Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Am I really bad if I connect to internet using a neighbours' broadband?

i used to be able to pick up my neighbours wi-fi signal, intended on using it for my psp, but damn he had it protected :mad: :)
 
Boris Sprinkler said:
Despite the fact the connecting to someone elses internet connection is illegal ...
Is it? that seems absurd. At worst it should be a form of civil trespass.

What if someone has intentionally left a wireless gateway to the 'net open on purpose, just to be neighbourly, like?
 
Jonti said:
Is it? that seems absurd. At worst it should be a form of civil trespass.

What if someone has intentionally left a wireless gateway to the 'net open on purpose, just to be neighbourly, like?

In the first instance, it would fall under unauthorised access to a computer system. Penalties can differ as to what that access was for. It is assumed that if you did connect to a network not your own with intent and without permission you would be breaking the law.

The second may not be an offence, however, the person leaving this access open, advertising their SSID as something like "freeinternetfeelfree" would probably be in breach of the TC's of their ISP. From a user perspective it would also be naive to consider this a trusted network.

http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:...+computer+crimes+act&hl=da&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=dk
 
It's not the cop's job to enforce the (civil) T&C of an ISP contract. So I suppose there may be some confusion between a person just using an open gateway (to check their own email, for example) and "unauthorised access" as such to a computer system.

If indeed the cops make such a distinction in the first place ...
 
Ooh, that article says:

That Article said:
While not totally secure, WEP keys do at least provide a modicum of security to thwart all but the most technically-literate hackers.

I have wireless - how do I check that even the most technically literate people do not have access to my computer? I don't mind sharing the connection, but I don't want them getting into anything....

I think I have been secure. I have got a password, anyway...
 
Jonti said:
It's not the cop's job to enforce the (civil) T&C of an ISP contract. So I suppose there may be some confusion between a person just using an open gateway (to check their own email, for example) and "unauthorised access" as such to a computer system.

If indeed the cops make such a distinction in the first place ...

never said it was. Just accessing a wireless network falls under unauthorised access to a computer system unless you have express permission.
 
Interesting that nuLabour has taken it upon itself to make "the kindness of strangers" illegal.

They really are prize cnuts.
 
i would have thought, myself, that making a facility publicly available on the public internet does rather give implicit license to the public to use that facility...

If one can be prosecuted by the cops for that, then I think it is fair comment that "the kindness of strangers" has been repressed by legislation (albeit perhaps ignorantly and unintentionally).
 
Jonti said:
i would have thought, myself, that making a facility publicly available on the public internet does rather give implicit license to the public to use that facility...

not at all. By leaving my front door open whilst out (however foolish), does not grant people to come in and run a bath or indeed rob me.
If I had a sign saying free baths. then yes, assume you can use it.
 
Granted, but I suggest a better analagy is the right to roam free in the countryside.

As long as I commit no damage (and leave when asked) I can freely follow the course of Offa's Dyke, for example, through farmlands and fields. If a gate is open, I may go through it.

Ah, happy memories (including of the occasional gamekeeper with a 12-bore) :D
 
Boris Sprinkler said:
not at all. By leaving my front door open whilst out (however foolish), does not grant people to come in and run a bath or indeed rob me.
If I had a sign saying free baths. then yes, assume you can use it.

It's not quite the same as having an open door, though, IMO.

Looking at it from the way the protocol works, though, a neighbour's computer asks to join the Wireless LAN and is then granted access by your router.

As the owner of the equipment you're designating an agent (the wireless router) to handle requests to use your wireless network on your behalf.

A better analogy would be to have a bouncer stood at your front door instead of a lock, leaving him with instructions to let anyone into your house that asked for entry. You're perhaps a dumb clot if you do that, but that's what you've asked him to do.

Once you secure the network with a password, you've put a proper lock in place.
 
cybertect said:
It's not quite the same as having an open door, though, IMO.

Looking at it from the way the protocol works, though, a neighbour's computer asks to join the Wireless LAN and is then granted access by your router.

As the owner of the equipment you're designating an agent (the wireless router) to handle requests to use your wireless network on your behalf.

A better analogy would be to have a bouncer stood at your front door instead of a lock, leaving him with instructions to let anyone into your house that asked for entry. You're perhaps a dumb clot if you do that, but that's what you've asked him to do.

Once you secure the network with a password, you've put a proper lock in place.

Not entirely. It is the end users decision to join that network. They know whether or not they have permission to join the network. Just because it is unsecured does not mean that you can. Regardless of the protocols. The initial DHCPDISCOVER comes from the client machine, not the host network.
 
Back
Top Bottom