GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
1 edit |  Deserved arrest
This guy deserved to be arrested. He knew he wasn't getting access from a legitimate free hotspot. While his intentions may not be known for sure, he surely wasn't just trying to get free internet access. More than likely he was trying to steal information. Just because the homeowner had an unsecured AP, it doesn't make what this guy did legal. Try him in court, fine him, and confiscate all his computer and network equipment. And then put him on probation where if he gets caught again he goes to jail.
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum |
|
quientus
So Red Shoes
Premium
join:2000-08-11
San Jose, CA
| said by GOLFnSUN  :This guy deserved to be arrested. He knew he wasn't getting access from a legitimate free hotspot. While his intentions may not be known for sure, he surely wasn't just trying to get free internet access. More than likely he was trying to steal information. Just because the homeowner had an unsecured AP, it doesn't make what this guy did legal. Try him in court, fine him, and confiscate all his computer and network equipment. And then put him on probation where if he gets caught again he goes to jail. You're either kidding me or trolling. |
|
93254336
Weapons Of Masturbation
Premium
join:2001-10-20
| reply to GOLFnSUN
said by GOLFnSUN :This guy deserved to be arrested. He knew he wasn't getting access from a legitimate free hotspot. While his intentions may not be known for sure, he surely wasn't just trying to get free internet access. More than likely he was trying to steal information. Just because the homeowner had an unsecured AP, it doesn't make what this guy did legal. Try him in court, fine him, and confiscate all his computer and network equipment. And then put him on probation where if he gets caught again he goes to jail. I agree. Attempting to access wireless networks without permission is no different than going through a neighborhood and trying the front doors of all the houses to see which ones are unlocked. An unlocked door is not an implicit invitation to enter and take what you want.
- Dan
--
"That which does not kill us makes us stranger." |
|
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| said by 93254336 :Attempting to access wireless networks without permission is no different than going through a neighborhood and trying the front doors of all the houses to see which ones are unlocked. An unlocked door is not an implicit invitation to enter and take what you want. - Dan Too many of the younger generation raised on the Internet and illegally downloading music, videos, software, etc. are morally deficient. Too bad their parents never taught them right from wrong. Just look at the responses in this thread seeing absolutely nothing wrong with this.
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum |
|
BVT
join:2004-10-25
Mount Juliet, TN
| Chances are, there is no law against using a wireless network you do not own in 99% of the US. If there is, it is most likely poorly written and will actually include free wifi spots. This guy just happened to be in the wrong city.
If there is no law against it, there is no harm in doing it. Do not confuse your morals with the law. |
|
the niTz
Premium
join:2004-07-05
Sahuarita, AZ
·Cox HSI
| reply to GOLFnSUN
the only thing i see wrong is someone not locking their wifi and leaving it open for others to use, which is pretty nice.
morality has nothing to do with this, the wifi point was open hide it, lockit but dont complain if someone is using it cause its out there, which means its as free as air!
--
its official everyone in sahuarita is a spy u cant even post with out somebody calling the authories!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
93254336
Weapons Of Masturbation
Premium
join:2001-10-20
| reply to BVT
said by BVT :Chances are, there is no law against using a wireless network you do not own in 99% of the US. If there is, it is most likely poorly written and will actually include free wifi spots. This guy just happened to be in the wrong city. If there is no law against it, there is no harm in doing it. Do not confuse your morals with the law. Not quite...
(From »www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline···aws.html )
As it reads today, each major subsection of the CFAA is intended to explain a particular aspect of computer crime. In simple terms, the CFAA prohibits:
accessing a computer without authorization and subsequently transmitting classified government information. [Subsection 1030(a)(1)];
theft of financial information [Subsection 1030(a)(2)];
accessing a "protected computer," which the courts have recently interpreted as being any computer connected to the internet, even if the intruder obtains no data [Subsection 1030(a)(3)];
computer fraud [Subsection 1030(a)(4)];
transmitting code that causes damage to a computer system [Subsection 1030(a)(5)];
trafficking in computer passwords for the purpose of affecting interstate commerce or a government computer [Subsection 1030(a)(6)];
and computer extortion [Subsection 1030(a)(7)]. - Dan
--
"That which does not kill us makes us stranger." |
|
jbozley
join:2002-09-29
Wilmington, DE
·Comcast
| reply to 93254336
..."This guy deserved to be arrested. He knew he wasn't getting access from a legitimate free hotspot"...
"I agree. Attempting to access wireless networks without permission is no different than going through a neighborhood and trying the front doors of all the houses to see which ones are unlocked. An unlocked door is not an implicit invitation to enter and take what you want."
