It's against my personal ethic and moral code to snatch up my neighbor's WiFi, but many people feel differently about the subject. It ranks up there with stealing stories or driving drunk, people do it, but that doesn't make make it right. I have a problem already trying to keep my neighbor's WiFi out of my house. I had to set my wife's laptop up to ignore it since it's stronger than my own in some parts of the house. She is trying to print to the Wireless network printer and it's not working, so I look, and she is stealing the neighbors WiFi by mistake. In a story on Yahoo! today, the writer talks about neighbors riding a free wave on your WiFi. Check it out, its a good read. "If loading a web page or downloading an MP3 suddenly moves at glacial pace, your next door neighbor (or some kid parked in front of your house) may be using up your bandwidth. To be sure, you can check your router's logs (accessible through your router's Wi-Fi manager software) to see what other computers are linked up to your network."
I must admit that I have used other people's wifi on occasion. I know that it is wrong. I would highly recommend that people lock their wifi connection down. I do. That takes care of the problem right there.
Thanks for this article. Before reading it, I did not see the problem in using (just checking my mails) the Wi-Fi access of my landlord who have his office at the ground floor of the house I rent in. Now, I understand better and I'll advise him to set a password out.
On the other hand, I know many fora/website where they make public the Wi-Fi spots that you can access when waiting for the bus, or having a drink at a cafe's terrace...
So, thanks again Chris for the warning.
Best regards to all of you.
__________________
Ipaq HX4700 (ROM 1.10.10 FRE) + GPS Royaltek Sirf III 2001 + Motorola RAZR V3 black edition) + BT headset Sony-Ericcson HBH-300 and Jabra BT330
Kulnet, this is not a jab at you AT ALL, but I must ask this to the general concensus.
Some of the many, many arguements on the subject over at Aximsite, have resulted in the attitude of some that say, "if it ain't locked down, it's free game". Well with that theory, if you walk by a Porshe and it's unlocked with keys in the ignition, is that your invitation to steal the Porshe and take it for a Joy Ride? It's not a fair comparison on some levels though. Is the Porshe owner dumb for having left his keys in the ignition? Sure, does he deserve to have his car jacked, no. Does the person that has too little info on how to protect his connection deserve to be used? No.
To me it is simple and clear cut. If you do not have explicit permission to use someone elses Wifi and you are not paying for it then you are stealing their bandwidth. By explicit permission I mean that either it is publicly advertised as free (if it is commercial) or your buddy or neighbor has knowledge that you are using his/her wifi and they are OK with it. I don't feel someone else should have to pay for their bandwidth and it is used right under their nose for nothing.
Yes their wifi should be locked down and maybe that is an invitation to let the neighbor know that their wifi is wide open and you mistakingly connected to it. Who knows, maybe that person may already know that it is open and gives you permission to use it. Otherwise if you don't have your own hotspot then I would go to a public hotspot if I must really get online.
__________________
Ted Whitely
whitelyt at ipaqhq DOT com
Kulnet, this is not a jab at you AT ALL, but I must ask this to the general concensus.
Some of the many, many arguements on the subject over at Aximsite, have resulted in the attitude of some that say, "if it ain't locked down, it's free game". Well with that theory, if you walk by a Porshe and it's unlocked with keys in the ignition, is that your invitation to steal the Porshe and take it for a Joy Ride? It's not a fair comparison on some levels though. Is the Porshe owner dumb for having left his keys in the ignition? Sure, does he deserve to have his car jacked, no. Does the person that has too little info on how to protect his connection deserve to be used? No.
I am not advocating Wifi theft, but questioning the comparison. Does the Porsche propagate itself where as the owner was never to be without his Porsche? I kinda look at unauthorized wifi use as a neighbor who has lavishly landscaped his yard with fragrant flowers. Does the neighbor miss anything if you look at his yard and enjoy the beauty? Does the neighbor miss anything if you smell his flowers? Does the neighbor miss anything if your house value goes up because of his work? The answer is no, he voluntarily chose to plant in such a way that all of those close by would be impacted regardless of their desire to actually look, smell, or improve their value. I really don't think it is that big a deal as it has become over at the aximsite. I just question how it could be theft if there is nothing missing? And speaking to the privacy issue, how could it be an invasion of privacy if nothing private was observed? Even if the wifi was secured, the neighbors would still know that you had wifi, so that is no secret. So if there is nothing lost, what's the big deal?
__________________
"The surest sign that there is intellegent life out there in the universe is that none of it has attempted to contact us." Calvin & Hobbes
Email me with any Mobility News you would like to see posted!
I am not advocating Wifi theft, but questioning the comparison. Does the Porsche propagate itself where as the owner was never to be without his Porsche? I kinda look at unauthorized wifi use as a neighbor who has lavishly landscaped his yard with fragrant flowers. Does the neighbor miss anything if you look at his yard and enjoy the beauty? Does the neighbor miss anything if you smell his flowers? Does the neighbor miss anything if your house value goes up because of his work? The answer is no, he voluntarily chose to plant in such a way that all of those close by would be impacted regardless of their desire to actually look, smell, or improve their value. I really don't think it is that big a deal as it has become over at the aximsite. I just question how it could be theft if there is nothing missing? And speaking to the privacy issue, how could it be an invasion of privacy if nothing private was observed? Even if the wifi was secured, the neighbors would still know that you had wifi, so that is no secret. So if there is nothing lost, what's the big deal?
