Surfing for Free--

I have discovered that I can surf wireless with my hp notebook. I set up the connection manually; I am getting a fast connection- but a very weak signal. I believe that this is my neighbor's broadband connection and that he is using a router; therefore I can surf on his connection?? I have firewalled this wifi connection and all ports were found to be stealth. Is there any way to make my signal stronger(without entering my neighbor's apartment)? Anyone with knowledge on this subject, please post. I am a novice on wifi but have considerable knowledge on software, configuration, os, etc When I hold pointer over my connection it says netgear(linksys) signal strength very low,5.5mbps, sometimes 11.0mbps, right now says 2.0mbps.

Reply to
Robert
Loading thread data ...

I don't know where you live, but most places in the States consider what you are doing to be illegal. It doesn't matter if your neighbor is intentionally allowing access, many locales still consider it stealing and his ISP may also.

Reply to
ken

What kind of card do I get that allows an internal antenna to be used w my notebook? Can you give me the item number and what site I can purchase this from? Someone from tech depot recommended a repeater but when I called up tech support for the manufacturers of this item, they said I would have to have access to the router(which is in the neighbor's apartment). I believe the item mentioned by tech depot was by "Buffalo". Can you please give more details as to how I would use these devices to amplify the signal? Thank you.

Reply to
Robert

I have read about this in the USA but let me get it clear, for example in a Starbucks or coffee house and wifi is allowed this is ok to use? I live in Canada and we have wifi hot spots completely free and fine to use. Universities, shopping centers, coffee houses, to be another example. I understand security invasions with using a neighbors wifi signal however I don t believe it is illegal here. Excuse me but I know nothing about the USA except for your television programming.

thanks

Reply to
Stivv

Well...

You could get a card for your laptop that allows an external antenna to be connected, or you could run a repeater.

Before doing either, I'd ask your neighbors if its okay if you use their AP though. Its likely they won't care. I have one AP that is open for anyone to use (using a captive portal) -- even showed my (elderly) next door neighbors how to use it from their back porch.

Reply to
Eric

I can see it being a violation of the ISP's Terms of Service.

(Hypothetical)

If all parties cared enough to "take action" in that situation, the ISP could cancel the neighbor's service by his breaching the Terms of Service. They could also file a civil action against the neighbor, seeking damages. The neighbor, in turn, could file a civil action against the OP, also seeking damages. The OP could file a counter civil action, against the neighbor, stating that his laptop was setup to automatically connect to the nearest open AP -- and his neighbor was connecting to him to cause damage! (Comms work both ways.)

....but "illegal"?

What laws are being broken by someone connecting to an open, even unintentionally open, AP?

(Ethically, I agree that someone shouldn't take advantage of an AP simply because it is unintentionally left open.)

Reply to
Eric

Illegal? Please quote which law is being broken......

Reply to
riggor99999

Google down again or not finding any hits with keywords like, oh I don't know: "laptop", "pcmcia", "cardbus", "rp/sma/mmcx, mc-card", "antenna", ect...?

You don't have to physical access to an originating AP to set up a repeater off it. This was probably his indirect way of saying, "Why don't you ask this person if you can use his AP?"

Hold on, lets stop and think about this for a second. You can see your neighbor's AP. When you set up a repeater, don't you think your neighbor is going to see it? Even if your neighbor's AP is open unintentionally by his/her own ignorance, they going to see a duplicate of their SSID -- coming from an unfamiliar MAC address. You might as well hang a sign up.

I don't mean to come off as "pompous" (or whatever the word is), but, seriously -- just talk to your neighbor and ask if you can use it. Not only might they not care, but they might even help you do so. I did for my neighbor.

Reply to
Eric

formatting link

Reply to
ken

Snip..............................

In the UK

formatting link
was prosecuted under the Communications Act and found guilty of dishonestly obtaining an electronic communications service

Reply to
Rob

"Theft of service", but it would have to be without even implied consent. You _can't_ steal from someone if they don't object to it. Just because the authorities "consider" it to be illegal doesn't make it so.

