It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Arrested For Using Wireless Internet

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:02 AM
link   
As an example to how ludicrous this is.

If the CIA and NASA put all their networks online without any kind of authentication, so that everyone who knows how to connect to their network can take any and all data they please, is it a crime for people to do so?

Or is it a crime and gross negligence of NASA and the CIA to leave themselves wide open and exposed?

Same goes for these wifi networks.
If I drive around my town wardriving, I detect between 400 and 600 (depending on TOD) uniqie hotspots, at least 50% of those are wide open and can, at the least, be used as free internet connections, at the worst, you can access these people's private data just by opening explorer and browsing trough their computers.

When its obvious which house is wide open, I usually notify the owner of the hotspot about this, and in town meetings I brought up this issue several times. But don't think that these warnings make any difference, the numbers stay about the same (although usually, when I identify a hotspot and notify the person, they do take care of the problem)




posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by yanchek
 


Actually the bailiff law is quite wrong, you have to open the door and even then it's very wrong if they enter, the foot in the door appraoch is quite illegal and yet few people know that.

I'm sorry but this is very wrong. What is unauthorised access? Well it's access that hasn't been expressly given by the owning party. Simply leaving access open isn't permission.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by yanchek
CD is a material thing not a service.


Stealing a service is still a crime. The ISP and the user have a contract between them. One to provide the service in return for payment. This bloke had no such contract and as such, was accessing bandwidth and network elements he did not have the right too.

The line that the ISP provides belongs to them and even the router they provide free is technically theirs as well. By him accessing it and using the service without payment or authorisation, regardless of whether the network was secured, is theft.

It's really quite simple.


Originally posted by yanchek
So by your definition if you went to a bar and drank a half of bottle of beer, pay for it, and then went home and another guy or bartender drank the other half that would be theft?


Yes, it is. Legally.

If you find money on the floor, technically you are supposed to hand it and see if anyone claims it. After a period, if no one claims it, you can keep it. If you keep it straight away that is, technically, theft.

It boils down to thus:

If it isn't yours to take and you do not have permission to do so, then you have committed theft, regardless where, when or what it is.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:13 AM
link   
www.wifinetnews.com...



cites 30 studies that connect EMR at high frequencies and signal strengths comparable to WLANs to health problems.


So... "THEY" can emit high frequency waves that cause EVERYONE health problems....

but only "those that can afford" to pay for the connection get to use it.

Hrm...

Sounds like the high tension power lines that crackle over my home.... even though I keep my personal power bill under 30/month ($20 connection charge).

Where is the justice in this?

Personally I say wifi needs to be shut down; entirely, completely...

Is this world not polluted enough already?

I am,

Sri Oracle



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkheartrising
yeah! go england...yet another example of how it has become a police state...and you guys worry about the US. taking our rights??? you should have never given up your rights to bear arms...mistake #1


lol I don't see how it makes us a police state, you're not allowed to steal things anywhere in the world. Does that make it a police world?
And about the right to bear arms... are you suggesting that if this happened in America the perpetrator should have shot the police officer? I'm not sure that would better the situation in any way.


Anyway this is dodgy ground because anyone who turns their laptop on while sitting in the street would automatically be connected to the nearest open WiFi connection, laptops do that automatically. Maybe if the guy repeatedly used their connection after they'd asked him not to then he could face trouble. But still, why don't they just encrypt it?



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by thematrix

If the CIA and NASA put all their networks online without any kind of authentication, so that everyone who knows how to connect to their network can take any and all data they please, is it a crime for people to do so?

Or is it a crime and gross negligence of NASA and the CIA to leave themselves wide open and exposed?


You should read this

Legal Issues of Intercepting WiFi Transmissions



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by malganis
Anyway this is dodgy ground because anyone who turns their laptop on while sitting in the street would automatically be connected to the nearest open WiFi connection, laptops do that automatically. Maybe if the guy repeatedly used their connection after they'd asked him not to then he could face trouble. But still, why don't they just encrypt it?


Just because laptops do that (and YOU can change the setting to turn this off) does not make it right or legal.

I can automatically kill my girlfriend with a toaster in the bath, but it ain't legal.

