back to article Cops raid man whose Wi-Fi was used to download child porn

A man recently found a swarm of armed federal agents descending on his Buffalo, New York, home after a neighbor accessed his open Wi-Fi network and used it to download child pornography. The account, included in a recently published article from the Associated Press, is one of several demonstrating the unintended consequences …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Quxy
    Black Helicopters

    On the other hand...

    ...perhaps the best defence is to create reasonable doubt by leaving your network open. After all, if your WPA2 password gets cracked with aircrack+cuda by the neighbourhood bogeyman, even the aforementioned "security" pundits aren't going to believe that you're not guilty of downloading all that kiddy pr0n.

    1. Simon Neill

      Maybe.

      Where I live there are no less than 11 Wireless networks broadcasting SSID in range of my laptop. One of the reasons I use cable for my desktop.

      I have disabled SSID broadcast, enabled WPA2 with a quite nasty key, restricted MAC addresses, turned off DHCP and basically ticked every setting I can to make it difficult. I know not a single one of these precautions is 100% reliable but as they say - "you don't need to outrun the bear, just your friend". With 11 networks broadcasting SSID in the same area I figure the hacker will take the easy option over my wireless.

    2. Anteaus

      Complex issue..

      If you had at least tried to secure your WLAN you could say that you had acted with due diligence, and that what happened was in no way your fault.

      But, as things were the cops should have noticed that that connection was public, and were negligent in not checking this. If the connection had been encrypted, the cops would have an excuse for not checking this aspect.

      Though, on balance I think I'd prefer to take the preventive measure.

    3. HMB
      Alert

      Re: WPA2 CUDA

      It's the same old problem. 128/256 bit security and a 64 bit password (16 chars with half byte ASCII).

      WPA2 is incredibly safe even against your CUDA just so long as you choose a password that makes people cry if you ask them to read it to you. :P

      Most passwords are pretty shit if analysed to a bit depth level.

      You could churn out a billion brute force guesses a second and still not scratch a proper 256bit password.

      256 Bit = 2 to the 256 = 1.15 X 10 to the power of 77.

      That's 77 mofo zeros at the end. I struggle to understand such a large number. A billion is a paltry 9 zeros. It's literally a minute rounding error in comparison. The sun would have consumed all it's hydrogen and consumed the earth in a fiery hell before your password was compromised.

      Just a reminder people.

      P.S. DES was going to be 128-bit until the NSA asked IBM to make it less good (yes, way back in the 70s).

      1. Quxy
        Unhappy

        Ah, so you MUST be guilty!

        No reason to look for anyone else who might have used your wifi, as you've assured us that it's absolutely impregnable. Lock him up!

        Seriously, though, this is a situation where "pretty good" security might very well be more dangerous than none. If you're not using WPA2 and "a password that makes people cry if you ask them to read it to you", you're probably at less risk (from this threat) if you just leave your wifi open.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Err....

      ...no. An open network is unlikely to give reasonable doubt.

      The forensics teams will just grab all your kit, image any media and then tear them apart. Not even things like "Truecypt" with their "plausible deniability" (which doesn't really work, BTW) can help. Even if that does prove to be uncrackable (which is *highly* unlikely) then there's all those lovely registry entries, temporary and log files to sift through.

      Oh, and if you are in the UK, you *must* hand over your keys/passcodes when asked.

      Moral of the story: if you are into kiddy porn, they will find you. It's just a shame the punishments are not more severe. Well, they might be if the other inmates find out you are a nonce.

      Second moral: The above will probably change in a few years when forensics goes private in the UK. All you have to do is make is too hard to be "economic" for the forensics teams and their managers will tell them to stop. That's right, the boss's bonus is more important that justice. Don't you just love privatisation?

      1. Quxy
        FAIL

        Re: Err...

        You're missing the point.

        This isn't about trying to hide your kiddy pr0n, it's about trying to avoid getting busted and having your life permanently ruined for something you didn't do. My point is that if you don't have the ability and inclination to secure your wifi extremely well, it might be safer to create plausible deniability.

  2. Graham Marsden
    Grenade

    "It seems just as easy to draw the conclusion...

    "...that mere use of an IP address shouldn't be grounds for armed police to raid a person's home."

    Yes, but that would involve the use of a bit of sense!

    I have no doubt that the Police took great delight in informing neighbours of the reasons for the raid and the arrest to the extent that many will think "well, there's no smoke without fire" and consider that they should tell their kids to stay away from him "just to be on the safe side"...

