Corporate Encouragement For Sharing Your WiFi

anagama writes "Conventional wisdom is that one should lockdown wifi, your ISP doesn't want you to share your connection, that person checking email outside the coffee shop ought to be arrested. The UK ISP BT is offering an alternative model. The company will encourage its three million broadband users to pick up a FON router and start sharing signals. 'For BT, the move makes its broadband offering more useful to customers, who can access the Internet from more places, and BT doesn't need to build out a new wireless network itself. BT's Gavin Patterson, a managing director, holds out hopes that the FON scheme can someday "cover every street in Britain." "We are giving our millions of Total Broadband customers a choice and an opportunity," he added in a statement. "If they are prepared to securely share a little of their broadband, they can share the broadband at hundreds of thousands of FON and BT Openzone hotspots today, without paying a penny." '"

Not for free. Charging extra users.

From the article, FON is charging the extra users. It's extra revenue for them. The extra users aren't getting on for free.

Re:Not for free. Charging extra users.

how do you read that?

Other "Foneros" can access the public channel for free, while non-Foneros can pay a few dollars a day to use the access points.

"If they are prepared to securely share a little of their broadband, they can share the broadband at hundreds of thousands of FON and BT Openzone hotspots today, without paying a penny."

That's how San Fran et all should have done it

I can think of no simpler way to implement a city-wide free wifi system than a grassroots method such as this. Not only is the up front cost relatively inexpensive per user, it's distributed across thousands of people who can take part if/when they see fit, and it's much easier for individual people to maintain than a central authority.

Not only that, you would have the redundancy of having multiple choices of APs in a given area, so if one goes down for whatever reason, you can still choose another.

It's almost like the equivalent of swarm intelligence, but applied to wifi.

Re:

Every mesh network I've seen employs at least one backhaul to enable Internet connectivity. Now, unless you believe that there will be a wealth of intra-mesh communication that the spooks will want to see, the backhaul is where they will tap.

this should be stopped dead in its tracks!

damned bleeding heart pirate and crime promoters, these telcos, how dare they muddy the waters of evidence-gathering against all those copyright-thieving artist-income-depriving file-sharing child-porn distributing criminals?

Some US providers try/tried too...

Some providers in the US also try/tried that, starting as early as 2003, and usually hoping that non-customers would pay $$ to access their network through such user-provided "open" wi-fi APs. I don't think this worked overly well so far though...
http://www.sonic.net/hotspots/ [sonic.net]
http://www.speakeasy.net/netshare/learnmore/ [speakeasy.net]

RIAA

Must be screaming in pain now.. Even less of a way to determine who downloaded/uploaded something that is *isp sponsored*.

Cool.

Re:

Not really. If you'd R'dTFA[1] you would know that you still need to log on to the network to use it, and have an account with them. They still log exactly who is doing what and where.

They also allocate 512KB more bandwidth to your link while other pe

So lets see....

You share your bandwidth with someone else and the ISP pockets a little extra money if that someone doesn't happen to be a current customer? Yes, according to the article the other users will be on a different channel, so your service isn't interrupted, but no matter how you look at it you're still splitting your pipe. Also, since this scheme involves a new customer paying for access on your (already paid for) connection why not apply the extra money as a credit on your bill? I'm paying a pretty good chunk on my broadband (Time Warner), but I wouldn't mind this setup if it meant my bill was going to be lower.

Re:

but no matter how you look at it you're still splitting your pipe

No you're not. That's the entire point of this system. When other people are connected, BT (who own almost all of the ADSL infrastructure in the UK, including the last mile) will allocate another 512KB of bandwidth to your connection. This will then be

BT's FAQ

As posted on the FON blog [fon.com]:

Q:If I am a Fonero and have BT do I need to sign up?
A: Yes

Q:I am a Fonero but not a BT customer, can I access BT Fonspots?
A:Yes, all Foneros can use BT Fon Hotsposts and vice versa

Q:I am a Fonero but not a BT customer, can I use BT Openzone hotspots.
A: No, but if you had BT Total broadband then Yes.

So, FON users still do NOT have free access to BT's commercial hotspots ("BT Openzone") UNLESS they are also paying BT broadband customers ("BT Total"). Bummer. The only thing new here is that a major ISP does not mind (and in fact encourages) the use of FON routers.

Anti-RIAA

Talk about the perfect excuse that it wasn't me sharing music over my WiFi router. It was someone else -- and BT make it all possible. Certainly an RIAA nightmare in the making.

Just two questions...

