Man Charged With Stealing Wi-Fi Signal

[10sun]

http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/ap ... 26874.html

Associated Press
Man Charged With Stealing Wi-Fi Signal
07.06.2005, 08:15 PM

Police have arrested a man for using someone else's wireless Internet network in one of the first criminal cases involving this fairly common practice.

Benjamin Smith III, 41, faces a pretrial hearing this month following his April arrest on charges of unauthorized access to a computer network, a third-degree felony.

Police say Smith admitted using the Wi-Fi signal from the home of Richard Dinon, who had noticed Smith sitting in an SUV outside Dinon's house using a laptop computer.

The practice is so new that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement doesn't even keep statistics, according to the St. Petersburg Times, which reported Smith's arrest this week.

Innocuous use of other people's unsecured Wi-Fi networks is common, though experts say that plenty of illegal use also goes undetected: such as people sneaking on others' networks to traffic in child pornography, steal credit card information and send death threats.

Security experts say people can prevent such access by turning on encryption or requiring passwords, but few bother or are unsure how to do so.

Wi-Fi, short for Wireless Fidelity, has enjoyed prolific growth since 2000. Millions of households have set up wireless home networks that give people like Dinon the ability to use the Web from their backyards but also reach the house next door or down the street.

It's not clear why Smith was using Dinon's network. Prosecutors declined to comment, and a working phone number could not be located for Smith.

-------------------------------------------------

This is bullshit, the guy was parked on the street picking up a wifi signal being broadcast out by the file who filed charges.

There was no encryption being broken, the fellow picking up the signal most likely did not know which house was providing the broadcast, nor did he care.

I do this all the time while travelling personally. What are other people's thoughts on this?

-Adam

[veeneedefeesh]

This is sort of like leaving your doors wide open and then charging someone with trespassing, yes it is illegal, but in reality the "victim" isnt even using basic security precautions to keep intruders out, so he kinda deserves what he gets.

[Eziekial]

Editted. I thought a second more about it then realized that this guys is going "into" someone elses property via his connection. Hang him, it's not like we are even attempting to be reasonable in our judicial system anyway.

[Harrison]

I don't consider it theft unless he is breaking encryption or brute forcing passwords/bypassing them.

[Gidan]

Whether or not this is actually illegal is still in question. The laws are very vague in connection wth wifi signals.

WiFi is a major problem in this country, thousands of people use it without any regard to how it works. For the acg joe who knows next to nothing about computers or computer hardware, setting up a secure wifi connection is almost impossible. They just dont understand it. The setup wizards rarely walk somone through setting up WEP encryption and never through mac authentication which when combined with WEP is extremely secure.

One of the major issues around this is that you can very possibly be using windows XP and be connected to somone elses WiFi without even knowing you have done it. You could very well be trying to ues your own WiFi connection but got connected to somone elses who happened to also have a wide open signal.

Its not a great thing to do but there is no true law to deal with it, until then it shouldn't be a major crime.

[Tossica]

I would say it's closer to trespassing unless he was invited to use it. Guests in your home are just that, guests. People that wander in without being invited are trespassing.

[10sun]

The fellow never set foot upon the accusor's property.

[Tossica]

The fellow never set foot upon the accusor's property.

Not physically, no.

[10sun]

Am I allowed to look at someone's property from the road?

or make a loud noise that can carry over a property line?

I fail to see where to draw the line.

If the fellow has a problem, he should have setup a secure network instead of broadcasting an unsecured signal to god knows where.

[xaoshaen]

The fellow never set foot upon the accusor's property.

Not physically, no.

There's really no way to set foot on someone's property save for physically.

[Gidan]

The laws regarding things like this refer to the actual computer and not to routers. Since your not actually accessing their computer you dont really fall into that, however if teh person has converted a server into a WiFi router (Cant think of a single person with enough knowlege to do this that wouldn't have it secured), then it would fall into that catagory.

The laws regarding Satalight TV, general TV and such refer specificly to those technologies and connot be used in this case.

I would bet a lawyer jumps up to take this case for free, not to mention you will probably see some new laws in regards to this. There have been any instances of things like this, but this is the first I can recall that involved an arrest and charges.

[Martrae]

It should fall under radio rules...if it's transmitted thru the air and you have the equipment to pick it up you can do with it as you please.

[Gidan]

There are laws that fall under radio rules though, think about laws around using scanners to listen to specific frequency ranges and recording conversations. I cant recall the ranges atm but I remember reading throguh some of them not to long ago.