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Flame

      Actually... OUR "local police"...

      Our cops, actually call the press, and local news-crews, BEFORE they make a "child-porn" arrest, so the media can record the entire "bust/raid". And, then the cops do a "perp walk" (marching the suspect around) for the cameras... publishing the name, address, and photos of the "accused", within hours.

      And, based upon the usual "letters to the editor" ANYONE accused is tried, found GUILTY, and sometimes... sentenced to "death" (by the local idiots)... before even a single piece of "evidence" is heard. In fact, some of these IDIOTS were actually demanding the lynching (and death) of the wife of a "suspect" (who the police flatly-stated was in no way involved, suspected, or being further investigated). Our "law-enforcement" aren't just "idiots"... they are psychotic-thugs.

  3. John Halewood
    WTF?

    erm?

    "About 201 million American households use wireless networks to connect to the internet." Phew, Amerika seems to have got a lot bigger all of a sudden, there was only about 115 mil a couple of years back. Obviously immigration is out of control, or did they take over Europe while we weren't looking?

    1. MeRp

      bigger?

      Well, there are over 300 million Americans (restricting ourselves to the usage meaning people from the USA), and, it seems to me, growing the usage of wifi from 115 million to 201 million in a "couple of years" when that is one of the biggest growing computer related tech areas during those two years doesn't seem unusual, nor does it seem to require any excessive immigration or annexation of a continent.

      1. Kevin Montgomery
        FAIL

        Households != Population

        Whilst there are well over 300 million Americans each one of those does not constitute the definition of a Household. Not all Americans live on their own, many come in "family packs" which constitute a household instead.

        Therefore growth of approx 115 million households to 201 million households is either massive population increase or a whole lot of families splitting up and living on their own.

      2. Old Handle
        Dead Vulture

        No, that doesn't add up.

        There are 312 million people in the US, but an average 2.55 people per household. There should be only something like 122 million households.

        In fact, reffering back to the AP story, I see it's a misquote. That was supposed to be 201 Million households WORLDWIDE.

        1. Marvin the Martian
          WTF?

          "worldwide" instead of "US"

          You mean there's civilisation outside of the blessed US of A? Beyond Alaska?!

          The mind boggles.

  4. corestore

    You don't say...

    "It seems just as easy to draw the conclusion that mere use of an IP address shouldn't be grounds for armed police to raid a person's home"

    Plus 100... I'm old enough to consider the provision of an unsecured network a public service; a matter of good neighbourliness. Of course I have a second, secured, network for our own private use.

    Definitely a case for severe education of law enforcement; the cops in this raid clearly acted as though he had already been convicted - note, it was him they arrested, not his wife, they *assumed* it had to be him. Lawyers who pursue file sharers are already learning this the hard way. Lawyers who pursue cops are probably already salivating.

    Mike

  5. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge
    Big Brother

    Just makes me

    glad that I installed CAT5 cables everywhere in my house

    "what ya doing that for? wireless is easier" cried my friends

    "yeah , but no bugger is gonna leech kiddie pr0n off my connection"

    1. Steve Brooks

      whoops

      "yeah , but no bugger is gonna leech kiddie pr0n off my connection" Sorry, when I first read that it came across as ""yeah , but no bugger is gonna leech kiddie pr0n off my collection" and was already dialing the police when I realised my mistake :-)

    2. Elmer Phud
      Black Helicopters

      Tin foil hat for sale

      as title

      1. Sir Runcible Spoon
        Joke

        Sir

        "Tin foil hat for sale"

        Does it protect against wi-fi?

  6. Old Handle

    Thanks for including that last part

    That's my take on it, as well. I've been known to use open wireless networks from time to time. So I figure it's only fair to let other people use mine. Stories like this give me pause, but considering how many wi-fi networks there are and how many of those are unsecured (28% according to wigle.net), these few incidents represent a very small risk, literally less than one in a million.

    1. Pete 2 Silver badge

      Wireless: open, to accusations

      > I figure it's only fair to let other people use [my open wireless] . ..., these few incidents represent a very small risk, literally less than one in a million.

      I have to admire your altruism: being prepared to get arrested and charged with child pornography (which as has already been said is a guilty: with no chance of removing the stigma, offence) just so that some anonymous strangers can get internet access for free,

      1. C Yates
        Black Helicopters

        Couldn't agree more!

        You're far better people than me in allowing people free access. I think my wireless network is the only one bothering to use any encryption in my street.

        I've even warned some of the neighbours about this sorta thing only to have them shrug!

