[wplug] [wplug-announce] The Open Pitt, Issue 10

[Drew from Zhrodague]

	Hi, guys. Can I have this trooper's email address? I'd like to 
clear up a few things:

> One surprise to me was that war-driving may be illegal.  Section 7611
> says, "A person commits the offense of unlawful use of a computer if he:
> intentionally and without authorization accesses or exceeds authorization
> to access...any computer, computer system, computer network..."

	Wardriving is not accessing computer networks -- but simply 
discovering them. Since the AP's beacons advertise their existance to 
everything in reach, there is no interception, or even access involved in 
wardriving.

	This is a point which people bring up often when I talk about 
http://www.WiFiMaps.com -- where we plot maps of Wi-Fi installations 
across the globe. The point of wardriving is not to break into networks, 
steal credit cards, download kiddie porn, send spam, or even meet hot 
chicks. Wardriving is like geocaching, but with a laptop and wireless 
card (http://www.geocaching.com).

	I might also point to an interview I did with Special Agent Tom 
Grasso at the NCFTA about wireless security, where we talk about 
wardriving too, available from http://tv.seattlewireless.net.


> That means if you're sitting at Starbucks and accidentally connect to the
> network belonging to the geek next door, you're fine.  But if you go
> around the city with a laptop, intentionally trying to find networks which
> you know you're not authorized to use, that is a crime.

	This is a little backwards, if you think about it. Actually
accessing a network which you are unauthorized to use DOES violate federal
and state laws. However, it is unenforcable, as each of us with wireless
cards will be violating these laws about 50 times a day (as our cards
automagically connect to whatever is open wherever we are).

	It all comes down to intent -- do you intend to access networks 
you are unauthorized to use, or not? When I wardrive, I do not intend to 
access these networks.


> However, the law also says, "It is a defense to an action [if] the actor:
> reasonably believed that he had the authorization or permission of the
> owner" (section 7605).  This could cover war-driving, as the courts may
> decide that you can "reasonably believe that you had authorization" when a
> network is set up to allow anyone to connect to it.  That, of course, will
> depend on how the courts choose to interpret the language.

	So, when you understand that wardriving is not access, or 
intercepting transmissions not intended for you, you realize that it is a 
harmless observatory practice.


--

Drew from Zhrodague		http://www.WiFiMaps.com
drew at zhrodague.net		Location Based WiFi