A good warning for those who use wifi

Post Reply New Topic

That's my point: there is no way, at the protocol level, for a system to determine the intention of the owner.
It's merely an open public access point and it's broadcasting that information to anyone within earshot.

I think it is obvious if the computer is doing it and the owner is not aware that their computer is using someone elses router, we couldn't blame the owner of the computer that is automatically using another signal.

But if a person is aware that they are using another person's router, they can easily get away with it, but it is not really ethical to use another person's paid services just because a person can; it is very possible that the other person wouldn't risk the chance of someone downloading kiddy porn, if they understood the risk. I would want to alert the person of that fact, if I could figure out where the source of the router was.

I'm not intending to say you disagree with any of this, just trying to clarify the difference between somone who is aware of what is going on vs. someone who is not aware of what is going on with their computer and someone else's router

Most people I've seen, switching on their laptops, notice nothing about their connection or where it's sourced - unless it misbehaves or is suddenly not there.
So they could have been using a neighbour's WiFi for ages.

The problem is that something which does require technical attention and care in setup has been dumbed down to the point of being a potential liability.

I agree.

I do think though, in the home environment, it would be unusual for a personal computer to select a neighbors router, if their own personal router was working properly. Do you think that is a frequent occurrence?

My sisters router is not password protected and she lives next door. I will be sure to inform her of this article; I guess we are too trusting of our neighbors. My service went down, and her signal was not strong enough for me to use; but I guess if she had a much more powerful router and/or signal it might be stronger than mine?

The machine would first try to use the router with which it last connected, and only start automatically searching for another if that one wasn't available.
If it found an open service then this additional searching would most likely add no noticeable delay to the 'time from power-on to on-line and ready' state, so an 'innocent user' would be unaware of any change.

From my own tests, carried out by travelling through an area where there are lots of active WiFi systems and listening to what's being broadcast, roughly 10% were wide open and available to anyone.

Yes, and if it's running open and unprotected your machine would have found hers instead. But sometimes, routers with a weak signal are a security blessing in disguise!

The signal from one of my neighbour's (properly secured) WiFi varies hugely depending on where I am in my house and I can get anything from a tiny and unusable signal right up to a useful one. Another neighbour's router presents a small but uniformly useful signal wherever I am in the house.
Normally I see none of this because my own WiFi's signal is massive compared to these, so it's always used. Actually that's not quite true: I rarely use WiFi because everything here is on a wired LAN, and only fire it up when I want to play about with the laptop.

"Too trusting" is exactly right, and it scares the pants off me sometimes when I see how people can treat this stuff.

"Stealing the internet" just means using someone else's internet connection for free while they have to pay for it and you are getting it for free. Nothing wrong with it but the bad thing about it is if yours is unsecured, someone nearby who picks up on the connection can go to an illegal website and you can get busted for it and it be a b***h to get it sorted out. You never know what your neighbors could do. Even if you trusted all of them and knew every one of them and knew they'd never do a thing like that, a stranger can still drive by and pick up on your connection and do it. If someone went to a child porn website on their tablet or phone, will the FBI still know about it?

Going to a public place like coffee shop, fast food restaurant, or library is not stealing it because they made it be public for anyone to use.

Yes, I think her concern was someone else seeing something on her computer; without thinking about the possibility of someone downloading something illegal and it being traced back to her router. Maybe the issue there is people think that their computer assigns an IP address rather than their service provider.

Also, of course many people could care less what an IP address is and just think they are safe as long as they are not downloading anything illegal on their computer; thinking the router has nothing to do with it.

It is scary it's too bad they don't inscribe, a warning label on the router, considering the potential legal ramifications of not securing it.

Finally, do they actually make off the shelf routers that cannot be used for public access. I understand the other poster went through the setup process and and was required to use a password, but I'm thinking there might be away around it, if a person wanted to make it a public access point?

I know with my AT&T service that covers phone, TV, and wireless internet, the gateway modem requires a key for secure access; but I'm talking about store bought routers for DSL service.

I would love to think that most users even get as far as understanding what an IP address is at all.
And of course, access through an unsecured router is bad enough from an 'unsavoury content' viewpoint, but if it also makes it easier to access the owner's PC then things go from bad to worse.

It's largely down to the configuration and security measures available/activated.

Variable. My sister's router will only work in one secure mode, but others default to 'dumb' mode and leave the details up to the user.
The idea on these is presumably to 'enhance the user experience' or somesuch market-speak, so that they're able to get on-line quickly and with no, um, 'fuss'.

I always know what I am using because I have this icon on my task bar. If I click it, it tells me what wireless connection I am using. There's a list with several on it around the 'hood and I always make sure I am using mine.

Yep - if you click to check, and you shouldn't need to make sure your router is the one you're using.
It's good that you do though, and I'm not knocking you for it.
Just that most users I've seen in action with WiFi couldn't care less, so long as they have a connection.

I think we are missing the major culprit here.

I think the government should look into this potato chip can device. They MUST hold hearings about the possibly piracy threats using these cans and impose strict sanctions as to whether these cans should be sold over-the-counter. Should we make them accessible to minors? They should hold surveys to see what people think about these cans and hold a floor discussion about them in Congress. It might be tough because most potatoes are known to come from Republican states and they might filibuster for the industry, but we must hold firm and find out the truth about the national security risk of this infernal device.

Change the Pringles can you mean

Are you American? That was a joke about our Congress doing stupid stuff instead of focusing on real issues.

I'm guessing the statement about minors is in regard to their ability to access pornography, based on the topic of discussion. That is an interesting point. I would personally like to see at least an inscription on the device to warn people of the dangers, considering the potential consequences.

Regarding pornography, Google might be a larger issue there, unless a parent is more computer savy than the child, there is worldwide potential for a child to get into.

How could we make sure that every parent understands what to do, to password protect the filtering on Google to make such accessibility impossible at least for home use for the child. The instructions are there just like they are on the routers to password protect them for security.

I've never seen a warning to parents about this in regard to Google on any media source. I'm sure there has been some, but it is evident to me that it is not sufficient to get the word out.

I don't think we can change Google; freedom of speech issues apply here.

Our modern technology brings many advances, but the dangers are also evident too. I think it may be too late to turn back now, but I'm not sure where it will eventually lead us.

(puts head in hands)

It was a joke that apparently no one got.

Went right over my head. But I get it now that I re-read it. Idaho potatoes, that rings a bell now. Seeing the next post, I see that you already explained it as a joke. That was a wit-inspired type of joke; and a good one at that.

I do see those things as problems, but the're just another part of life now that people have to deal with.