Schneier Says 'Steal this Wi-Fi' 432
apolloose noted Bruce Schneier's latest entry on Wired where he talks about insecured wifi networks, and suggests that you
Steal this WiFi. Basically, since insecure WiFi is everywhere, why not? You're helping make the world a little better for someone else.
Beware of strangers bearing gifts (Score:5, Interesting)
So please "steal this Wi-Fi" since I need a few more social security and credit card numbers.
Yeah! But firmware and software changes would help (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Clients (laptops) default installed wifi software (hint: Steve Jobs are you reading???) need a scanning
mode which does not waste my time telling me about all the password or mac-address locked wifi
basestations, and only advises me about open ones.
2. Basestation/routers need a simple-to-configure mode where they will let others into a separate
subnet that goes straight out to the Internet but does not see my home computers directly.
3. (Brain software/mindset change.) Americans need to stop reflexively calling sharing 'stealing'.
You've been trained into this terminology by those who have already stolen everything and don't
want you to get it back.
Usually not stealing (Score:4, Interesting)
FON and Co (Score:5, Interesting)
There are already a number of organisations/initiatives around that actively encourage you to purchase their wireless routing products and then open up access to everyone.
I'm a member of FON [fon.com], which allows you to allocate a specific amount of bandwidth for sharing if you're using one of their routers - say 1MB of your 8MB ADSL, which neatly overcomes the first poster's issue of not having enough bandwidth for their own nefarious purposes. After being a member of FON for 12 months they actually sent me three free wireless routers at Christmas, which I gave away to friends hoping that they too will join and share bandwidth.
There's another company I heard about, US based, that does something similar, but I can't think of their name right now.
However, I wonder about my ISP's stance regarding sharing WiFi for free with others. Does it violate their Ts&Cs? Do I care enough to actually find out? No!
Correct my if I'm wrong (Score:5, Interesting)
While I understand the anonymity helps his secure network stand out, all those open networks are just waiting for a guy with a little time and knowhow to start doing many bad things, say, man-in-the-middle. Just because you are blending into the pack does not keep the lions from eating one of you.
Now then, it IS his network at home, so he can do whatever the heck he feels like. And I do understand his social aspects of looking at WiFi as another resource for the public. But that does not free you from liability regardless of how little or insignificant it may be or stupidly enforced.
To me, it sounds like he doesn't want to roll up his sleeves and do some dirty work with port-forwarding, SSH-ing, and proxying. With those, you can enjoy quite decent browsing while away AND understand that your weakest point is at home.
On an unrelated note, where does this guy live?
Re:Steal Wi-Fi? (Score:5, Interesting)
However, don't be surprised that companies like Comcast freak out because, while they want you to PAY for all that bandwidth, they don't actually want you to USE it!
Re:Car analogy (Score:3, Interesting)
The ticket was specifically worded not to be issued to the driver. It was to the owner of the car, regardless of whether they were driving. This did have some implications otherwise: It therefore didn't result in 'points' being added to my record.
So, back to the computer situation, they could just say that you are responsible for that bandwidth, and should have blocked it if the traffic wasn't from you. Don't know which would hold up in court, but there at least is a reply.
Re:Beware of strangers bearing gifts (Score:3, Interesting)
Chris Mattern
Re:Steal Wi-Fi? (Score:2, Interesting)
I don't look at connecting to wi-fi as stealing from an ISP at all. If anything I'd say you're stealing from whoever is buying that bandwidth. At the same time, though, you're not stealing their connection in the same way you're stealing a car. Their router and modem are still there, and if you're just surfing you're probably not causing any noticeable difference.
I say, if there's an unsecured wireless network, you may as well use it. Just don't be a jackass and prevent the poor old grandma who doesn't know what WEP is from googling proon smoothie recipes and using two very capable fingers to mail her grandkids every night at 5:30 right before bed.
Re:Steal Wi-Fi? (Score:2, Interesting)
However, don't be surprised that companies like Comcast freak out because, while they want you to PAY for all that bandwidth, they don't actually want you to USE it!
That's how the internet companies see this.
Who is right? Both really. There will be people who share the internet with 20 other users and only pay one bill. The upload and download is always maxed out 24/7. The internet company makes no money from them. In this case, the internet company was right. But there will also be people who simply like to leave there internet open, because it's awfully nice to go to your grandma's house over Christmas (who doesn't have internet, let alone wireless), and bring your laptop, and to be pleasantly surprised that someone left their network open, so you can still check Slashdot instead of spending time with family.
The solution would be to not force this into a box, but qualify statements: "While we the internet company do not approve of users sharing their internet with 20 different users in an apartment, we see nothing wrong with people in neighborhoods leaving their AP open; because most people aren't going to have a desktop with integrated wireless.
Re:He's being an idiot. (Score:3, Interesting)
Besides, the police probably wouldn't be able to get any useful data off his computers without hiring him to help.
Re:Steal Wi-Fi? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Steal Wi-Fi? (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, it's more like ordering the all you can eat buffet and letting your friend eat off your plate.
If your friend says, "gee that looks good," and you say, "here, have a bite," the restaurant doesn't care. You had a good time, your friend had a good time, you'll probably come back for more. On the other hand, if your friends eats a dozen jumbo shrimp and couple of salmon fillets, the restaurant will be ticked off, because they priced the buffet around the probable range of one person's appetite. If everybody starts doubling or tripling up, then they have to raise prices, which mean they can't sell to individual diners.
So the way this works is, the vendor makes rules, and they look the other way at insignificant bits of rule breaking that keep their customers happy. When people get organized about breaking rules to unilaterally drop the price of service, then they start to get a bit tetchy.
Recently Opened Mine (Score:4, Interesting)