[wplug] Wardriving CNET article

Robert Griffin rgriffin at escinter.com
Fri Dec 23 10:47:14 EST 2005


I agree, ignorance is hardly ever a plausible excuse.  The problem is 
ignorance is almost the norm.  In an effort to make everything "simple"  
Microsoft and hardware vendors link Linksys, Netgear, D-Link, etc. have 
made their products initially insecure, without making the consumer 
aware of these issues.  

I haven't purchased a wireless router from any of the said manufacturers 
in awhile, but I don't recall the packaging saying anything to the 
effect of "Installing this device may open your home/office network to 
intrusion without any modifactions to internal settings"  or some legal 
mumbo-jumbo.  So what we have is a product that is heavily used by the 
masses and no disclaimers or warnings (correct me if I'm wrong here), 
and by the nature of its default settings it is insecure, and allows 
neighbors or passersby to access it without any authorized acesss.  Now 
we are going see lawsuits over what is the default setup of devices.  
Which all could have been avoided by some consumer warning or training.  
So I can agree with the fact that Microsoft and hardware vendors are 
some what responsible for the problem.  Possibly the result of lawsuits 
to come may lead to some class action lawsuits against manufactures.

However,  I still believe it boils down to a ethical issue.  Let's say 
my neighbor has a door, but they don't lock it.  Heck, they leave it 
open.  Now I have wide open access to enter their house, and all I want 
to do is watch some TV or make a local phone call.  Now my neighbor 
comes home, and there I am watching TV and making a phone call, I 
believe this person has a right to be upset, even though they initially 
left the door open.  Also, If I left the keys in my car, I'm not 
inviting someone to take my car down to the store, even if they do no 
damage and return it. Obviously the parameters are a little different 
because of the physicality of each situation.  Just because I don't 
physically intrude on someone doesnt mean I'm not stealing from them.  
Take a garbage collection service for example, I put my garbage out with 
my neighbor and don't make any previous arangements with them.  I never 
physically intrude on them, but I'm taking advantage of their money 
(whatever small and insignificant amount it may be) and ignorance in the 
situation.

An interesting line from the article is: "Speakeasy believes that shared 
wireless networks are in keeping with our core values of disseminating 
knowledge, access to information and fostering community..."  Although I 
agree with Speakeasy in their core values of disseminating knowledge, I 
believe this is probably taken out of context, and is in an agreed upon 
sharing of the service.

I guess in conclusion, consumer/end-user awareness is always a good 
thing in matters such as this, and if you really sit down and look at it 
ethically, it's stealing.

-Robert Griffin


Brian A. Seklecki wrote:

>WinXP automatically associates with non-preferred networks.  Therefore,
>someone at Microsoft should get caned.
>
>Also, operators of private wireless networks should be held accountable
>for negligent security practices.  Ignorance isn't a plausible excuse
>anywhere in law...
>
>*wink*  >:} 
>
>~BAS
>  
>


More information about the wplug mailing list