        I suppose the silver lining is in that anyone wanting to get upto something will leave my connection alone as it's easier to access SKY181 or [insert_easily_researchable_router_model_with_default_admin_passwords] down the road... *shrug* =)

  7. Steve Evans

    BT's FON

    I wonder how things would go in the UK with BT's home supplied routers which act as FON hotspots for anyone with an account. I don't know, as I don't have either the AP or an account, but I hope for the broadband customers sake that BT can and do log access made via these hotspots.

    1. AndrueC Silver badge
      Go

      Hmmm

      The BT FON acts like two separate routers. People connecting from 'outside' use a different SSID and get a different IP address. I don't know what MAC address the router presents though so it might still be possible to trace the data back to a particular box. I would hope that when BT were contacted they would be able to explain that it had nothing to do with the owner of the box and they should pursue the FON account holder.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Linux

        LaFonera

        The FON still shows the same external IP as accessing the website as the real account holder. For the police to access the account holders information they must contact BT and request details. Which at this point BT will supply both access lists for the real router and also the Fon router.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Coffee/keyboard

          You are .......

          JOKING I hope!!!!

          BT will Hahahahahahahehehehehehehahahahahahaha

        2. Gavin Chester
          FAIL

          Hmm 2

          Nice in practice but FON have never been the most customer focused company. This has been raised before many times on the FON boards and the answer is alweays to bury heads in sand and say that is not an issue.

          Lets face it just like in this case the police WILL assume the owner is at fault, they chose to share the connection and assume they are guilty.

          Many Many people have BT FON because they don't know better and are opted in by simply using the BT homehub. You could always get free access on FON by signing up as a "alien" with a email account and watching a advert. Add in disposable hotmail / yahoo/gmail accounts and the downloader could be effectly anonymous.

          With free wifi being more common in pubs, cafes, shops etc Fon's time has been and gone, unfortunalty it's security hole will linger on for BT customers.

    2. Wayland Sothcott 1
      Boffin

      re: BTFON

      I am not on BT but bought a FON router for £40 so I can use for free any of the millions of BTFON HomeHubs all over the country. For my part of the bargin I just leave the FON router plugged in to my LAN.

      Any users do not come out of my IP address, they are routed to come out of BT's. Since they sign in BTFON has a record of their connection including their name and any details linked to their BT Internet account.

    3. Gordon 10

      I had same thought.

      Are fon hotspots logged?

      Who is liable if pron is d/l'd on a router hosting one.

      Will BT help defend you if the rozzers come a callin'. (I doubt it very much)

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Big Brother

    I think, this is part of a bigger "security" picture.

    Currently, the "authorities" are trying to promote the legal-fiction that anything that can be done with "your IT property" (stolen, borrowed, or not) is YOUR legal-responsibility. This (along with the boogy-men of; "child porn", "crime", and "terrorism") is being specifically used to justify the entire notion of external-control of your computer, and Internet, usage (such as being forced to run a "trusted" , locked-down, computer that only does what it is allowed to, by various government, and private, interests... as specified by government "regulation", and imposed by your ISP).

    Bye, bye privacy, freedom, and rights... Hello, special-interest, police-state.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      FAIL

      Re: "I think, this is part of a bigger "security" picture."

      Correct.

      The phrase is "Unstoppable march to the utopian police state". Aided and abetted (in the UK) by the likes of the Daily Fail and other self appointed vigilante groups".

      As for the "milion CP images" referenced, it sounds like the police are systemically failing to do what they are paid for (there's a first.), ie blocking this filth at source.

      Unless of course, they just don't care...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Child porn

        In the 'great land of the free' called USA. A million child porn images could constitute a video. There are guidelines written for them for the evidence that is found that I think every minute of video is classed as 1000 images.

        This is how they get such large numbers.

        1. Sir Runcible Spoon

          Sir

          "Currently, the "authorities" are trying to promote the legal-fiction that anything that can be done with "your IT property" (stolen, borrowed, or not) is YOUR legal-responsibility"

          Roll on Apple making home routers then, coz we all know we don't actually own anything produce by Apple after all.

          Where's my effin sarcy icon?

        2. Steve Evans

          @AC 09:44

          Interesting maths... Ignoring that only a fraction of the video frames are complete images, and most are actually transitional frames stored as differences to a complete reference frame, 60 seconds at 30 frames per second is 1800 images. So they could have hyped it far more.

          I guess you don't have the Daily Mail in the USA to push this kind of mathematical correction!

