Man in Florida arrested who was using unauthorized Wi-Fi - Page 17

Because of the media attention it got.

Ok so it is the law (and please someone point to some documentation of this law) but as with any thing what is wrong with debating the issue or law? Laws have been changed before. I know many of you are saying the you agree the onus should be on the router owner but argueing a legal standpoint, fine.

But I think the debate is not whether or not it is legal so much as should it be legal.

Example; I just moved. This weekend I was informed that the neighbors who are puting up a new wall cut the cable line going to my house. So I will not have cable (TV or Internet) for 2 weeks. While setting up my computers I discovered that the same neighbors have a wireless internet connection that is not secured. First thing that happened was my wife's computer connected to it. I then disconnected from it so as to not be "stealing" because i think that would be wrong. However since they cut my cable line I am going to ask them if they wouldn't mind sharing it with us till ours gets installed. And then offer them info on how to secure it so others do not take it with out them knowing.

I don't think people should try to find (drive around or whatever) open unsecured wifi from private connections. However I also feel that individuals should secure their networks.

Almost anytime a car is stolen or broken into one of the first questions asked was "Was your car locked?" or "Were your keys in the car?" I have heard that asked by police and insurance companies alike. Is it because by leaving the car keys in or unlocked you invited the crime? No. But then you can be considered negligent.

meh <shrugs>

I have seen sad comparisons in the past, but this has to be the most pathetic.

It's fairly enjoyable, I like a debate.

Just accept it- it's something that another person is paying for. Using their bandwidth lowers their enjoyment/use of the servie they pay for. Tapping into a satelite feed doesnt do that.

***Sure it does you are using their service and they are not getting any money in return. The sat. company is paying to have that service broadcast and for the multimillion dollar sat.

The guy wasn't arrested for logging onto the network as such, more for using someone else property. Since we seem to like analogies, having a ping of the network is I guess like looking into someones front room as you walk by- nice telly etc. If they have their blinds down, then its WPA, hehe.

***by the same note you broadcasting a signal over my property is using my property because you are "polluting" that person's airspace. Aka you could be causing that person's wireless phone not to work or other said items. Take it you wouldn't mind if I sent up a multi-frequency generator on my property and broadcast out all bands in the 2.4Ghz range and effectively jammed your wireless device and/or wireless 2.4Ghz phone from working. This happens with ham radio operators all the time.

Now, you can see their room, you can see the tv. But you can't really recline with a cold one, ca you. Now walk into their house, watch the telly, drink their beer. That's a crime.

I bet you someone will bleat- "But it's their property then", yeah, it is. So is bandwidth. The fac you are venturing onto their property is irrelevant for this- you are still taking up their space on the couch, drinking their beer, etc.

***read above about me jamming you and denying you and bandwidth. Too bad so sad.

Or another one. You're at a cafe, on the last table. You get up to go to the toilet, leaving some clear notification it's you're table. You come back, someone there. You'd be pissed, it's your "property" again- you don't own it, but you have reserved it for your use.

***bad comparison, you cannot reserve a airwave or frequency unless you bought the rights from FCC. Airwaves and frequencies are public property and anyone can use it the public band that isn't reserved. Reserved ones are restricted and not allowed to be used in some cases or other restrictions. Good example is you can't broadcast any band of radar range frequency from your auto unless you are licensed to...aka law enforcement.

Our society and most others are built on this- you don't use smeone elses stuff without permission. If they are broadvasting round the neghbourhood, tell them so and ask if they mind you using. Offer to help them setup WPA. Just have permission to use it.

***please people do this all the time. People park their car, boats and etc on public streets all the time, using others rights and community property without permission. The road is owned by all...aka the tax payers, what right do you have to park your car there 24/7(like it's and extension of your private property) in front of your house causing others to avoid it and wait for oncoming traffic. Specially when you have open space in your driveway?! I could go on and on, but what's the point.

Its the law.

Its common sense.

Its the way things are

You seem to quite effectively miss all of my points, nicely done!

If you want to setup a multifrequncy tramsimitter, and take all of my radio waves, there's nothing I can do (I dont tihnk, although I have an idea that you can only use 802.11 signal up to 10db- probably wrong there). Its not illegal, its just stupid and a moronic exmaple to be honest. No one would do that.

No, broadcasting a signal is not "polluting" your property in the eyes of the law. If I cause you phone no to work, tough cookies, it doesnt. Not my problem.

You seem to be mising my point, in fact I'll make it in capitals:

THE LAW IS THAT IT IS ILLEGAL TO USE SOMEONE ELSES NETWORK WITHOUR PERMISSION.

