Trespass?
If they left their extension cord draped over my privacy fence, damn right I’d be within my rights to plug my radio in.
Exactly! Just like the time when a neighbour of mine parked his car on my driveway while he was shoveling snow off his driveway... I went out and slapped a "for sale" sign on that puppy and made an easy $3,000. He was pissed, but I told him "if something of yours comes on to my property, it's mine to use any way I want".
Good thing he doesn't know about the time his wife came over to drop off some mis-delivered mail...
Since the car magically rematerialized when he decided he wanted it back, I really don’t see why he would be upset.
Oh wait... it didn’t.
But if the aforementioned hypothetical neighbour with the extension cord doesn’t like the electric bill I racked up, he’s free to yank the cord back over to his side of the fence.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
If they're going to beam THEIR microwaves onto MY property, then I'll be damned if I'm not going to beam microwaves of my own right back at them.
What a moronic waste of skin.
Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.
I doubt many ppl have been convicted of stealing WiFi. I agree that "borrowing" WiFi should not be a crime.
I keep hearing people say "they have to make it (computing) simpler" and "I just want to use my computer for email and all this other stuff just gets in the way." This attitude never lasts. People always want to do "other things" after a while. Most features are there because somebody uses them. The idiot consumer will always be with us and he doesn't want to put any effort into learning how to use his system.
Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.