There is no justification for WEP cracking.

[mrgreen4242]

I here ya but I'm intrigued by the mere possibility of it. To me, with ample security (protecting your computer and data) there should be no need for 100 strong & locked WiFi signals in a 1 city block area. Why not share some of that wealth?

Most ppl if granted access to a network wouldn't be sucking up bandwidth by downloading the content of the library of congress or anything like that. Mostly its passive web searches that have little to no effect on what the owner is doing at all.

Kinda like someone walking by and getting a glass of water from your garden hose on a hot day. Some ppl would call the police, some ppl wouldnt mind at all.

But we all know how some ppl get when they own a well in a desert.

That's a terrible argument, even if I was OK with 99 out of 100 people using my WiFi, the 100th still ruins it for everyone else (by downloading the entire contents of Library of Congress, or whatever).

It is a shame the WEP cracking topic was killed. It is not necessarily illegal, it just could be depending on the circumstances.

It's illegal for a variety of reasons.

i think there is a big misconception between gaining access to a network and intercepting other ppls data as defined in the Federal Wire and Electronic Communications Interception Act.

here is an excerpt from an interesting article that questions the Legality of WEP Cracking

A lot of ppl [reasonably] assume that things are illegal but CANNOT point to a law or cite a courtcase where someone has been fined, arrested or charged with accessing a neighbor's network for their own personal use.

If anyone can forward a specific law that says one cannot use a WiFi for your own personal use (and I sure there are some) can you please post it.

There's several examples of both case law and actual law touching on this. There's a difference between intercepting someones communication (the law you point to) and utilizing someones computer network without their permission. I'm not feeling up to doing the research for you, but take a look at laws covering "phone phreaking" and you'll see the difference.

The other law covering this would be the DMCA. It makes it illegal to remove the encryption on digital data without the proper permission from its owner. That law sucks for the most part, but it would likely apply to this case as you are decrypting digital data without the owner's permission.

I agree, i mean the only convenient wifi around my dorm is by some other guy who has it locked so if i want to use wifi i have to walk across campus to use it

You have another choice - GET YOUR OWN WIRELESS ROUTER AND INTERNET CONNECTION. You probably have a free internet connection in your dorm from your school, so all you need to do is buy a wireless access point/router. If you want to have wireless internet access you could always PAY FOR IT LIKE EVERYONE ELSE.

If you play your music loud enough to penetrate the walls of your apartment, does the neighbor owe you royalties? Do your neighbors owe the original copyright holder royalties? Should your neighbor share in any of the costs of downloading the song in iTunes?

While a WiFi signal is invisible to human eyes and ears, it doesn't discount the notion that the originator is violating another's personal space without their permission. If these victims just so happen to derive benefit from this intrusion, how can you call them a thief?

-joedy

According to the RIAA, yes they would owe royalties, and you would have to have a performance license. The key distinction in this example is that you are broadcasting material that you don't have the rights to broadcast. There's no such copyright regulation on a wireless signal, and even if your wireless was transmitting copywritten content (say an Airport with Airtunes) you are making a good faith effort to keep people who are not authorized to hear it from doing so by encrypting it.

There's also the matter of comparing a signal which can be received without any special equipment (sound and your ears) to one which is only detectable with a device designed for that specific purpose (Wifi and a wireless card).

Do you feel it should be ok for the government to listen in on your cell phone calls since obviously the signal for it has passed through a government office, thereby invading their space?

Or, is it justified to cut off your neighborhoods electricity at 8pm because people are leaving their lights on while you try to sleep and it's coming in your window?

I get your point, but it's an obviously flawed argument. There is a substantial and demonstratable difference between sound waves and wireless signals.

 

[carman63]

My opinions on each of your points.

I here ya but I'm intrigued by the mere possibility of it. To me, with ample security (protecting your computer and data) there should be no need for 100 strong & locked WiFi signals in a 1 city block area. Why not share some of that wealth?

There is a monetary investment, no to mention terms of services, that a private individual or business had to make/agree to, in order to have their WAPs installed, provisioned, etc to go live. That's like rationalizing walking through an apple orchard uninvited, and picking an apple or 2. After all, there are plenty of apples, why not help yourself to a few?

Most ppl if granted access to a network wouldn't be sucking up bandwidth by downloading the content of the library of congress or anything like that. Mostly its passive web searches that have little to no effect on what the owner is doing at all.

You're making general assumptions here. What if these people are downloading porn, trying to perpetuate scams, etc? When the law enforecement gets involved, guess whose IP address is ultimately going to show up? The owner of that WAP.

