Slashdot Mirror
Nebraska Sheriff Wardriving, Sending Letters About Unsecured Wi-Fi
An anonymous reader sends this quote from JournalStar.com:
"The Lancaster County Sheriff’s Office has seen an increase in scammers using unsecured Wi-Fi connections to steal identities and mask their crimes during the past six months, Sheriff Terry Wagner said. ... So deputies spent the past few weeks finding unsecure connections and sending 40 to 50 letters to let people know about the potential dangers of strangers accessing their network connections. 'You're just opening yourself up for a series of potential pitfalls,' Chief Deputy Jeff Bliemeister said. ... Bliemeister said only businesses like coffee shops that offer Internet connections to customers need unsecured Internet connections.
Applause!
Much better than that goofball sheriff in Aridzona.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
In a dense area you might pick up 15 different access points, 2-3 of them open. Unless they have sophisticated RF locating equipment the letters are just going to be out based on a best guess scenario.
The only place I can see this working is suburbs with wide spacing between homes, or rural areas.
2 deputies with directional antennas.
If you can find warships that way, you can find wifi hotspots.
You've never been to Nebraska, have you? Google says the population of Lincoln is about 260,000 total. There are apartment complexes in Los Angeles with nearly that many people. Houses have yards, there aren't many multi-story buildings (especially residential). The only "sophisticated RF locating equipment" is the number of bars on the signal idicator in the system tray in Windows, which will vary visible from one house to the next.
I don't see anything in the article that said it was illegal to have open wifi, or that you couldn't.
It said that open wifi was being used for identity theft, and that notices of potential dangers (I'd imagine such as possible repercussions for the wifi owner if fraud is traced back to their internet connection) were sent out.
For a couple of older folks or just generally non-technical people who potentially just plugged in an unsecured D-link, not a terrible thing to be given information about, and somewhat pro-active of the Sheriff. It seems little different from the notices given to people who leave their cars unlocked in neighbourhoods experiencing an increase of car thefts...
Here you go: http://journalstar.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/sheriff-looks-to-lock-down-open-internet-connections/article_3a98d107-05c6-5a11-8d09-8769e6e7dacd.html
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
There are some very dense areas in Nebraska. Some of them are even well populated.
They are not mandating you close your wifi, they are just suggesting you do. Making you aware of something you were unsure of maybe. Very much the same as if they were to wring your door bell to tell you your garage door is open at midnight, etc.
I thought that using a PSK still allowed people to decrypt your packets, as long as they knew the PSK and were able to capture the beginning of your session. So while having a PSK is slightly better than not having one, it doesn't really guarantee a secure connection.
Does anyone make an easy-to-use 802.1x appliance for coffee shop type uses?
On the key is known, then anyone can use it and it might as well be open. Even the individual key is not going to stop snooping.
You obviously don't understand anything about wireless security. If a connection is open (no encryption), anyone (even those not connected to the router) can stniff EVERYTHING sent over the connection (barring https and the like). With a password, even if every person in the world knows the password, nobody can sniff anyone else's packets. The passwords intiates a transaction where the router and your computer set up their own sessions keys which are used to encrypt everything else. so even though everyone used the same password, everyone is using different encryption keys, so everyone is protected (at the wireless level at least).
In my area DSL isn't available and FIOS or broadband is upward of $70. This affects me and many others who have difficulty with such prices. The act of intimidating people with open APs is ludicrous and shit-brained. A secured router with a unique user-ID, strong password, along with various options such as filters, availability-configurations, etc., is more secure than WEP with default settings. This sheriff should have a router fastened to his head until the microwaves loosen the rocks. I think the EFF elaborated on this topic quite well, also mentioning Schneier and his views on the subject.
Sharing, especially of educational/informational resources is a good thing. Intimidating people into doing otherwise against their will is encouraging greed, inefficiency and paranoia.
Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
A federal grand jury wouldn't return an indictment.
For someone up to no good, I'm not sure that securing WiFi is smart move.
If someone has an open wifi, and something illegal (copyrighted content, kiddie porn, etc.) is downloaded via his IP, the person has plausible deniability that he himself did the downloading.
If that persons has secured his WiFi with a password, then I would think he's more likely to get convicted.
I just left AZ a bit over a year ago and lived in Maricopa County. Joe Arpaio started his b.s. first, but even before that he and his office were a menace to the Latino populace of the county. Don't get me wrong, there ARE illegals there, no one will ever dispute that claim, however he's been less than truthful when he repeatedly states that they're responsible for all the crime there. Take a look at the mugshots his office posts daily, plenty of black and white faces to go along with the brown ones he singles out.
Fifty watts per channel, baby cakes.
I had the same thing happen in my home county. Our jail was under federal oversight for over 13 years due to constant escapes, inmate injury, and general code violations. We had a sheriff who hired a known thug deputy to be an assistant warden. The man hired numerous thugs for guards, and gave a good old boy system "wink, wink" to the guards who "beat the inmates who needed it."
This entire reign of terror ended after an inmate was beaten to death while in the restraint chair. The video showed the man get slammed into the chair, strapped in, pepper sprayed, and hooded with the spit hood. Then each inmate proceeded to either punch/kick, strike with a baton, or use a tazer on the poor victim. The coroner determined what happened and the federal justice department filed criminal charges against a bunch of "officers." I believe 18 of them either resigned, plead guilty, or plea bargained to lesser charges. Only one or two were convicted of the worst charges, and they happened to be the ringleaders. The only lack of justice is that the assistant warden was never charged, he did end up resigning and no longer works in law enforcement. This entire debacle cost the sitting sheriff his seat in the next election.
The man who took his place almost immediately increased the pay for guards, increased hiring standards, and began the process of fixing all of the code violations that had been ignored for years. The county commission thought he was "spending too much money" and fought him non stop. Apparently they don't think anything of having the justice department look over your shoulder for years. I only hope that the sheriff gets re-elected and can continue to fix the problems in the county. I do not want the county to look like "Sheriff Joe" and his "tent city."
Should anyone want to read what happened, the events in question were from Harrison County Mississippi, during February 2006. The sheriffs name was George Payne. I do know it is against the rules to read the article/story/research/etc. but it is an interesting read.