WiFi Seeker, Finder, Detector Roundup 168
captainJam points to this review at handtops.com of five reasonably priced hardware WiFi finders. A snippet: "If you're not using a WiFi enabled PDA, you either have to turn on your handtop or laptop, or wake it from standby just to check if there's a network in the area. While a WiFi Finder / Seeker won't make a connection out of thin air, it will conveniently tell you whether there is a WiFi network in the area."
Re:Encryption and Access (Score:4, Insightful)
So what's inside? (Score:4, Insightful)
Duhh.. antenna (cheap), plastic box (cents), couple of LED's/switches (cents), batteries (included?), small PCB (cheap), some dedicated IC's (???, anyone got some info here?), design/packaging/retail etc. (large portion of street price?)
Easy to build yourself as hobby project? Estimated price a couple of years from now?
Re:time (Score:5, Insightful)
I could easily press a button on a keychain while walking. Hell, even that $50 fancy one looks easy enough to manage. There's NO WAY your laptop is going to be as easy to use.
If I am hunting for a WiFi signal, I don't want to stop, find a place to rest a laptop, spend thirty seconds setting it up, and then clicking a couple times to see if, indeed, there is a signal even ONCE. Screw doing it over and over.
"I don't really see the use for these devices"
Stop being so self-centered, and maybe you would.
-Erwos
Re:Application? (Score:2, Insightful)
How about... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:So what's inside? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Application? (Score:3, Insightful)
------------------
Computer Misuse Act 1990
An Act to make provision for securing computer material against unauthorised access or modification; and for connected purposes.
Be it enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:--
Computer misuse offences
Unauthorised access to computer material.
1.--
(1) A person is guilty of an offence if--
(a) he causes a computer to perform any function with intent to secure access to any program or data held in any computer;
(b) the access he intends to secure is unauthorised; and
(c) he knows at the time when he causes the computer to perform the function that that is the case.
(2) The intent a person has to have to commit an offence under this section need not be directed at--
(a) any particular program or data;
(b) a program or data of any particular kind; or
(c) a program or data held in any particular computer.
(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or to both.
------------------
So it could be argued that authorisation is required *before* attempting to access. Leaving the gates unlocked is not an invitaion to enter.