[Yamori]

If this is a crime, it certainly shouldn't be a felony... :/

[Tikker]

wardriving is a sticky subject


the dude in the SUV, it's not like he happened to stop there, and coincidentally noticed he had an internet connection


people go out, LOOKING for unsecured wifi, and hop on the networks


Just because I didn't lock the door to my house, doesn't mean it's now not illegal for you to come in uninvited



ps


people who don't secure their shit are retards, but that's mostly a lack of education on the matter

[Lueyen]

Unless the person cracked an encryption code, or cloned thier mac address which would show absolute proof of intent I do not believe they are guilty of anything. As Gidan pointed out WinXp based machines when configured to connect to any available wireless network do just that. Why would you even configure your machine in such a way? More and more free wireless service is becoming available in many areas, airports, hotels ect. Personally my laptop is configured this way due to travel. When I'm at home, my wireless network is it's prefered connection, however even still I have noticed it occasionally connecting to a new wireless network recently setup in my area. So say I fire up my laptop at home and start browsing the internet, if instead of connecting to my home network I connect to someone elses and don't realize it am I then tresspassing?

Okay so this person drove somewhere and specifically went within range of a wireless network to use it for internet service. Did he know that it wasn't a free service? Little hint here, there is never anything that tells you if a service is there for public or private use unless there is some type of authentication.

This problem will not be solved by incarcerating people for using wide open networks, or by making laws to criminalize the act. If you understand the technology and it's current applications this should be obvious to you.

[Ciladan]

The fellow never set foot upon the accusor's property.

Not physically, no.

There's really no way to set foot on someone's property save for physically.

semantics

[Lyion]

The fellow never set foot upon the accusor's property.

Not physically, no.

There's really no way to set foot on someone's property save for physically.

If someone stole your identity, would that be theft, since there is no actual taking? if someone connected to your computer and downloaded your files without your permission, would that not be trespassing?

[labbats]

If this is a crime, it certainly shouldn't be a felony... :/

[Wrath Child]

This is sort of like leaving your doors wide open and then charging someone with trespassing, yes it is illegal, but in reality the "victim" isnt even using basic security precautions to keep intruders out, so he kinda deserves what he gets.

Isn't that like saying a hot chick jogging at night in a bikini deserves to be raped if she's not carrying any protection?

The question I have about WiFi is this: If the SUV guy was downloading kiddie porn or breaking into Pentagon computers, would it be traced back to the guy who "owns" the WiFi signal? If so, then I see a serious problem with it.

[Lueyen]

The question I have about WiFi is this: If the SUV guy was downloading kiddie porn or breaking into Pentagon computers, would it be traced back to the guy who "owns" the WiFi signal? If so, then I see a serious problem with it.

The answer is yes it could be traced back to him. Would he be charged? Maybe, would he be convicted, unlikely. Most routers are going to have some limited logging that would show it was not him. But this could cause him some severe headaches.

[Tikker]

Okay so this person drove somewhere and specifically went within range of a wireless network to use it for internet service. Did he know that it wasn't a free service? Little hint here, there is never anything that tells you if a service is there for public or private use unless there is some type of authentication.

when you're wardriving, you're specifically looking for unsecured home networks to leech from


he knew damn well what he was doing

most people don't do it maliciously, but some do


most just get off on printing something off the dudes networked printer

[Lueyen]

Sure, and that is an issue. If there was malicious action then yes throw the book at someone. The problem I see is that it is far to easy to hook up unintentionally to a network you don't belong on, and possibly not even realize it. Don't get me wrong I think measures need to be taken to stop wardriving however I don't think we have the neccecary laws to address the issue as the technology and application of it now stand.

First off there needs to be some personal responsibility, just as people have learned to use virus protection and personal firewalls, they also need to secure their private networks. If the tools developed in the industry are not condusive to this then the answer would seem to be to make them more user friendly. More and more common are routers with at least a basic http configuration interface, which is probably leaps and bounds ahead of telnet for configuration for average know very little joe user. However it probably does need to be taken a step further and made less complicated still... and some people will never get it.

Another possibility would be designated channels for open networks vs private ones.

I just don't think the comparison between an unsecured wireless network, and leaving the door to your house unlocked is a completely valid one for the purposes of determining the guilt or innocence of someone treading into your property. I do feel that it is a valid comparison if you are looking at it from the stand point of personal accountability. If you leave your door unlocked, or your network insecure, while I don't think this gives justification to a perpatrator I do think that you must accept some personal resposibility for the situation as you did not use the available tools to prevent the crime. Some of the fault lies on your shoulders for not taking the preventative measures.

[mappatazee]

A comparison would be someone standing outside your window (Possibly in the street) and viewing your television.

[Tuggan]

how does someone just happen to unintentionally stumble onto someones home based wireless connection? i was kinda under the impression people had to drive around looking for a strong enough signal to tap into.