[IP] The case of the stolen Wi-Fi: What you need to know
Begin forwarded message:
From: Bob Frankston <Bob19-0501@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: August 12, 2005 8:54:16 PM EDT
To: Dave Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: 'Dewayne Hendricks' <dewayne@xxxxxxxxxx>, "William R. Cheswick"
<ches@xxxxxxxxxx>, 'Brad Templeton' <brad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Bankston@xxxxxxx, 'Simson Garfinkel' <SimSong@xxxxxxx>
Subject: The case of the stolen Wi-Fi: What you need to know
The continuing criminalization of the Internet.
It may seem that I’m overreacting because, as the article points out,
the odds are I won’t be caught and prosecuted but I’m not comforted
by idea of another potential crime I can be accused of “they” need to
find one.
Before I’m too dismissive of the idea of “authorized access” and the
fears that drive Florida to criminalize connecting via the ‘wrong”
access points, open access points do create serious exposures. I fear
Microsoft and others are following the road to Maginot rather than
addressing the real security issues of the Internet. Their “solution”
is to destroy the community and return to the “good old days” of
noninterconnectable realms.
The article is unbalanced because all the attention is on the victims
– that is users both authorized and unauthorized rather than the
failure of systems companies to provide users with tools that allow
them to participate in the shared Internet.
It’s one thing to have to use firewalls because of apparent failure
of Microsoft (and others) to give us effective control but it’s
another thing to start to institutionalize them in law. Next the
carriers will be able to enforce their rules against running servers
(including SIP servers for VoIP) or sharing the Internet connection
between our computers and our printers?
The article complains about stealing bandwidth as if it were scarce
and expensive like electricity. This is a very bad analogy – akin to
calling reading a newspaper over someone’s shoulder in the subway
piracy or theft. There’s the usual garbage about this being a Wi-Fi
problem when any shared medium is leaky. And now there’s the threat
the RIAA will swoop down on you if your IP address shows up on their
lists.
Alas, as I noted, the defaulting of Windows (and other platforms) to
sharing everything creates exposures that do make it necessary to
close down our LANs. Early Unix had this problem – defaulting to open
access vs Multics’ requiring the user give permission. (Project MAC:
Man-Machine Symbiosis). XP’s “simple [minded] networking” model adds
to this since it has a share/noshare model that only works if we wrap
our systems in protective bubbles and presumes an unambiguous
hierarchical model of authority. It compounds this by subverting the
powerful (though overly complex) access control system built in.
The longer we keep our computers within protective bubbles the more
damage from any leaks or errors or confusion. And all the while we
are paying a price by leaving our machines as little more than
typewriters and Web surfing TVs. It’s just like reducing our personal
computing devices to mere telephones.
In the meantime carrying my HP-6315 may be a criminal offense in
Florida! Out of concern for public safety perhaps there should be big
“No Wi-Fi” signs at the entrance to the state? Or maybe “If you have
Wi-Fi enter this state at your own risk”
Note that Bankston is not a typo, and is not me!
Also, I realized “give us” goes against the grain – we shouldn’t be
dependent upon these companies but the dependency is still real.
http://www.computerworld.com/mobiletopics/mobile/story/
0,10801,103774,00.html?source=NLT_PM&nid=103774
The case of the stolen Wi-Fi: What you need to know
The case of the stolen Wi-Fi: What you need to know
News Story by Stephen Lawson
AUGUST 08, 2005 (IDG NEWS SERVICE) - Benjamin Smith III and Gregory
Straszkiewicz both were arrested for allegedly stealing something no
one could see, hear or feel. That thing was valuable enough for
victims to press charges in both cases. But the arrests were over
something many consumers throw out their windows every day: a Wi-Fi
signal.
The idea of a police car roaring down the street to catch a roving
Doom junkie using someone else's wireless LAN may seem silly, but
there are real dangers if your network plays host to strangers. The
hazards you might face include eavesdropping, theft of data, painful
legal hassles or even a conviction for computer-related crimes. And
if you casually tap into your neighbor's Wi-Fi sometimes, these
arrests -- Smith was arrested in Florida and Straszkiewicz in
Isleworth, U.K. -- signal that it's at least possible you might run
afoul of a law and an irritated fellow citizen.
On April 21, Richard Dinon of St. Petersburg, Fla., called police
after he saw Smith in a car on the street outside his house using a
notebook computer. Smith, 40, was arrested and charged with a felony
under a Florida law that prohibits unauthorized access to a computer
or network, according to police. A pretrial hearing is set for Sept.
8. In July, a court in Isleworth convicted Straszkiewicz of using a
laptop to access the Internet over unprotected residential WLANs on
several occasions. He was fined $874 and got a 12-month conditional
discharge.
……
Bob Frankston
http://www.frankston.com
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/