If you do sign up to the scheme then:

1) with the ever growing list of people getting done for illegal activity, ie downloading mp3s/illegal porn/'hacking' etc., will you be exempt from any charges relating to criminal activity through someone using your router?

2) is the broadband service provided truly unlimited?

I can't see many people in their right minds signing up to such a service if they weren't protected from neighbours doing heavy downloading and the drive-by wifi'ers downloading stuff deemed illegal. Because on one end of the scale I wouldn't want additional charges for bandwidth use or have the speed restricted due to too someone else using it too much, and the other end I wouldn't want to be arrested because someone else used my internet connection through the wifi router for criminal activities.

Re:Just two questions...

From the FAQ [bt.com]:

What happens if someone uses my broadband connection to access an illegal site? Can I prove that it wasn't me accessing the sites?
Yes, their access to the internet will be through a separate channel, so it is easy to identify that the access was through the visitor channel.

Umm, I'm not impressed

I got that FON adaptor with a Skype phone, and it took me all of 30 seconds to decide not to install it.

Given the current security climate I'm really not going to give someone a chance to (a) identify where I live and if I'm around (look at their status info on the web - having an access point means you've got kit to steal) and (b) to put a remote controlled listening device on my traffic. The FON adaptor is a small Linux box, and I don't know what it does. Worse, someone else controls it and can flash the thing at any time.

Nope. Not interested in contributing to an 802.11 version of Echelon :-).

I prefer a more Grassroots approach...

Why do we need a teloco to allow us to do this? DIY is always better. [meraki.com]

Re:

FON authenticates its users.

Re:

That's why we invented ssl, ssh, etc. AP security is mostly an illusion anyway and at least IMO it should not be allowed as it's hijacking a scarce public resource (the frequency being used) and making it into a private resource. Very annoying if you live

Re:

yes. ISPs would be much more secure if they didn't make internet access available to customers. And banks would be much more secure if they weren't always dealing with people's money.

Sharing anything causes an increased security risk. The

Re:How hte hell

RTFM. Slashdot doesn't delete posts because Taco doesn't believe in deleting posts. There are two ways I know of for a post to disappear:

1. If it gets flushed because the discussion is too large, a la 20721.
2. If our Benevolent Masters at the Church of Scientology disapprove in any way

"We" can't "block" "this guy" from "concievably" posting, for several reasons:

1. We are not Slashdot admins
2. It's not one guy
3. Concievably isn't a word
4. IP bans are ineffective due to the availability of proxies
5. Jews orchestrated and carried out the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center in New York

My advice to you is that you delve deep into your user configuration page and fix it so that you don't see AC posts or -1 Troll posts at all. Alternatively, type up a bogus DMCA takedown notice claiming the shit-eating first post as your own work. Before you can even click "Send", Taco will be knocking at your door wearing nothing but a pair of see-through panties and handcuffs, eager for you to administer his "punishment" for being a "bad boy".

Re:Sure, I'll share my broadband...

That's the point, BT has BT openzone, so at places like airports BT gives wi-fi access, if you partipate in this scheme, you let people use your broadband, and in return you can use theirs and BT's. It's like communism, but the good kind :P. Of course you can choose not to, and you pay a little to accesss the wi-fi area.

Re:

...but will BT pay for it?

Yes. [fon.com] Summary: When somebody accesses the Internet through your connection, they pay for it, and you get half.

Re:Since there's a camera on every street corner..

firstly, what the hell are you talking about? plausible deniability of what?

But what really annoys me about your comment is the shear stupidity of it. Is the UK a nazi-esque state? no. If it were would the media be able to report about when the police

Re:Since there's a camera on every street corner..

Tell me, if the man you referred to running towards an underground train with a backpack on shortly after severeal suicide bombings had been a suicide bomber too, would you like to explain to the hundreds of casualties, deaths and relatives why the armed police there to protect them didn't shoot? The percentages say, it was better for that man to die than to risk the hundreds, and as a result we also live a more concious society of these incidents which in itself helps protect us.

You are fucking joking, right?

Percentages, is it? OK. How many people wear backpacks in London? Millions. How many people run for a train? Millions. Of those, how many are suicide bombers? Four so far. So, shoot anyone wearing a backpack who is running for a train, on the off-chance they might be a bomber?

Moreover, despite the initial lies put about by the police, de Menezes was not carrying a bag of any kind. Nor was he wearing a heavy coat.

Re:

They only get to use the additional 512kb that is given to those who subscribe to the scheme. That 512kb can only be used by other users, not the subscriber himself. His connection remains at the maximum speed that he is entitled to under his existing co