Mmmkay? Sure, if you want it changed, do so. If you want to open yours by making the SSID "Free wifi!" do so. But unitl then, assume a few tihngs:

1) using someone elses network and looking at their files is a crime, no matter how easy it is

2) using someone elses bandwidth is stealing, no matter how easy it is

3) I dont want you to go on my network. You should assume everyone else is like me, no matter what their level of skill is. Assuming someone wouldnt mind is just arrogant.

rodada65 you sound like a kind and very reasonable person... (in a sense you are discussed at great length in law... statutes and case law are always referrin' to "the reasonable person" lol... it's tryin' to say what would a normal, reasonable person, with common sense do... Merriam-Webster defines reasonable as “moderate, fair – not extreme or excessive”... i think most of us would love to be around people described like that )

there is nothing wrong with being ignorant, it simply means you don't know something and that applies to ALL of us - NO EXCEPTIONS...

From my post #292… please especially see the part I’ve made bold:

You are welcome to feel that way and say it because the highest law in our land, the Constitution, allows it, just as it allows others to disagree with you.

Again, you are pretty much allowed to do whatever you want with your own property, personal or real.

Everyone please, please appreciate these rights. Most ppl in this world will never have them and those of us that do have had to pay the highest price for them. Maybe not us personally, but many have paid the ultimate price.

Glad you agree with me that wireless should come with security enabled, etc. It should be easy to enable security and difficult to disable it.

These ppl are not necessarily stupid – most are just ignorant. All of us are ignorant of the vast majority of things but this is no crime or anything to be ashamed of. There’s just too much to know!

[quote=snafle]You seem to quite effectively miss all of my points, nicely done!

If you want to setup a multifrequncy tramsimitter, and take all of my radio waves, there's nothing I can do (I dont tihnk, although I have an idea that you can only use 802.11 signal up to 10db- probably wrong there). Its not illegal, its just stupid and a moronic exmaple to be honest. No one would do that.

***you seem to miss my point YOU DO NOT OWN ANY RADIO WAVES, THEY ARE NOT YOURS! Piss the neighbor off and he might feel like doing it. Just like idiots that buy a new wap and set it up without even checking to see if someone else is arleady running that channel near them.

No, broadcasting a signal is not "polluting" your property in the eyes of the law. If I cause you phone no to work, tough cookies, it doesnt. Not my problem.
*** actually that is wrong, a local radio station was forced to lower it's wattage after installing a new tower because it was causing interference with people's TVs living close to it.

You seem to be mising my point, in fact I'll make it in capitals:

THE LAW IS THAT IT IS ILLEGAL TO USE SOMEONE ELSES NETWORK WITHOUR PERMISSION.

***Did I ever say it wasn't illegal? No I stated it shouldn't be any different then the case is for getting a sat. TV signal, which isn't. I quote myself "My take on accessing an unsecured wireless network from public property (aka the street out front) or from your own private property is that it should be legal."

Mmmkay? Sure, if you want it changed, do so. If you want to open yours by making the SSID "Free wifi!" do so. But unitl then, assume a few tihngs:1) using someone elses network and looking at their files is a crime, no matter how easy it is

2) using someone elses bandwidth is stealing, no matter how easy it is.

***take it if your on a shared cable network and the neighbor is running a file server you should turn him in for stealing from you...lmao


3) I dont want you to go on my network. You should assume everyone else is like me, no matter what their level of skill is. Assuming someone wouldnt mind is just arrogant.

***kind of like driving if you don't know jack about it you shouldn't be doing it same goes for having wireless.

btw, A is a restriced band - it's used for emergency services and is watched over very closely by the FCC...

i.e. router makers (a D-Link tech told me this) are not allowed to have removable (read upgradeable) antennas on A band routers cause ppl have been installing larger/more powerful ones and are interferring with emergency services...

the services notice it immediately because they are on 24/7 and people's lives are are in the balance which certainly trumps OUR use...

i still much prefer using A band instead of G... i have the Intel ProWireless 2915abg which is known to be finicky (to say the least) and it seems to do much better on A...

Err I never heard of that...

From what I know emergency services use(look for ***) like:

29 to 29.7 MHz (10 Meter "Ham" Band)
29.7 to 50 MHz (VHF Low Band)
50 to 54 MHz (6 Meter Amateur Band)
108 to 137 MHz (Aircraft Band)
137 to 144 MHz (Military Land Mobile)
144 to 148 MHz (2 Meter "Ham" Band)
148 to 174 MHz (VHF High Band) ***many police and fire here.
406 to 420 MHz (Federal Government Land Mobile)
420 to 450 MHz (70 cm "Ham" Band)
450 to 470 MHz (UHF Standard Band)
470 to 512 MHz (UHF "T" Band ) ***some here

*** and some use the 800 Mhz range.

info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UHF
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/802.11a

i only know what the D-Link tech told me when i asked why my A band router had a fixed antenna and my G had a screw on... said the FCC made a ruling... that the A used to be just like the G but they had to change it... can't imagine why he'd wanna lie bout that... he said they could keep makin' em just had to have non-removable antennas...

he did add that since i was inquiring about it that i might be one of those ppl that would change it, amplify it, etc. anyway and if i did that emergency services near me would be able to tell prolly so he advised me not to do it cause anybody that's seen an FCC penalty (i have) for that sort of thing KNOWS it's VERY severe cause you had to knowingly go to a lotta trouble so you know you were doin' something wrong... i do know that is true...

judges and juries have no sympathy for ppl like that... kinda the equivalent of child molesters – endangering others lives for their own selfish purposes…

http://www.tomsnetworking.com/News_story_more_249.php

That is only thing I know of that was ever been pulled because of FCC issues. It was a 2.4Ghz range booster.