Kinda like someone walking by and getting a glass of water from your garden hose on a hot day. Some ppl would call the police, some ppl wouldnt mind at all.

Taking without asking permission is theft, in every country I've lived in. Period.

But we all know how some ppl get when they own a well in a desert.

Again, consider the investment in that well. You sound like you're trying to rationalize stealing. Would you feel the same way if someone were to pick the lock on your house, and help themselves to some of your personal effects? Because that's pretty much what you're talking about.

I use encryption, disable SSID broadcasts, limit the number of IP addresses DHCP can hand out, and I live in a cul-de-sac. And if someone gets past all that, I'll disable the WAP or locate the thief.

You have another choice - GET YOUR OWN WIRELESS ROUTER AND INTERNET CONNECTION. You probably have a free internet connection in your dorm from your school, so all you need to do is buy a wireless access point/router. If you want to have wireless internet access you could always PAY FOR IT LIKE EVERYONE ELSE.

AMEN!

It is a shame the WEP cracking topic was killed. It is not necessarily illegal, it just could be depending on the circumstances.

If you thought that there was the slightest chance it were illegal, would you still do it?

What if it weren't a "faceless" crime? What if the owner of that access point determined who was stealing his bandwidth, and confronted said person? You think the "it's not necessarily illegal" argument would work against a pissed off person?

 

[Snide]

*Felony* arrests have been made for WiFi poaching...

KYBOSH - check these out:

Wi-Fi cloaks a new breed of intruder

Michigan man arrested for using cafe's free WiFi from his car

 

[carman63]

While a WiFi signal is invisible to human eyes and ears, it doesn't discount the notion that the originator is violating another's personal space without their permission. If these victims just so happen to derive benefit from this intrusion, how can you call them a thief?

-joedy

By any chance, are you related to that judge in DC that sued a dry cleaners for $54M due to a 'satisfaction guaranteed' claim? Because your argument makes almost as much sense.

Does anyone have a real world law in the books that addresses these issue specifically or are you all just going to keep wagging your fingers without anything on paper? What are the penalties under law and have charges EVER been brought up on using a neighbors WiFi without expressed permission.

If no one can come up with anything I say we have a grey area and its not illegal (yet). No analogies needed.... just show me the [case]law.

I've looked and i dont see it.

Using w/out permission = borrowing my lawnmower - open garage door! - and then BRINGING IT BACK, but never alerting me to the fact that you desire to borrow my lawnmower.

You are basically looking into my locked garage, seeing the lawnmower, and picking the lock to TAKE my lawnmower. IOW, no matter how you slice it, you are doing something unlawful.

The phrase "if ain't illegal if you don't get caught" comes to mind.

 

[KYBOSH]

Well there you have it...
unauthorized access to a computer network, a third-degree felony.... in FL anyway.

Thanks Snide

But I am noticing that these are state laws and nothing Federal. So the legality of it (and punishment) can vary from state to state.

But the funniest parts are when ppl get arrested for using OPEN networks from the comforts of their car. I wonder if they would arrest me if I went INTO Starbucks and just sat there with my iphone without ordering as much as a latte.

I guess the next thing is to have ppl arrested for coming in your store and using up the air conditioning when you aren't going to buy anything.

 

[The General]

I want to hack my own WEP network. I don't remember the WEP key or password. I am authorizing myself to hack my own network. Please help me.

/end of thread

/end of complaining

/end of legal debate

/omg shut up

Just like torrents. It's not illegal depending on how you use it. Those threads don't get locked.

 

[Blue Velvet]

Those threads don't get locked.

You can talk about it all you like, you just can't help people to do it here on MR. There's a difference and we also delete or lock threads that ask about hacking school networks, for instance. That's why that thread was locked.

There are plenty of other places to go to discuss the precise ins and outs of this topic.

Thanks.

 

[overcast]

I want to hack my own WEP network. I don't remember the WEP key or password. I am authorizing myself to hack my own network. Please help me.

/end of thread

/end of complaining

/end of legal debate

/omg shut up

Just like torrents. It's not illegal depending on how you use it. Those threads don't get locked.

No it's nothing like torrents. In one instance you are deliberately breaking security measures to get access to something you should not be - THAT IS ILLEGAL. In the other instance, you are using legal software to do something illegal.

That's like saying, I'm allowed to legally drive my car, but i do so past the legal speed limit. So that means, I can just go break into a building. You see the logic that doesn't exist in your world.