Hmmm.... I have to wonder about that analogy. If one landscaped his/her yard with fragrant flowers, then yes, those around that enjoys beautiful landscapes would gain satisfaction from a view. However there is no personal gain in it. Webster defines theft in this way:
"the taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it"
If I paid for the flowers to be planted then it is my property. You can look all you want. But if you decide to take that which I paid for then it becomes theft. There is no personal gain just be gazing at a beautiful landscape. There is personal gain when one decides to take from it. To me it is the same with Wifi. If you can detect that I have an open Wifi connection then that is no big deal. There is no personal gain just from detection. However if you decide to use it without my knowledge then it becomes theft since you are using it for your personal gain and you didn't even pay for it. There is a deprivation of usable bandwidth that could be used by the Yeah, shame on the person that left his/her wifi wide open. However does it make it right to use it just because it is there?
__________________
Ted Whitely
whitelyt at ipaqhq DOT com
In my area, I am the only one with WiFi (that I am aware of). For that matter, I am about the only one with a computer :)
I don't have to worry much about stealing WiFi or others stealing mine.
Heck, people STILL don't know what a PocketPC is around these parts.
Hmmm.... I have to wonder about that analogy. If one landscaped his/her yard with fragrant flowers, then yes, those around that enjoys beautiful landscapes would gain satisfaction from a view. However there is no personal gain in it. Webster defines theft in this way:
"the taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it"
If I paid for the flowers to be planted then it is my property. You can look all you want. But if you decide to take that which I paid for then it becomes theft. There is no personal gain just be gazing at a beautiful landscape.
Sure there is, the enhancement of ones surroundings is a personal gain. That may be speculative, but I will stick with it.
Quote:
There is personal gain when one decides to take from it. To me it is the same with Wifi. If you can detect that I have an open Wifi connection then that is no big deal. There is no personal gain just from detection. However if you decide to use it without my knowledge then it becomes theft since you are using it for your personal gain and you didn't even pay for it. There is a deprivation of usable bandwidth that could be used by the Yeah, shame on the person that left his/her wifi wide open. However does it make it right to use it just because it is there?
I dunno, I guess my point is the owner of the wifi is never really out anything. Nothing has been impacted by the usage of his wifi. He still has his router, he still has access to the Internet. Again, I still think it is not right, but to what extent it is not right, I am not comfortable with. I still think the analogy of the flowers is a good one. The owner has not lost anything if the flowers are still there. It will still be fragrant for as long as the flower is alive of course, but the same still has to be true of wifi, you have not stole the router, and the signal will still be there. Nothing personal was taken.
A secondary thought occurred to me in that in Chris's case, the signal is trespassing on HIS property, causing him damage, or in this case inconvenience. Say the same was true with a flower and a neighbor had severe allergies to flowers? So is it lawful to have an injuction slapped on him to cease and decist? LOL Don't you love how this is going?
__________________
"The surest sign that there is intellegent life out there in the universe is that none of it has attempted to contact us." Calvin & Hobbes
Email me with any Mobility News you would like to see posted!
I can see both sides of the story. I agree that unless a person is trying to malicously attack others or use all or considerable amounts of bandwith, is the wifi owner really loosing anything? not really. You won't even know what they did online.
As for the security of a wifi router, how many routers don't mention security in the setup of the router, settings screen, user manual, and on the manufacturers website?? Some may say ignorance is bliss, but they are the fool and are allowing people to use their access. It is the porche's owners fault he left the keys in the ignition and the doors unlocked. He is at fault for presenting the opportunity. Tell me his insurance would cover the replacement cost knowing that he didn't secure his vehicle?
My .02, if you want it learn how to protect it and use it wisely. If not you will suffer the consequences.
One point to consider (and lenghten the discussion) is, is the use of unprotected wifi access considered morally unacceptable or is it just socially unacceptable?
Just lock up your network. Otherwise, you are indeed inviting people in. I don't mean that an open node is an actual open invitation, but you lock the front door to your house so that nobody comes in, lets out the cat, and walks away with your PC. And wireless router, of course.
As far as "stealing", it's not stealing (assuming you are only using "spare" bandwidth), but it is intruding. If indeed, somebody does walk into your house and does not let out the cat or leave with anything, they have still intruded.
Webster's definition of theft is a bit skewed. The intent of theft is not to deprive the owner, but to provide the thief. The effect is to deprive the owner.
So, I can see that there are three basic types of WiFi intrusion here:
Intrusion with intent to gain access to private data.
Intrusion with intent to use bandwidth, where that use decreases the victim's access to the bandwidth.
Intrusion with intent to use bandwidth, where that use does not affect the victim's bandwidth.
As far as my personal preference goes, only desperation would lead me to use "mystery" bandwidth. There is ample free bandwidth out there, and I do have wireless broadband (encrypted) at home. I would encourage all to provide themselves with access in a fully legal and straightforward way.
Follow Us
RSS Feed
Follow on Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
Addicted Member