I did find this though...which backs up what the tech said, http://www.proxim.com/products/bwa/m...int/mp11/mp11/ I see where it can be used by public safety first responders or as a metro transportation monitoring system.

But, what miffs me is it says it can be used as a residential unit. With the antenna amp below it has a line of sight of 5 - 32 miles! That unit can be had for about $350 on ebay. Hell with that range I could surf my home connection from work, screw using their network...

You can get antenna boosters for A-band devices. http://www.teletronics.com/mseriesamp.html

I would guess the real reason why the FCC is tight about A-band is because it falls into the "microwave" range of frequencies and they don't like people mucking around in it that don't have licenses. Plus, high watt microwaves can mess you up! You see this listed on the link above "Teletronics' TT5800", now see this FCC license link

http://www.teletronics.com/grantofequip.pdf ..."must be located at least 1 meter from all persons." And this one weak mofo device .31 watts output. Where I work at they have high power microwave RF dishes that if you stood in front of it for any length of time you'd be trashed.

If you are techy enough to know its someone else using your Wifi channel, then you are skilled enough to change it. Reacting in this way, sure some people might do it, but it's a hell of a lot of effort to spite someone who is simply ignorant.

This is a completely different exmaple, if you don't understand the concepts of different frequency bands having different laws, then go research them.

Getting satelite TV is different, I've already written about it above. Laws are there to protect the majority, not to give a minority acces to other people's stuff. Well, in theory at least

No, that's in the contract, the line is contended. If you want to take it up with your ISP, that's fine, just say he's using more than his fair sahre of bandwidth. Unles you're ISP has a policy on this (mine, 20 gigs a month) then you're likely to be told to piss off.

Not really, not. In fact, nothing like it. I don't even know where to start with that comment.

OMG! LMFAO!!! 32 fookin' MILES... just too much

dude, thanks for the info but mostly for the best laff i've had in a while...

Dude, that rules. I must get one, heh.

If you are techy enough to know its someone else using your Wifi channel, then you are skilled enough to change it. Reacting in this way, sure some people might do it, but it's a hell of a lot of effort to spite someone who is simply ignorant.

***Nice opinion...which everyone has. They should know enough to check to see if anyone else is already using that channel in the area. And you ASSume that everyone is techy enough to know, where as the first person that set their's up might not be able to figure out why all the sudden their wireless is having problems, which is caused by the moron down the street...it isn't all about me it's about others and their situation.



This is a completely different exmaple, if you don't understand the concepts of different frequency bands having different laws, then go research them.

*** No it isn't, the radio station was polluting those people's airspace so they couldn't get quality reception. I do understand, so don't try to think you are smart or above anyone by thinking for one second you're insulting me.



Getting satelite TV is different, I've already written about it above. Laws are there to protect the majority, not to give a minority acces to other people's stuff. Well, in theory at least

***how much different is it? Satelite TV is a digital network.


No, that's in the contract, the line is contended. If you want to take it up with your ISP, that's fine, just say he's using more than his fair sahre of bandwidth. Unles you're ISP has a policy on this (mine, 20 gigs a month) then you're likely to be told to piss off.


****it's a joke get over it... oh, and if your ISP has a limit then they suck...

Not really, not. In fact, nothing like it. I don't even know where to start with that comment.


***easy like many things in life if you don't know anything about it you shouldn't be using it...be it driving, shooting a gun, operating a bandsaw, etc. A really good example is idiots with cell phones that talk on them while pumping gas.

I didn't think I was insulting you, heh.

The radio antenna could only interfere with the TVs for two reasons- it was broadcaasting on the same channel as the TV station, or it was so powerful that it caused interference. Both of these are illegal. To broadcast on radio you need a license. Same goes for TV.

Wifi on the other hand has a set frequcny band devoted to it. Anyone can use this, as long as their broadvast stays within the power limit.

Getting sattelite TV illegally is different. You arent using and *cuasing some elses service to degrade*. You are simply picking up a signal. And I think it is illegal anyway, the people just got away with it on a tehcnicality.

And yes, I am aware that my ISP sucks, but since most ISP in my area are limited and my dad wants to go with BT, I have little say. They dont seem to enforce it, anyway.

