Hijacking a broadband connection

This is true. Whenever you use a free hot spot, you should be using a VPN connection. Unfortunately, most ISPs don't offer VPN to their non-business customers. The ISP I use, includes VPN access on all accounts, even dial-up, which is one of the main reasons I chose them (as well as excellent technical support that is not outsourced).

Yes, no argument there.

Sounds just fine. It might get you some jail time, but that's just additional excitement, eh?

Does that come down against the person connecting to the network (he intended to connect to it) or against him (the network was intended to be open)?

Doesn't hat make using the web a bit of a risky proposition?

Unfortunately, what you wish should be the case is not legally the case.

I get "The file is damaged and could not be repaired" from Adobe Acroblast 7.0.3 on W2KSP4. Please fix so I can disagree with whatever you wrote.

As far as I see it, it comes down against the owner of the network. The person doing the connecting 'instructs' his computer "Look for a network which I can (and am allowed to) use to connect to the internet". It finds a network which is announcing that there are no access restrictions (ie it is open) so the computer makes the connection through it. The person owning the network should not have it configured as 'open' unless that is his intention and wish, and he should bear the responsibility for it being configured as 'open'.

No doubt. But any cases that are likely to be prosecuted would also have extenuating circumstances, such as the one where the user parked in front of the house where the network he was using was located. Or the user of the network was doing malicious damage to the network owner's computers, or was engaging in some illegal activity. No prosecutor is going to touch a case where a user's computer simply connected to an open network (without the user intentionally seeking out open networks), and where no damage was done. The only bad part of this is that we'll likely never see a court decision on such a case, only on the extreme cases where a hacker steals something on an open network, or where someone is driving around neighborhoods with a signal finder, looking for networks to use.

We've become so accustomed to free wireless, at least in parts of the U.S., that we take it for granted when we turn on our PDA or notebook computer and it automatically connects to an open network. We don't think, "gee, I wonder if the open network that my machine connected to automatically is one that I am explicitly allowed to use, or is it just the network of some idiot that didn?t turn on security." It's more "how nice, someone is nice enough to leave their network open and provide free wireless."

The best treastise on this subject that I've seen is at "

" and it's the best because I wrote it.

I wouldn't be too relaxed about keeping no local logs if I were you.

IIRC, RIPA ensures that your ISP must capture and retain information relating to all the activity on your connection so that it can be transmitted to the relevant agencies on production of an appropriate warrent.

In theory, it's not kept for too long - see

- but in reality, one imagines that there is a continuous stream from all the major ISPs into a Government computer centre.

Nick

Not securing a private wireless network is hardly the same as offering a public service. Unless the wireless net _is_ public or corporate, you likely don't even have a duty of care to prevent others accessing it.

I'd be surprised if your router is not equipped to do that - at least the "denying access" part - they are pretty well all designed to permit you to keep out unauthorized users. However, I doubt you can be help liable in most jurisdictions if somebody hijacks your bandwidth. otoh, you _could_ be held liable if illegal material gets stored on your system - which is also possible if you're letting unknown people hack your wireless network.

Hi,

Tha is all well and good until your local "naughty" person decides to download some less then legal pictures or similar using your WiFi / Broadband connection.

In the eyes of the law you could also be held liable for any illegal usage of a "public" service which you may be offering.

At the very least you should be monitoring the usage on your connection to see what people are using it for and denying access to anyone who is using it for less than legal purposes.

Kind Regards

Simon

Really?

Some of the setups I've had here produce no logs.

AIUI under the DPA I cannot retain data for which I now have no need, for the purpose for which it was retained.

I have no need to retain such data for any purpose.

Which law?

My router is not equipped to do that.

Ditto

Derek ^

How? How is the AP designed to keep unauthorised users out? :)

Well possibly untested but in criminal proceedings, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution who must prove beyond reasonable doubt.

I think the defence "is it at all *possible*, that someone could have access the defendants computer via the open network and placed upon it these file?

The answer is an absolute YES it is possible.

Case dismissed. (depending on quality of arguments offered etc.)

David.

I'm not sure what the smiley means in this instance, David. We've certainly had enough discussion of the various methods of security on a.i.wireless.

Agreed, though I've noted in Canada that that "burden of proof" seems to be way lower when the material is child pornography. I did stress the word "could" - I don't find it that likely, either. It was essentially a rebuttal to the guy who figured you'd be liable for "any" illegal usage of your network, and you're picking apart my (I think reasonable) suggestions to the other party that he really could make such things, if not impossible, at least hard enough to meet any reasonable standard that he had not provided a public service.

wrong , see the recent judement on p2p re torrent etc sharing .

Well seriously, I wasn't sure what you meant. MAC filtering does nothing, WEP does nothing. Ok, other than deny the default stumblers. I wasn't trying to be contrary, just wasn't sure to what degree you were saying that AP's will keep out intruders. :)

My concern here is that if someone thinks that MAC filtering is enough to refute that nobody else could be using the LAN or even WEP is a little dangerous. In one way, that's kind of helpful for those that configure MAC/WEP because they can still deny liability!

I still can't help but think that the police should be locking up all the car owners who carelessly locked their cars and didn't weld steel plate over the windows, if the car is used in a robbery for example.

MicroRant over. :)

David.

Can you retain it under XPOS?

Then the fact that the software won't let you is not a problem.

Barry ===== Home page

OK, then I just meant he should use the tools available to secure his network - which really means WPA (accept no substitutes!).