    2. Maty

      So ...

      If my router is leased from my ISP, it's not my property and my ISP is liable?

  9. Tony Paulazzo
    Happy

    RE: BT's FON

    To use the FON network (which is crap really, literally good enough for email but not transmitting a football game to your wife), you have to login with your email address.

    @ anon where the media show up with the pigs, where would that be, exactly? Not many clues in your post.

    As for the conclusion, open wifi vs over eager cops, I'd say it shows they're already watching everything we do online, ergo, act appropriately...

  10. Robot

    To the victim ....

    To the victim whose home was busted by the police: Your ordeal, though unpleasant, has raised public awareness of Wi-Fi theft, and will probably save many innocent people from false arrests and false imprisonment. (In this world, there are many victims of false imprisonment, e.g. the innocent 14-year-old boy at Guantanamo.)

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Troll

      How do you know for sure the 14 year old was innocent?

      I mean, if the chosen one believed Stan Shunpike wasn't a Deatheater, couldn't you be wrong too?

      1. Robot

        Yes, in fact, the 14-year-old boy was innocent ...

        The 14-year-old (named Naqib Ullah) was innocent according to a secret U.S. intelligence assessment written in 2003. Thank-you for unmasking this, Wikileaks.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Yeah ...

    In an ideal world, we could leave our wireless open, creating a wonderful situation of being able to get a wireless connection almost wherever you are (in a town or city at least), safe in the knowledge that it would only be used for 'legit' (note the quotes) purposes and not for anything that could put us in legal endangerment or further create demand for 'nefarious' activities.

    Sadly of course it's not like that .... I use mains-ethernet exclusivly these days anyway, I got fed up with the poor quality and speed of wireless (especially since I had to use the awful 'Orange Livebox' with its lack of external antenna, but thats a gripe for another time .. )

    The point about an IP not necessarily relating to one person is the most interesting thing. I'm assuming that this person then got released because there was no 'material' on any of his/her equipment.

    Someone else I think makes an interesting point about a defence for someone doing that by deliberately leaving their connection unsecured ....

  12. Andrew Duffin

    This is news?

    I knew this would happen as soon as I read about that BT thing where they "encourage" you to let random people use your WiFi connection.

    No way will any law enforcement types ever understand this; anyone who allows their connection to be used is just asking for trouble.

    Me? 802.1x .... forget it, bad guys!

  13. Sir Runcible Spoon

    Sir

    If people are using long-range antenna to access the wi-fi points, how do they get found out?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Sir

      Probably from the 18 inch long directional antenna bolted to the top of their chimney!

      Talking of which, I should take mine down, I used to use it to share my friends wifi before I could get broadband, he was only 300 meters away but the phone lines took a different route to his house so were somewhat shorter, than mine, and not aluminium.

      1. Sir Runcible Spoon

        Sir

        Hmm, and here I always thought the unobstrusive antenna of choice was a pringles can (empty). Still that would probably look odd stuck to the top of your boat/car/head :)

  14. Muscleguy
    Pirate

    To WEP or not to WEP

    Our network is WEP protected, but also non visible. You have to know it's name to connect and have your MAC address registered. It's the best I can do. I would like to WAP protect it but Mrs Muscleguy's PSP won't connect if it is set to WAP (don't mention connecting her XBox to it wirelessly).

    Besides the neighbour's BT Openzone is a far more tempting target ;-)

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Sniffing

      Im sorry to pop your bubble Muscleguy, but the clients that are connected to your "hidden" network broadcast your SSID and their MAC address. That anybody who may be listening to can then capture.

      I was on a Microsoft training course a while back when they told us that "Hidden SSID and Mac Filtering is the best form of wireless security for enterprise networks"

      Also to connect to open BT Networks (BT Openzone, The Cloud, BT Fon etc) You need to log into it or buy credits with a card

    2. Steve Evans

      @Muscleguy

      Bad news. Your connection could be breached within minutes.

      Hiding the ID doesn't make your network invisible, it just means the ID has to be provided by the connecting party as another form of confirmation. The trouble is if you are using your wireless network, that "secret" ID is whizzing about in the airwaves all the time in the packets... And your packet are only encrypted with WEP.

      WEP can be broken very quickly. Once the key has been extracted the next packet that comes past with the ID in it will be broken, and there is the ID, and a MAC address which you allow.

      It will stop someone accidentally using your network, but to anyone who *really* wants to use it anything not secured by WPA2 is as good as open.