As for you last bit "why don't they just encrypt it". Well, some people are just stupid. A surprisingly large amount, in fact. Even supposedly intelligent people can be quite dumb.

I'm a Network Engineer for a large telco in the UK and I have to speak to customer "engineers" when they have faults. Firstly, they blame us. Once I have proved the network good, they will still blame us, but ask us to help. eventually, after much consternation, they will admit it's them, but still want us to fix it because they don't know how.

Face it, people on the whole are dumb animals. Just because people are dumb, does not give others the excuse to take advantage of them.


apc

posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:30 AM
link   
The tech side of this thread has been quite amusing. Thank you all.


Oh boy...

Erm anyway it's unauthorized access to a private network, which even in the US is a crime in some states. Access to network resources in almost every state. This UK law is nothing abnormal.

Funny that several years ago when just 802.11b was in its infancy, it was predicted that WiFi would become The Wireless Internet by default. There would be so many access points that no matter where you went you could get a signal.

Unfortunately these were the dreams of nerds who didn't realize the average user would have no clue how to segregate the radio from the internal network.

So now we have laws to protect the poor users... the death of a dream.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by apc
The tech side of this thread has been quite amusing. Thank you all.


Oh boy...



How so?



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:42 AM
link   
My only issue would be turning this into a 'strict liability' crime. In many circumstances, how does the average consumer know which networks are intended to be public versus those which are private?

If a network is intended to be private, then regardless of the lack of security precautions, one should not be allowed to simply "take it'. But I think a degree of wrongful intent should still be a prerequisite to any liability.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:42 AM
link   
I read an news article about a man charged with stealing a connection. He was in North Carolina and he was sitting in his car outside a Star Bucks I think. He would go out there on his lunch break. The employees thought he was stalking a woman that worked there, so they called the police. Well when the police arrived, he told them he that he came over there to check his e-mail. So the police, I believe just trying to find something on him, said that he did break the law by using the connection since he was in his car and not inside the shop.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:42 AM
link   
The main point is that Britain is becoming, or has become, the example of a first level nation being slowly and surely relegated to a police state, and fast. In Englad it is plain and apparent that the people are being herded into a sheep like mentality that accepts whatever the politicians say. It is beyond crazy that we can see microchips in trash cans ( dustbins?) and cameras everywhere and cops with almost unlimited powers to detain and arrest.

We are witnessing the first stages of the total control of populations and Britain is just the stage managed example that the real rulers will point to as proof that their nefarious system works. the USA is not far behind. It goes slower here as we still are an armed and dangerous nation to the people who would rule us totally; Britain has been disarmed ( except for cops and crooks ) and the British people have NO alternative except to obey the powers that be.

Of course the Americans are just as weak and just as ill informed as anyone else in the world, maybe more so than our European counterparts, but we still have a mentality here that gives us a little more time to choose up sides in the coming culture war. We are fast losing our middle class; the middle class are the people who never complain and never deminstrate or riot when things get bad; they just drink a beer and watch Fox news and the football game and drift off to sleep, never worrying about the ' problems of the politicians ' until it is too late. When our middle class has been neutered, the lower classes, much less dependent on words to settle disputes, get fed up with the horrid treachery of the rulers here, will revolt en masse and we will get a revolution of sorts here, which we need badly.

It will take the almost total collapse of this society to shake the dumbed down and lazy Americans out of their slumber and into the streets to take this nation back. Only when the remnant of the middle cloass decides that there is nothing left to lose will any real change take place. I predict that there will come a time, very soon, when the police will abandon patrolling and bothering people over petty crap like they do now, due to the armed and violant response of the people against a total meltdown of the country.

If it comes down to being placed into a camp somewhere or dying in ones own doorway, many here would rather make a last stand and go down fighting. many Brits would have to give it up and surreneder as they cannot defend themselves at all; butcher knives do not stand up well to real weapons. Most Americans have guns, many have quite a few guns, and ammo, stored away and ready to repel enemies from within.

It is all an experiment by the big players to see how much people will take; the Brits have shown that they will take almost ANY level of intrusive and illegal conduct by the govt. without protest. At least here, as bad as we are, we still have a chance to at least take out as many as possible before they conquer; we can make it expensive for them. In Britain, it will be easy to contain and bully the people as they have been nconditioned that way for a long time, in incremental steps we all have seen.

