Is your wireless router secure? Have you ever thought about it?

JustPassingBy

RussJK wrote: »

As amusing analogy, but they are two different things. There are established laws about trespass on physical property, and these have no particular relevance on the issue. There are privacy laws including the Data Protection Act. There is the Computers Misuse Act, and there is the Communications Act 2003. Are there any more?

I wasn't concerned with the law.

If someone is broadcasting their SSID to the world (their wireless signal into my house), and granting permission to requests to join their network, then that is hardly computer misuse. No hacking is involved, and as long as someone is reasonable with just checking light emails/browsing then they aren't necessarily causing disruption to the network either.

Leaving the front door of your house is broadcasting a signal to the world. I go in, make a cup of tea, sit down and watch a bit of telly. On leaving I leave a pound or two on the dresser. No harm done, no disruption, no damage to the household.

How can you know for sure that an unsecured wireless isn't intended to be shared? You can't - so you need to be guided by your own morals when using a mobile device and not abuse a free service. Intent matters as shown in (b).

Ok, I'll go with this. Do you mind if I come in through your open gate and sit in your back garden in summer? My intention is enjoy the flowers you have on display.

Personally I don't feel that it's stealing when someone is sharing their connection to the world, but I wouldn't abuse it with downloads or access content that would put the owners at risk. The onus is on people to secure their networks, not for mobile device users to worry whether an open wireless network is intended to be shared.

So the onus is on people to secure their property otherwise the assumption is they intend to share?

RussJK

JustPassingBy wrote: »

Leaving the front door of your house is broadcasting a signal to the world. I go in, make a cup of tea, sit down and watch a bit of telly. On leaving I leave a pound or two on the dresser. No harm done, no disruption, no damage to the household. [1]

Ok, I'll go with this. Do you mind if I come in through your open gate and sit in your back garden in summer? My intention is enjoy the spring flowers you have on display. [2]

So the onus is on people to secure their property otherwise the assumption is they intend to share? [3]

If the doors to a house were electronically controlled and permitted entry to anyone who asked, then would it be okay to enter?

These are more false analogies and don't really work. There are well established social mores and laws regarding property rights which don't crossover cleanly into a question of 'electronic services'. You've described criminal trespass and theft of tangible property, and the second is also trespass but would be unlikely to be treated as a criminal offence. The assumption is that property rights are respected, and laws regarding property followed; it is however the owner's responsibility to secure their property regardless.

You would be better to to make an analogy with utilities, such as water or electricity, as the property rights argument never works. For example, washing hands on someone's front garden tap, compared with consistently diverting water from their piping to avoid paying for water. OTOH a tap in someone's front garden isn't an open invitation in the same way as a wireless service that actively advertises itself & distinctly authorises access to a network - so the tap analogy only answers the question of intent.

Still, wireless services are a whole new thing, and need to be examined on their own merits. Analogies are clumsy things that only describe part of the picture. So are words for that matter - so I propose we continue the rest of the discussion through the means of interpretive dance.

stevemcol

taxi97w wrote: »

No, I'm not bothered.

Excellent. In addition then, when they're out, if you knock a few bricks out of the wall and locate a cable you can probably connect to their electrical supply and nick a few KW/H of electricity. Even better if you find a gas pipe. Happy days.

prowla

I have WEP, changed the password, and have a list of allowed MAC addresses.

Mr_Oink

prowla wrote: »

I have WEP, changed the password, and have a list of allowed MAC addresses.

WEP was cracked long, long ago - if you are still using it make sure the key length is 128 bits or above (but that alone will only slow an attack, not protect against one)

MAC spoofing is really easy, and it is really easy to find mac addresses of your wireless clients to 'borrow'.

Personally, I'd switch to WPA/WPA2 as the bare minimum.

People who get burgled often say 'It's such a nice area, you'd never think it would happen around here'. I suspect in years to come people will say similar things regarding the cracking of wireless in their neighbourhoods.

Mind you, securing the Wireless is all good and well - if people have the router web interface (or telnet) open to the internet then the wireless is the very least of their worries.......

taxi97w

stevemcol wrote: »

Excellent. In addition then, when they're out, if you knock a few bricks out of the wall and locate a cable you can probably connect to their electrical supply and nick a few KW/H of electricity. Even better if you find a gas pipe. Happy days.

I don't believe anyone should have to pay for what is a wave frequency. Who owns a wave frequency?- We all do. And the same goes for electricity. If Tesla could have had his way, we'd all be on zero energy, free for all. They purposely deny us zero energy so that they get rich and we get poor and trash the planet with pollution into the 'bargain', they being the government and their corporate buddies.
The law is basically about money, not morals.
These could be happier days, but not just yet, not until it stops being about money.

lucylucky

stevemcol wrote: »

Excellent. In addition then, when they're out, if you knock a few bricks out of the wall and locate a cable you can probably connect to their electrical supply and nick a few KW/H of electricity. Even better if you find a gas pipe. Happy days.

Reminded me of this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5p-YQkbe_s&feature=related

lucylucky

taxi97w wrote: »

I don't believe anyone should have to pay for what is a wave frequency. Who owns a wave frequency?- We all do. Do we really? And the same goes for electricity. If Tesla could have had his way, we'd all be on zero energy, free for all. But we are not. They purposely deny us zero energy so that they get rich and we get poor and trash the planet with pollution into the 'bargain', they being the government and their corporate buddies.
The law is basically about money, not morals.
These could be happier days, but not just yet, not until it stops being about money.

Good luck with the "no money" thing

JustPassingBy

RussJK wrote: »

. . . . . . . so I propose we continue the rest of the discussion through the means of interpretive dance.

No thanks. I've seen enough hand waving for the present.

taxi97w

Originally Posted by taxi97w
I don't believe anyone should have to pay for what is a wave frequency. Who owns a wave frequency?- We all do. Do we really? And the same goes for electricity. If Tesla could have had his way, we'd all be on zero energy, free for all. But we are not. They purposely deny us zero energy so that they get rich and we get poor and trash the planet with pollution into the 'bargain', they being the government and their corporate buddies.
The law is basically about money, not morals.
These could be happier days, but not just yet, not until it stops being about money.

Yes we do and we are. But 'they' would have you believe otherwise.