      1. Sir Runcible Spoon

        Sir

        @Muscleguy - google Kismet, you may be surprised at some of the freely available tools out there.

        There's also a 5 Gb password file out there somewhere that you can use once you have a copy of the encrypted WPA key (WEP can be broken in minutes) - so always use a non-word (non-substitution) WPA key, as the password files regularly take into account regular substitutions.

    3. sabroni Silver badge
      Unhappy

      hey muscleguy

      ..bad news. You make it clear that you know the risks and that you know your network isn't very secure and you also state that a neighbour has a more easily hackable wifi setup. Nevertheless a load of smartarses on here are going to "enlighten" you with their wisdom about how easy it would be to hack your wifi.

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Grenade

    Hiding SSID/WEP

    Anyone who is prepared to crack your WEP key will have no problem identifing the SSID if it's hidden. Same goes for the MAC filtering. Yes it will deter the person walking by, but it will not stop someone who is a bit mroe determined.

    Hiding your SSID is also not a valid seucirty method in my eyes, and also makes any clients that connect to that network less secure.

    http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/28653/debunking-myths-is-hiding-your-wireless-ssid-really-more-secure/

    1. Muscleguy
      Boffin

      It's still an ecology

      Yes I'm aware we are not 100% bullet proof secure, but for the reasons stated I can do no better without denying my wife access to the PSN network on her PSP (oh wait! . . .). But the point about the neighbours is still valid, I can currently see 3 other networks from this static location (leafy suburbia). With such prey on plain view, the camouflaged animal is still at an advantage even if it is über vulnerable if detected. So your objections apply only to those determined to do us personal harm and we are universally loved by all, of course.

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Mine's staying open

    Not worth the hassle to lock it down. My friends and neighbours use it. I might change my mind if my local police demonstrate the stupidity detailed here.

    Oh, regards WEP: it's almost entirely pointless. Trivial to break the password and offers no protection between those on it.

  17. Mage Silver badge

    PSP?

    Sony PSP works with WPA. The Nintendo DS only works with WEP.

    Unless it's very old Firmware PSP?

    1. Muscleguy
      Alert

      Theoretically

      I know the PSP (latest version using discs) can, theoretically do WAP. That is no help in getting it to actually work though (Airport Express). Eventually Mrs Muscleguy wanted her console back and for it to connect, or else and she almost never leaves the house without it so I have ceased my attempts to make it work and am not interested in resetting the entire network whenever she wants to connect with it.

      At least the XBox connects if you use enet pretty seamlessly.

  18. MJI Silver badge

    Shafted by DSs here as well

    Otherwise I'd go WPA or even disable WiFi.

  19. Alex Brett

    IPv6 to the rescue?

    Interestingly this is an area where IPv6 will actually help to prove your innocence - because you don't use NAT, and each machine has a unique address, it's easy to show that it wasn't your PCs that accessed the material, as the server will see the unique address, not a random single IPv4 address that only identifies the connection.

    Of course, there's nothing to stop the clever person from changing the IPv6 address they use when accessing dodgy things, but it should make it easier to clear people who obviously wouldn't know how to do that...

    1. Sir Runcible Spoon

      Sir

      "but it should make it easier to clear people who obviously wouldn't know how to do that"

      Nice idea, but you can't prove a negative.

      Still, it isn't like the cops need proof these days is it? Insinuation seems to be enough.

  20. Anonymous Coward
    FAIL

    I assume that the stupid plods will pay-off his mortgage

    If the moron plods had bothered to stop at the driveway, pull out a Smartphone, they could have confirmed that the WiFi hotspot was open. This would have taken all of 30 seconds. Then they would have had (even more) reasonable doubt, hopefully calmed down a bit, aimed their automatic weapons elsewhere, knocked on the door, presented the Search Warrant, and gently entered for further discussions.

    There really should be a huge lawsuit over this incident. These idiot police and their extremely unprofessional behaviour are a huge embarrassment to the law enforcement community. The fact that they will not face professional repercusssions is an indictment of the entire system. This sort of FAIL fuels the extreme rightwing nut-cases.

  21. Mark .

    three days

    "Within three days, investigators determined that the homeowner had been telling the truth"

    Despite the awful ordeal that this must have been (and the disgusting unprofessional comments made during the raid), at least this did get solved in that time.

