[Tfug] warchalking

[klsmith]

Tyler Kilian wrote:

> At 09:25 AM 6/28/02 -0700, Nicolas Lopez wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 07:32:20AM -0700, Tyler Kilian wrote:
>> > Bowie:
>> >
>> > We've had our ups and downs, but let me say, for what it's 
>> worth...you hit
>> > the nail right on the head with this one.  In fact, you used a 
>> nailgun.
>> >
>> > A few things, that I know specifically:
>> >
>> > 1) There are laws governing the use of home-made antennaes
>
>
>
>
>>   And there are laws governing how long you can spend in the bathroom at
>> Sizler before they send to cops in to pull you out. Just because 
>> there are
>> laws it doesn't mean they say anything meaningful.
>
>
>
> Sure, it's like Sizzler.  Just like at Sizzler, if someone pushes the 
> issue, you can be in trouble.  The whole point of the laws is not what 
> happns if nobody cares to prosecute or investigate, the point is what 
> happens if someone finds out and decides to press that issue.
>
>
>
>> > 2) The expectation of privacy exists with most wireless devices of 
>> this
>> > type.
>
>
>
>
>>   The expectation of safety exists with idiot leaving their cars 
>> unlocked
>> just because they think they live in a "good" neighborhood too. 
>> Neither have
>> much of a connection to reality.
>
>
>
> That's a lot like blaming the victim of a violent crime. "Well, he was 
> in a bad area of town after dark, it's his fault."  True, you need to 
> take precuations, but that doesn't mean that someone breaking a law is 
> exempted from responsibility.  If you leave your car open and someone 
> steals your linux sticker, that is theft.  Period.
>
>
>
>> > 3) Attempting to procure a lease *is* accessing a network without
>> > authorization.
>
>
>
>>   No, attempting to procure a lease, by definition, is ASKING for
>> authorization to access the network. DHCP OFFER is analogous to you
>> welcoming a hobo knocking at your door in for dinner.
>
>
>
> No, because you are tying up bandwidth, processor cycles, and then 
> potentially an IP.  If you came into my office without permission and 
> plugged into a switch and tried to gain an IP address, that would be 
> accessing my network without permission, as well as potential 
> tresspass, etc.  Just because it is wireless and not physically secure 
> does not mean that the same rules regarding access do not apply.
>
I think the problem with this example is one is phisically on your 
property while the other is not.

If you where to put your switch in an open area available to all (on the 
fence), one could argue that by doing no more that gaining access to 
bandwidth via and IP delivered via DHCP, one was invited to do so 
because it's readily available.

>
>> > 4) If you try and crack WEP, this is circumventing security further 
>> and has
>> >    all sorts of other "hacking" and encryption laws behind it.\
>
>
>
>
>>   Well duh, that's why nobody mentioned cracking WEP.
>
>
> Just a potential item of contention, that's all.
>
>
>> > A bad anology to this is scanning.  There is nothing illegal about
>> > listening to
>> > radio transmissions.  If you try and join in--then it's a crime.
>
>
>
>
>>   There's nothing illigal about going door-to-door looking for charity
>> either.
>
>
> Unless a no-trespassing sign is posted.  You can't ignore the intent 
> either.
>
>
> Anyway, you'll do what you want and try to justify the non-criminal 
> element of it.  If you war drive the wrong place, however, don't be 
> too surprised if the response you get is "tell it to the judge."
>
>
>
>
>
> # Tyler Kilian, CCNP
> # Technology Director, Dakota Communications
> # TKilian@DakotaCom.NET | 520.745.3900 x 100
>
> _______________________________________________
> tfug mailing list
> tfug@tfug.org
> https://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug
>