BF2S Forums Wifi Access

How ever you look at it its stealing. Taking something from stupid people is still stealing even if it their fault.
If someone leaves his car unlocked and you take it its stealing. You cant say its his fault.
Just like you can hyjack a phone line if someone is using those old "wireless" phones.
Or if someone leaves his things on a picnick for example. You cant just come and take it, this is not wild west.

And yes, downloading movies and music and games is illegal no matter how much we all love it.

Last edited by zeidmaan (2007-04-19 10:07:49)

joker3327 wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hereford/worcs/6565079.stm


Just read this on the BBC website ... Just thought I would get your views


Mine...well one of my neighbours has an unsecured connection...I have told him about it on several occasions.. the last time I told him he said he was not bothered.. so my son uses his connection for MSN whilst I play 2142...

So no I dont think it should be illegal...its their own fault for not using security measures

You encourage your son to STEAL services someone else is paying for?

Dude, that is just wrong!

I usually keep my mouth shut about people's child rearing skills, or lack thereof, but come on.

You're teaching him it's OK to STEAL !

Shame on you.

No

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Secured or not, it's not your connection.

The wireless part of my internet connection is mine. My router is owned by me - not the telecoms company.

(and yes, it is secure)

(and, imo, if someone leaves their wireless unsecured it should be illegal to not use it! (yes, you did read that correctly))

Wireless connection is the equivalent to not even having any form of protection.  WPA2/WPA/WEP Encryption can be broken within relatively shorts amount of time. And notice you will not even know you are being attack until its too late due to it being a passive attack. Granted checking the log for packet injected request could be a hint to something going wrong, but this is a bit too much for the average user. MAC filter is simply overcome via enumerating connections being sent out already from other wireless devices and simply taking their mac ;D.

So yeah -- stay away from wireless connections and go the old fashioned wired route.

As for the usage of neighbors wifi i just personally think its laughable how both windows/mac OS will, key word here, AUTOMATICALLY connected to the first unsecured connection it can find. Granted it asks you to connect, but hey the average user won't think twice to hit...yes. So, first off you would have to address both the OS method of connection to unprotected networks and the uninformed user whom thinks no protection is "okay" or that hell WEP is "okay."

Last edited by Fen321 (2007-04-19 22:25:23)

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Let's put it this way. Accidentally leave your door unlocked, and someone would still be breaking the law by entering without permission to watch your sat.

That is because it is trespassing. If someone is sending a signal into your home it's a little different. It is touchy all around I guess.

This is interesting... http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=464

Ilocano wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Let's put it this way. Accidentally leave your door unlocked, and someone would still be breaking the law by entering without permission to watch your sat.

That is because it is trespassing. If someone is sending a signal into your home it's a little different. It is touchy all around I guess.

This is interesting... http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=464

Better analogy would be tapping into your neighbor's water and electricity line.   You are taking his bandwidth when he is also online.

I like that analogy; but just to be cynical- i am still taking your bandwidth...water.... and electricity.

CoronadoSEAL wrote:

don't make laws that are unenforceable; it just encourages people to break other laws.  i think the real question here is, "is it 'the right thing to do'".

edit:

joker3327 wrote:

konfusion wrote:

It's your own fault if you don't secure it, really. I think, however, that there perhaps should be a disclaimer about it, so that people can't sue the companies in the USA.

-konfusion

Sounds like a good Idea..... a disclaimer should be on the router stating that you do not have a legal leg to stand on if you dont secure your connection...

no...pretty soon there will be disclaimers for everything.  "warning: use of detour might cause mental anguish", for example.

what ever happened to common sense?  when i fell off my bike i learned to wear long sleeves/padding of sorts, i did not look for some one to blame.  <- major failure in today's youth.

I was talking about stupid american lawsuits.

-konfusion

edit:
If this is an analogy to gun laws: yes, ban guns. Wifi doesn't kill anyone.
And also this: Guns make people who own them hurt people. Wifi lets other people hurt those who own them. Therefore, people who buy Wifi are taking into account that there is that possibility, and have only themselves to blame if something goes wrong. A victim in a shooting cannot only blame himself for what went wrong. He blames the gunman who shot at him - the guy who bought the gun, and can't take anything into account except self inflicted wounds with the gun.

Last edited by konfusion (2007-04-20 11:33:18)