<Warning wordy response>

--- Matthew Copple [email protected] wrote:

It is widely accepted that breaking into someone's computer and using it without their consent is a crime, or at the very least, a Bad Thing To Do -- even if the user invites a takeover attempt by failing to secure his system. Walking into someone's house without her permission is also a crime, even if the owner leaves the door and windows wide open. Hopping into an unlocked car and taking it for a drive (even if you return it) is still theft.

How would jumping on someone's wi-fi connection be any different?

Granted, breaking into a computer is and should be a crime. However, this is a case of apples and oranges. One, with wide open wi-fi there is no breaking in involved. Wi-fi broadcasts the availability of access. To me this is the same thing as putting out an "open house" sign. I think we can all agree that a house with an "open house" sign on the property and the doors are open or unlocked is an open invitation to enter the house. It is possible to lock down the wi-fi and things that can be done to minimize the announcing of the existence of it. While I consider the use of an open access point to be permissible under most conditions, just as walking through someone's yard is permissible under most conditions, that doesn't mean that all access via war-driving is innocent. There are certainly activities that are and should ber criminal. If someone takes a shortcut through someones yard and throws a rock at a window and breaks it, that is certainly criminal. If a user wardrives into your network and uses it for spamming that is certainly criminal also. Now consider this, if someone walks through your yard which has no foence and no indication that trespassing is not welcome and picks up a rock from your stream, is that criminal? Let's also say that you have even known of the rock in your stream and didn't consider it to be anything important. Now let's say the rock contains a fossil worth $10,000 dollars, is it criminal now? Now let's consider that not only did you know of the rock, but also what it was and it's worth, but felt it belonged where it was. Now is it criminal? You see not everything is black and white, and I think it's wrong to flat out say that wardriving is criminal in all cases everywhere. In fact there are numerous places that intentionally have open access points for people to use. Therefore, the only true way to know that an access point is not intentiionally left open for all to use is to somehow secure the wi-fi. So, by this logic any open access point should be considered: an explicit or implicit consent to use and, as an "open house" sign and thus legal to use for any legitimate purpose. While this is certainly not a truly correct analysis, because there are certainly people who probably don't want peopel using their wi-fi, it is analogous to the first-time homebuyer who after buying the house never locks it and leaves the open house sign on the front lawn. The ignorance of the general public is certainly no reason to outlaw an otherwise innocent activity. Some responsibilty must be imposed on the general public. In fact this assumption of responsibility is built into both the Constitution and Common Law that are the foundations of this country.

I hope this explains how I see hopping on someone's wi-fi as very different from entering an unlocked house.

Lastly, as an aside, hopping into a car and taking it for a drive and returning it may not be a crime in Missouri. I have a friend with a construction company who had one of his trucks taken for a joy-ride one night and the police told him they couldn't prosecute him for auto-theft. I think he might have been able to prosecute for theft of the gas, but I don't think it occurred to him or them at the time. Although, I disagree with this assessment (about the auto theft that is). Now of course, IANAL, nor familiar with every single law in Missouri, so it could very well be the Officers were wrong (something I consider quite possible in the KC force in general).

Brian J.D.

__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

--- Matthew Copple [email protected] wrote:

I think one would have a difficult time prosecuting an individual for merely observing radio waves.

Try telling that to Dish Networks and all those companies that sell Satellite Television services. Although I agree, about it should not be prosecutable.

However bear in mind it may be possible to use the DMCA to prosecute people making/using AM/FM stereos. Since they all require making/using devices that decrypt information.

A wireless card is nothing more than a fancy radio, after all. But jumping on someone's router, pulling an IP and surfing on that person's bandwidth is a deliberate act, not just passively collecting radio waves. That is network intrusion, and that is illegal.

Not necessarily. If my computer with a wi-fi card (or as was pointed out, my cell phone) runs dhcp (since I have a local lan and want to avoid hardcoding addresses), then there is no deliberate act involved in acquiring an IP address. The computer or phone is only doing what it is programmed to do. Hence the mere act of walking past someone's house with my PDA/phone causes me to access any wireless network that is open,

get an ip address and download my mail, et cetera. If we go with your definition of illegal, I can't walk down the street with my PDA, nor in fact could I take my PDA to any number of places I currently do without risking breaking the law unintentionally. So you see it really isn't that simple. But, I was talking about wardriving, and not cellphones with instant internet. Still, if we make one legal then it would be very discriminatory to illegalize the other. After all if I have a wireless network and for some reason my dhcp server goes down and my network then connects to my neighbors wireless, how is that criminal? I may not even become aware of it for a while. I may not even be at home? What if I have scheduled downloads? Am I committing a crime when my server crashes and I'm in Kentucky on business and my automated downloads access my neighbor's wireless, all without my ability to stop it? If that isn't illegal, then why should a wardriver be penalized for doing something just as innocuous?

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Matthew Copple wrote:

fancy radio, after all. But jumping on someone's router, pulling an IP and surfing on that person's bandwidth is a deliberate act,

I like this analogy better: Person A walks up to a stream on a person B's property and drinks some water. Yes, it's a deliberate act. But, we all have to share this planet, and reasonable persons doing respectful and reasonable things didn't historically create a need for attorneys. Now, if this person A drives his water truck in and hauls off twenty thousand gallons, or releases toxins into the stream for person B and everyone downstream to deal with, this is obviously a different ball gane. Otherwise, no harm, no foul.

But anybody (probably a corporation) too stupid to secure their wifi is probably stupid enough to sue for harmless trespass, so don't pay any attention to my pollyannaism.

Regards,

-Don