In Canada, and I'm pretty certain in the US, it would require the owner of the open AP to press charges. If sharing his Internet connection was a violation of his terms of service, the ISP might force him to press charges to keep his service. Nothing in the cited article indicates whether this was or was not the case in the UK.

Reply to
Derek Broughton

Yes. There are open WiFi hot spots in US. Starbucks is a valid example. Many libraries now add them.

The point is still valid that "unlocked" does not necessarily means "open for all".

Reply to
Eugene F.

"ken" wrote..

...and exactly which law is being quoted in that article?

Yeah, I remember incident. There was never a follow-on or update to it. I doubt he ended up being charged with anything.

From the article:

"The sentence we'll seek depends on whether he was accessing the Internet for basic personal use, or using it for pecuniary gain -- like identity theft -- or other illicit reasons," said Fred Schaub of Florida's State Attorney's office.

In other words, ("The sentence we'll seek"), they realized after bringing him in that there really wasn't anything they could hold him for with just using that open AP. They have to look at what he actually did with it and determine if those actions were unlawful.

Should be simple:

An open AP is implied consent for anyone to access it.

Likewise, an "open client" (settings set to "automatically connect to any AP") is also implied consent for any AP to connect with it. (Comms works both ways. Clients connecting to an "open AP" can be at risk too.)

What happens after a connection is established can be unlawful though. I.e., say someone using an AP to transfer child pornography. They could easily be prosecuted. In my second example above, say if someone were to use their AP with a captive portal and automatically spit out child pornography to unsuspecting connecting clients -- they could also be prosecuted.

Beyond that, it is just civil BS.

Reply to
Eric

Ok. (I admit my "prejudice" with thinking only about in the US.)

...but, this article leaves many unanswered questions:

"Details in this particular case are sketchy, although it is known that Gregory Straszkiewicz had "piggybacked" on a wireless broadband network of a local Ealing resident, using a laptop while sitting in his car."

Was it an open, unencrypted, AP or did he break the encryption? (I want to say that breaking encryption might be "illegal". Not sure on that though.)

What was he doing on the network after he connected -- and what do they mean exactly by "piggybacking"?

Reply to
Eric

Doesn't matter whether it is encrypted or not. Offences relating to networks and services

125 Dishonestly obtaining electronic communications services

(1) A person who- (a) dishonestly obtains an electronic communications service, and (b) does so with intent to avoid payment of a charge applicable to the provision of that service, is guilty of an offence.

In simplistic terms "Getting a free ride"

Reply to
Rob

Ok. Gotcha. Googled the above, found it as part of the UK's "Communication's Act" of 2003, and skimmed some of it.

The language seems very open to interpretation though. ("dishonestly obtains an electronic communications service")

What defines "dishonest"? Simply establishing a connection or circumventing security measures?

Reply to
Eric

That's the whole point of legal text, so that they can later try and twist it to suit the scenario they want to prosecute for. The challenge is providing a better argument for the defence.

Precisely! The computer establishes a connection if it can well it used to, it could be argued that now XP for example asks you if you want to connect to an unsecured network, thus you are are affirming its actions. However, can you be proven that you were being dishonest or that you were intendeing to avoid payment? How are you to not know that it wasn't a nearby free service?

Try this piece of amazing UK pending legislation for example:-

formatting link

Reply to
David Taylor

As this was possibly the first case I should imagine the CPS{Crown Prosecution Service} did their best to cover all the angles they could think of at that time and now a "Precedent" has been set.

Reply to
Rob

Not necessarily, like I said, it just depends on the two legal arguments being put and which one seems better on the day. Look up speeding defences, you'd think they'd have covered all angles by now but nope, better defences just keep on coming.

David.

Reply to
David Taylor

I don't "Speeding Offences" and "Legal Arguments" always work well together.I found it was much cheaper to plead guilty and pay the £60 fine rather than take a day off work, have a round trip of 400+ miles and maybe have the case dismissed, and god knows how much it would have cost if I had used a solicitor.

Rob

Reply to
Rob

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.