The radio antenna could only interfere with the TVs for two reasons- it was broadcaasting on the same channel as the TV station, or it was so powerful that it caused interference. Both of these are illegal. To broadcast on radio you need a license. Same goes for TV.

***This is all general knowledge.

Wifi on the other hand has a set frequcny band devoted to it. Anyone can use this, as long as their broadvast stays within the power limit.

Getting sattelite TV illegally is different. You arent using and *cuasing some elses service to degrade*. You are simply picking up a signal. And I think it is illegal anyway, the people just got away with it on a tehcnicality.



The sat. tv isn't illegal. This is why Direct TV changed their boxes out and went to a better encryption scheme. Heck, back when cell phones where analog it wasn't illegal(they were not wiretapping...aka listening to conversation) to intercept the signal and people where doing it to steal people's phone IDs by standing on over passes with scanners. Hence, the push to go digital and have encryption so this wouldn't happen.

Yes, and anyone who buys GMRS band two-radios at Best Buy, Circuit City is supposed to have a FCC license to use it too...and I am sure everyone that is buying one is...

Point is it's only illegal when you get caught.

funny, that was sorta what i said to a CPA i was having lunch with..

i'm a self-employed consulting programmer/analyst so over the years i've spent more than my share of time on the road so i've always used radar detectors... we were talking about tax write-offs and i said i write off my radar detector... the CPA said "you can't do that!" i said "as long as the IRS does not disallow it, then i can write off anything!" pizzed her off something terrible lol

i then told her that i'd written off things that really weren't for business, the IRS had audited me and found no problems... she was so upset she got up and left lol

A few tidbits regarding various posts in this thread:

1. 2.4GHz is pretty close to the same frequency that microwave ovens use. It's an efficient frequency to excite water molecules. But 2.4GHz wifi is so low powered that it doesn't do any appreciable harm. Maybe if you straddled your wifi hub you might eventually have a problem, but wifi doesn't put out the hundreds of watts of power that a microwave oven does. Anyway, 2.4GHz is microwave.

2. It was and still is illegal to receive the old 800-900MHz analog cell phone signals. The Federal Communications Act of 1934 pretty much made it legal to receive anything that was being broadcast. Many of the communication laws since then have been to create exceptions to that blanket "right." When the cell phone companies first started out, they foolishly used unencrypted FM which could easily be received by anyone with a radio that tuned the cell frequencies. Of course cell customers complained, so the cell companies decided that they didn't need to upgrade their technology, they needed laws to help them. Congress passed laws that not only made it illegal to listen to cell conversations, they made it illegal to make radios capable of receiving the old analog cell frequencies.

3. Receiving pay services without paying is called "theft of service." It's illegal. Not all satellite TV signals are pay services, though.

4. Broadcasting a signal powerful enough to overload the front end of a television is not illegal. It is incumbent upon the television manufacturer to make their TVs so that they reject strong local signals. Some do; some don't. Years ago you used to be able to tell when your neighbor was running their toy electric train by the hash it generated on your TV. The electrical noise from the train might have been questionable, but there was no doubt that the front end selectivity on the TV was pathetic. There are many amateur radio operators who can legally broadcast over 1000 watts on licensed frequencies that are nowhere near TV or radio or any other household electronic device. When a crappy piece of consumer electronics gets interference from that, it's legally NOT the amateur radio operator's problem. Many of them will offer to help their neighbor correct the problem with bypass capacitors, line filters, etc. but they do that to be good neighbors, not because they have to.

5. If you live near a broadcast station and their signal overloads your TV, stereo, etc. then it's most likely your problem, just like with the amateur radio operators. There are no "RF pollution" laws that make it incumbent on a commercial broadcaster to change something they're doing as long as they're within the technical limits of their license (power, harmonic radiation, signal purity, etc.) Then again, if you live where massive RF overload is a problem for your electronics, you might want to shut off the electronics and start thinking about things like "why does the cat have three tails?"

6. Some of the amateur radio operators I mentioned above have been known to take wifi equipment and alter it so that it has greater power, range, etc. When they do that, it's no longer covered by Part 15 of the FCC rules (which is where consumer electronics live) but it's covered by Part 97 (the Amateur Radio Service rules) and it becomes licensed transmitting equipment.

7. FCC rules are sometimes bizarre. It's illegal to talk (or even attempt to talk) to someone more than 155 miles away on a CB radio. Yet the 27MHz Citizens Band is prime "skip" territory during the high parts of the sunspot cycle. When the sunspot count is up, it's hard NOT to talk to somebody more than 155 miles away. I don't know if the FCC is trying to protect some other communication service like telephones with this rule or what. A lot of FCC rules are to appease one big political contributer or another in the communication industry. That's why it's illegal to listen to the analog cell bands.

Thanks, that's intersting.