What to do? Not sure, except keep your powder dry ( if you have any ) and be ready to defend and protect your against the powers that be in the near future when it all comes down.


apc

posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:43 AM
link   

stumason
How so?


People who have no clue what they're talking about and are just regurgitating jargon they've picked up on vs. people who actually know a thing or two about wlans being argued with. It cracks me up every time.

[edit on 24-8-2007 by apc]



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:46 AM
link   
Incidentally, this "police state" argument I keep seeing in connection with this issue is nonsense.

Government protection of private property is a good thing.

Now, for example, if the government attempted to limit my ability to share my network with others, then THAT would much better fit the police state argument people seem to be looking for.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
I'm sorry but this is very wrong. What is unauthorised access? Well it's access that hasn't been expressly given by the owning party. Simply leaving access open isn't permission.


Not entirely true.

Packet sniffing, tempest attack, password cracking and buffer overflow are common techniques used for unauthorised access.

Packet sniffing (we could also say Wi-Fi Eavesdropping) with Wi-Fi is actually legal in UK. In the UK listening to broadcasts in the Industrial, Science and Medical (ISM) band is not illegal as this is a license exempt band and Wi-Fi is 802.X standard.

The other thing is understanding of the law in general. Anything that is not strictly or explicitly forbidden is alowed/legal hence aguments in court of law.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
The main point is that Britain is becoming, or has become, the example of a first level nation being slowly and surely relegated to a police state, and fast. In Englad it is plain and apparent that the people are being herded into a sheep like mentality that accepts whatever the politicians say. It is beyond crazy that we can see microchips in trash cans ( dustbins?) and cameras everywhere and cops with almost unlimited powers to detain and arrest.


OK.

You are talking bollocks. You do not know what you are talking about.

I could rifle through the same old debate, but I'll refer you to this thread instead;

Lets settle this "UK is a Police State" Rubbish right now

Where I - and a whole host of other English/British people have made some very pertinent posts about the subject.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by apc
People who have no clue what they're talking about and are just regurgitating jargon they've picked up on vs. people who actually know a thing or two about wlans being argued with. It cracks me up every time.

[edit on 24-8-2007 by apc]


Ahh... Happens in every thread, no matter the topic!



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 12:19 PM
link   
neformore, I was about to refer him there myself!

Thanks for beating me too it!



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Although, that is not to say the police state argument does not hold true for other examples.

See, for example, Children taken from parents and adopted ‘to meet ministry targets’



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by yanchek
This is a legal grey area.

Wi-Fi is broadcast. It is not a point-to-point communication. Data is sent out just like a radio station broadcasts data, for anyone and everyone to pick up and use (if the usage of this data is not against the law).


Anyway you stack it, its still theft of a utility.
If the person is broadcasting with the unit wide open, then you still cannot use it. It is theft against the provider of the service to do otherwise. The person, who is broadcasting it, whether doing so knowingly or not, does not have the right to broadcast that service to the public. The service is property of the ISP provider, and is licensed solely for the use of the person who’s its being served too.

To say otherwise is the same as saying that it’s ok for you to buy cable TV, and then hook up all your neighbors’ houses through your service…



Theft of Utilities
Utility theft can be charged in several different situations. Perhaps the most common scenario involves the modification, alteration or adjustment of a meter designed to record the per unit usage of a given utility, such as gas, water, or electricity. Another frequent situation is the unlawful hook-up of cable television or subscription based cable services like HBO or Cinemax. Additionally, Florida’s law dealing with utility theft also applies to instances where a person has used water or power from a neighbor’s home without permission. Utility theft is a first degree misdemeanor, regardless of the actual value of the utility service received. In fact, just the act of installing the necessary hook-up or changing the meter is enough to trigger a charge under this particular law. However, if the value of the utility service received is greater than $300, the prosecutor always has the option to charge the unlawful use of the utility as a grand theft which would cause the charge to be classified as a felony rather than a misdemeanor.


Actually based on the above, the person or company who left the connection unsecured is also liable as they did not have the right to broadcast the service to the general public.


[edit on 8/24/2007 by defcon5]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join