 

[Snide]

I want to hack my own WEP network. I don't remember the WEP key or password. I am authorizing myself to hack my own network. Please help me.

Press and hold reset button on router, log in with default password, create new settings and password...


BTW, it's a felony in Michigan as well:

Under Michigan's "Fraudulent access to computers, computer systems, and computer networks" law,
Peterson's actions could result in a five-year felony and a $10,000 fine.

 

[Joedy]

I've been following the case laws to date and aside from isolated case of individual State statues, the Federal Wire and Electronic Communications
Interception Act is primarily cited in these scenarios.

But the trouble with using this reference is that it assumes that an intruter has made an overt attempt to penetrate a network. With WiFi networks, the signal is being broadcasted uniformally from a central location; the intended target is covered as well as unintended locations as well.


Consider the case of Sam Peterson, the chap arrested for using a WiFi network from his car in front of a business with a sign posted merely, "Free WiFi" (and later amended by the owner with the suffix, "For Customers Only!")

Suppose that Mr. Peterson lived in an apartment above the shop and went out an purchased an iPhone. His subsequent use of the iPhone inadvertly caused Mr. Peterson to utilize someone's WiFi without their permission and without his knowledge.

Would be be a criminal (and a felon, at that)?

Suppose (hypothetically) that due to a unique circumstance that Mr. Peterson had a pacemaker which was affected by this WiFi intrusion. Could he then make a claim of invasion to his peace and safety? Could the WiFi owner be held liable?


Suppose that the coffee shop down below his apartment plays music and due to the poor construction of the building, Mr. Peterson ends up hearing Jazz music all day without any patronage to the establishment down below. We could call him a felon due to his unauthorized access to the audible sound network?


In the case of Mr. Peterson, the "Free WiFi" sign was not amended and modified until after his subsequent arrest. It would have been the same situation as arresting someone from sitting outside an arena on the sidewalk and listening to a rock concert blaring from the ampitheatre and insisting that the general public in the vicinity pay for the right of listening or deriving benefit from the sound waves. Essentially charging them with "stealing" by not purchasing a ticket to attend the show.


My point being that using content that people are broadcasting for free does not constitute a contract or agreement. If the owner of the WiFi signal doesn't take the efforts to close this network with a passcode, I fail to see how the subsequent use can be construed to be theft. Unethical, of course, but actual theft?


One thing is for certain, a greater clarification from the courts will be needed in light of the quickly changing technologies.


Also of note is the following information.

Posted by Doubloon here: (my emphasis added)

Setting up an open access point IS authorisation. If you want your wifi to be freely accessible but to only your customers, then give it a password and post the password on the wall in big letters. It's an open secret, but it establishes quite clearly your intent. So if somebody takes to using that password from their car, they have clearly violated that intent.

By nature of its openness (no password required) and by a public announcement, "Free WiFi", I fail to see how Mr. Peterson would lose an appeal to his conviction.

Does anyone have follow up information concerning this individual?

-joedy

 

[The General]

You can talk about it all you like, you just can't help people to do it here on MR. There's a difference and we also delete or lock threads that ask about hacking school networks, for instance. That's why that thread was locked.

There are plenty of other places to go to discuss the precise ins and outs of this topic.

Thanks.

You CAN help people do it! If someone needs help configuring a torrent client, that is allowed here. The only thing that's not allowed is helping people find copyrighted and/or illegal torrents. Bittorrent is not illegal, how you use it may be.

It's the same thing with this ...

No it's nothing like torrents. In one instance you are deliberately breaking security measures to get access to something you should not be - THAT IS ILLEGAL.

I shouldn't be accessing my own network? Are you joking? The act WEP hacking is NOT illegal. How you use it defines its legality. So, can someone help me hack my own WEP? I'm not sure what to do.

 

[Snide]

The heavy hand of the law comes down hard on WiFi scofflaws

Does anyone have follow up information concerning this individual?
-joedy

The Arstechnica article states that the Michigan Man got a $400.00 fine and 40 hours of community service,
while an Illinois man got a year of court supervision and a $250.00 fine.

Excellent post, BTW.

 

[Blue Velvet]

You CAN help people do it!

This isn't a debate about the forum rules, nor how they're applied. We have a good and consistent track record about deleting threads about hacking networks, wherever they are. If that's not to your liking, I'm very sorry about that.

 

[MarkMS]

I shouldn't be accessing my own network? Are you joking? The act WEP hacking is NOT illegal. How you use it defines its legality. So, can someone help me hack my own WEP? I'm not sure what to do.