I also agree. What is wrong is wrong, whether it's in cyberspace or the digital medium, unauthorized access is just that - unauthorized. Each person should pay his own way with the perks and risks/costs involved with operating a wireless network with internet access. If you can't afford it, get permission!
This must be illegal because there is no way to verify the intentions of the person accessing the private network...they could be "innocent" or devious. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | reply to 93254336
But if he's simply accessing the hotspot, he's not accessing the computer.... |
|
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| said by Karl Bode :But if he's simply accessing the hotspot, he's not accessing the computer.... All depends on how the definition of "computer" is worded in the law. An AP could be a "computer". It has memory, a processor, a UI, etc.
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum |
|
Dragasoni
We're All Mad Here
Premium
join:2001-12-14
Rotonda West, FL
| reply to the niTz
I agree, if they bought the equipment it's their responsibility to lock it down, period. If they leave it open, I consider it free for anyone within range to use.
I live in a high rise building and I can pick on 2 AP's in addition to mine. One uses RR an the other Verizon DSL. You bet when my RR goes down, I connect to the "linksys" SSID that is hooked up to Verizon. I use it to do simple things, I don't abuse it or anything. As far as I'm concerned, they'll never know about it and I don't think I risk being fined for it.
Now, do I drove around looking for free hotspots...No I don't. I think that is a bit more questionable for criminal intent, but not always.
-Dragasoni-
--
dragasoni@hotmail.com |
|
the_buz
join:2004-02-15
Yorba Linda, CA
1 edit | reply to 93254336
I see no mention of wifi in that excerpt. Try again.
Well, unless their definition of wifi is "computer" I really don't see how any of that applies. |
|
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to Dragasoni
said by Dragasoni :If they leave it open, I consider it free for anyone within range to use. Unless you get permission from the AP owner(and I know you may not know who that is), then accessing the internet thru his system means you broke the law. You can rationalize things all you want, but you are a criminal - just not a caught criminal.
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum |
|
BVT
join:2004-10-25
Mount Juliet, TN
| reply to 93254336
Applying that law here is a stretch at best. He will probably plead guilty or get it pled down. If he had money, he could fight this and win.
That subsection & the courts interpretation is very dangerous. Anyone could file a complaint against anyone that accessed their system. It is way to broad. Wait until BestBuy starts claiming break-ins on their computer because someone has accessed it to compare prices. There are numerous price comparison websites that will fall under this law if a company tries to pursue it.
The interpretation, in effect, outlaws the internet. |
|
Dragasoni
We're All Mad Here
Premium
join:2001-12-14
Rotonda West, FL
| reply to GOLFnSUN
What if your life depended on it? What if you were going to die unless you got on the internet to...I don't get an antidote for a snake bite? Would you use a neighbors free access point?? I bet you would!
I know it's a dumb analogy, almost as dumb as the "just because you left your front door unlocked..." one I hear entirely too often.
Why should I take an extra step to protect the idiot next door? Like setting Windows to not automatically connect to any access point within range.
You "older" folks with your "morals" sound really stupid, you need to adapt to the year 2005.
-Dragasoni-
--
dragasoni@hotmail.com |
|
stevephl
join:2000-11-27
Colorado Springs, CO
| reply to quientus
I agree completely time to quit blaming the victim and prosecute the criminals. Anyone knowingly connecting to another persons network and using it, is well guilty and should be punished severely. Time to cut this bleeding heart liberal B.S. that lets so many criminals loose on our streets these days. Go Florida.
Steve in Colorado |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Yes, lets spend millions having cops crack down on geeks with powerbooks trying to send e-mail via unsecured hotspots, when it would be far more logical and cheaper to simply have hotspot owners use security.
How modern Conservative of you. |
|
LinuxJunkie
join:2005-01-19
Cyberspace | reply to stevephl
Yeah, let's spend tons of money on this crap instead of more important things. You apparently haven't met many "criminals" if you classify nerd wardrivers as such. Keep your mouth shut... you're giving us moderate conservatives a bad name. |
|
LinuxJunkie
join:2005-01-19
Cyberspace
1 edit | reply to GOLFnSUN
But it contains no hard drive so therefore it contains no pertinent, private or valuable data. Nice try with the spin, however. Furthermore, that law says "any computer connected to the Internet" -- what about computers that are simply on a closed LAN that happens to have a wireless connection? No Internet connection there so that law wouldn't even apply in that case. |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| reply to Karl Bode
Love that liberal open door policy there Karl. It's that twisted logic of it's the fault of the AP owner that has crazy judges saying it's the rape victim's fault they got raped.
Stupidity isn't a license to be victimized...even by nerds and powerbooks.
I guess it's too much to expect people to respect other's PROPERTY and they won't understand this simple concept until they're arrested or fined. |
|