    If this was the UK, based on some of the horror stories, all his Windows computers, tablets, phones would have been confiscated, left lying around for perhaps months, whilst they try to get round it. These days the Internet is becoming a necessity, and it's also required for some people's livelihoods. Same with computers. And mobile phones are the only way many people have to communicate. People still think of these as a "search" warrant, not a "steal" warrant. That's before we consider the stress of waiting for months, worrying if you'll be charged (not to mention that having Internet access is something that would be useful for looking up legal advice and information...)

    Not to mention that now that we have laws criminalising all kinds of pictures of legal acts, of cartoons and so on - even if he wasn't guilty, there's a chance they'd still find some kind of image buried in a cache, and try to get him for that instead.

    On another note, I'm curious what make and model of desktop PC the man had. I mean we get told he had an Ipad and Iphone, not tablet and phone, so why not the make of desktop? Obviously it can't have been a Mac, because we'd have been told. Seriously, do Apple pay for the product placement?

  22. ph0b0s

    Counter productive

    This approach is more than likely to let the real perpetrator get away. If it is an open hot spot being used by neighbours, for no good, what do you think their first reaction will be to seeing their neighbours being raided. That's right destroy the evidence....

    If they actually did a bit of investigation first to check if the wireless is open, and who actually uses it, they could be more targeted in their approach.

    But as long as the law have caught someone, even if not the real abusers, they seem to be happy.... That's my main problem with a lot of these CP stories.

  23. Tom 13

    I blame the ISPs that still distribute WEP enabled routers.

    Most people can't be bothered to change the settings, defaulting to weak is defaulting to Fail.

    1. Steve Evans

      @Tom 13

      It's actually worse than that. Most routers in the UK seem to turn up with a preconfigured wireless password, which is a step on from the always supplied open situation of the past.

      Unfortunately some manufacturers set the password to one which can be deduced from the MAC address!

      There's an app on Android called penetrate (cue 12 year old snigger) which knows these routers and preset password algorithms. It's quite worrying to walk about with it running and see the known ones pop up one by one. From my short test, it's above 1 in 20.

  24. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    You're never secure

    Even if your Wi-Fi is 100% secure, you are still not secure.

    If someone email's you porn, you might not even see it, but you might have it. Or you might visit a web page with porn embedded somewhere on it, which will be stored on your PC, and you might never see it.

    The problem is that you can't prove it, and it's jail for something you were not responsible for.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

  25. Mike 61

    I leave my wifi open

    I have done it all my life

    and if you d/l kiddie pr0n

    I will stab you with my knife.

    Actually, on a more serious note, I log everything, and will happily turn over the logs to the authorities if they come knocking. Your mac address your connect times, and any other data your computer decided to share via tcp/ip. And if you were war driving I can give them the pictures of your vehicle from my security cameras, complete with timestamps. I am not paranoid...much..

  26. Henry Wertz 1 Gold badge

    WEP and unencrypted networks

    First off, I wonder how many of those 32% who admitted to trying to access networks that didn't belong to them were just using open access points? To me, if someone doesn't even bother to put WEP on, this suggests they are permitting people to use their network. Also, my Ubuntu system doesn't, but many machines seem to *automatically* connect to open wireless access points, so I bet far more than 32% have accessed "networks that didn't belong to them" without even realizing it.

    Secondly, so, yes WEP is weak. But, it does indicate that you don't want just anyone to use your network, and I think many people will respect that, especially given the preponderance of networks that are explicitly left open (no encryption whatsoever).

    That said, I've actually been surprised here in Iowa City, I keep hearing about all these open access points still all over the place, but around here it is probably only about 1 out of 20. For instance where I am now, I see 16 networks, 1 is open (and it's "fake open", even though it has "Guest" in the name if one connects to it pulls up a web page asking for a password!)

  27. JaitcH
    Happy

    If more WiFi outlets were open Plod might finally figure the futility

    When we order in an InterNet connection here, one national ISP inquires whether it is for a hotspot. If the answer is yes, it kindly configures the USER as ftp and the PASSWORD as telecom.

    This is almost the standard set up right across the country in coffee shops, fast food outlets, restaurants, etc. It is hard to pinch WiFi time as downloads are unlimited and few locals even bother with WiFi security even in their homes.

    As a result the police have decided chasing pornography of any type is an exercise in futility and they simply ignore it.

    This way the perverts can do their thing in front of their computer screens and the rest of the world can get on with their pursuits. If there is physical child abuse, the courts are extremely hard on the adults - a case last year involving a man and wife resulted in them getting 20 years each - no time off for good behaviour, either. Convicted rapists are frequently shot - after trial - so there are few repeat offenders.

    Mind you, Facebook is blocked along with about 20 other sites.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like