No one is saying that you shouldn't have access to your own network. Hacking your WEP code isn't the only way to get it. You can easily hold the reset button and enter the credentials again to restore the router. As philosophers tell us, we have reason (at least some of us do) and logic which enables us to choose the best path to happiness. WEP cracking may take a few hours to days. A simple reset will take no more than a few minutes. Which leads to quicker happiness? o_0

A neighbor who wants to know how to crack the WEP code is after one and one thing only ... free internet. It's really not to crack his own. If he does, he would take the time to find those "blackhat" sites that do actually discuss these sorts of things. I do, however, agree that it shouldn't be illegal to hack your own network (your own airwaves/frequencies), but there are very few who actually would do that for research and not take advantage of others. Hence, the rules here on MR.

 

[QCassidy352]

Free Wi-Fi is awesome when offered, and I hope it continues to grow, but stealing is stealing.

I'm sick of people who think they deserve something for nothing or at other's expense.

/applaud

You know, it's interesting. Many of these arguments about why it's ok to steal wifi are the very same ones that we heard in the days of napster about file sharing (nothing tangible, the owner won't miss it, etc.). And yet, I'd guess that at this point, the % of MR users who think that there's nothing wrong with unauthorized file sharing is very low.

 

[yetanotherdave]

wifi theft seems to be arrestable in the UK too

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6958429.stm

 

[The General]

/applaud

You know, it's interesting. Many of these arguments about why it's ok to steal wifi are the very same ones that we heard in the days of napster about file sharing (nothing tangible, the owner won't miss it, etc.). And yet, I'd guess that at this point, the % of MR users who think that there's nothing wrong with unauthorized file sharing is very low.

Naptser, Limewire, Kazaa, etc... Not theft. It's copyright infringement.

 

[darngooddesign]

Naptser, Limewire, Kazaa, etc... Not theft. It's copyright infringement.

Of course its not theft, you're not taking something away from someone else.

 

[The General]

Of course its not theft, you're not taking something away from someone else.

Not only is the person who's uploading the song willingly giving it to you, but he still has it when it's over. I didn't take it from anyone. A copy of it was given to me. Thus, it is not theft and it is copyright infringement. Neither the uploader nor me had authorization to make a copy of it.

It's not theft. It's copyright infringement. Find me a P2P court case where someone was charged with theft. Many have been charged with copyright infringement, none have ben charged with theft. Why? Because illegally downloading movies and music is not theft, it's copyright infringement.

 

[Snide]

wifi theft seems to be arrestable in the UK too

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6958429.stm

Here's a followup article with more info, including the guy getting a £500 fine and
having his laptop and wireless card confiscated (temporarily or permanently, I wonder).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4721723.stm

Man, those Brits don't take kindly to WiFi scofflaws!

 

[starkruzr]

Wait, has KisMAC been ported to the iPhone yet?

Give it time, give it time...

There's already a Stumbler.

 

[frosse]

I'm bringing up this topic again.

Is there an app for the iphone that hacks WEP secured Wifi networks?

I have forgot my password for my WEP and would like to hack it with my iphone. So no legal or moral discussion, strictly technical. Is it possible?

 

[DoFoT9]

I'm bringing up this topic again.

Is there an app for the iphone that hacks WEP secured Wifi networks?

I have forgot my password for my WEP and would like to hack it with my iphone. So no legal or moral discussion, strictly technical. Is it possible?

not too sure about the iphone hacking programs, if you could install linux on it then youd definately be able to find something.

how could you forget your WEP password?? i cherish that password with my life.. just reset the router/passwords and you'll be able to set it all again.

 

[bstreiff]

How about this: If you're so concerned about people who can omg hax ur internets o no, then don't use WEP. Period. WEP has been known to be insecure since 2001. That was seven years ago!

Either use WPA/WPA2, or stick with cables.

(And if you feel you must absolutely have WEP for your Nintendo DS, I recommend hiding the SSID, MAC whitelisting, and firewalling the hell out of the connection between your WEP access point and the rest of your network, and still accepting that it's insecure.)

If WEP goes the way of the dodo, then we don't need to bicker about the legality of cracking it.

 

[frosse]

not too sure about the iphone hacking programs, if you could install linux on it then youd definately be able to find something.

how could you forget your WEP password?? i cherish that password with my life.. just reset the router/passwords and you'll be able to set it all again.

Okay, maybe I havent forgot my WEP password but I'm still interested in the possibility of a KisMac..ish app for the iphone. I mean, it could be done, right?