Wardriving

Gaillimhtaibhse

Should we all wardrive? An anarchist friend of mine suggested that we should wardrive whenever possible. He says that the Internet is free, and that no one should pay a capitalist middleman for access to something that is free.

I raised the concern about accessing the web for free through a paying customer, without their knowledge or permission. He said that if they fail to firewall and password protect their wireless router, they are inviting you to wardrive.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

Ruu_Old

yeah, fight the power, and so on i thought wireless access depended on how well the company secures the network and not the user, but i dont know. someone else more knowledgeable will no doubt have a say in this.

DemonOfTheFall

Wardrive means driving around with a laptop seeing how many networks you can find.

Your thinking about just using your neighbour's internet access at home. Pretty big difference.

I'd say that someone's network is fair game if they're running eircom defaults. I wouldn't abuse their bandwidth with bittorrent or something, but I definitely would for surfing.

aidan_walsh

DemonOfTheFall wrote:

I'd say that someone's network is fair game if they're running eircom defaults.

I wouldn't. I don't think that its fair to use someone else's connection just because they are naive.

DonkeyStyle \o/

Gaillimhtaibhse wrote:

An anarchist friend of mine suggested...

That should be enough to stop you right there... anarchists are the masters of mind-bogglingly retarded logic.
As demonstrated by the rest of that post.

Yeah the internet is "free", so lets spend petrol money driving around for 50 miles looking for an open hotspot :rolleyes:

He said that if they fail to firewall and password protect their wireless router, they are inviting you to wardrive.

If someone is clueless enough to leave their wireless network wide-open, then I doubt they've ever even heard the term 'wardriving', so how can they be inviting you to do it?
There again, maybe they're just kind souls who want to share their net access with passers by.

I don't disagree with doing it, I think it's pretty harmless if the wardriver isn't up to anything naughty or taking the piss with the bandwidth, but the given justification is a bit weak.

Capt'n Midnight

Gaillimhtaibhse wrote:

Should we all wardrive? An anarchist friend of mine suggested that we should wardrive whenever possible. He says that the Internet is free, and that no one should pay a capitalist middleman for access to something that is free.

We are in a country where most internet connections are pay per minute or pay extra if you go over the cap. Hence what he is suggesting amounts to a financial hit on the victim - theft if you like.

The internet is not free. It uses electricity and copper and routers and stuff and people have to look after it.

An attitued like that would suggest we should shoplift enter open doors when possible to see what people have invited us to take :rolleyes:

Has that guy shared his internet connection - or is he just a leech ?

Yes the information should be free.
Yes the middle men are screwing us.
But sponging off your neighbour doesn't affect the middle man , nor does it make you a hero instead of a parasite.

As for anarchy despite the large number of time where all civil structure was wiped out in many places during the last century no utopia spontaneously generated.

ShiverinEskimo

So you want to attack the strong (eircom et al) by taking advantage of the weak (naive home users) - pretty ****ed up set of objectives there..but hey - you do whatcha gotta do..

stevenmu

Gaillimhtaibhse wrote:

He says that the Internet is free, and that no one should pay a capitalist middleman for access to something that is free.

That's the same kind of logic 'socialists' use when they say that they're supporting the common worker by sponging off the dole. The internet was initially built by the US military and research institutions, but the majority of what we recognise as the modern Internet was built by the 'capitalist middleman' who charge for access to it.

Archytas

Most of you seem to be decent folk around these threads but using someone elses bandwidth for a laugh is just wrong. There is no argument that will change my mind. Your "anarchist" friend is a thief. S/He isn't hurting the "capatalist middleman". What about some eircom BB time customer that comes home to a bill for €100? What happens if they cant pay it? Does that hurt the "capatalist middleman"? No it doesn't. It hurts the older/poorer people who tend to buy this type of BB package.

Abuse eircom hotspots or other eircom paid-for facilities, I couldn't care less, but ordinary folks dont deserve to be f'd around by you or anyone else.
I have never wanted to curse more in a thread in my entire life. What your friend is suggesting is disgusting.

DemonOfTheFall

Yeah, lol, re-reading the OP, his friend sounds like a muppet. It doesnt harm eircom in the slightest, it's only harming your neighbours.

A friend of mine got out the wireless card and antennas a while back looking for any free access from the houses in our estate, but the signal was too weak on all of them. He only did that because he has no option to get broadband himself. I don't think that it harms anyone really if you don't take the piss with their connection. If all you ever do is some light surfing they'll never even notice!

That said, if I had any chance to pay for my own net access I would definitely take it rather than scab someone elses. When I move out next year I'm sure itll be ridiculously easy to find unsecured networks and just get free internet, but I'd much rather suck it up and just pay 40 quid a month for my own.

SouperComputer

He says that the Internet is free, and that no one should pay a capitalist middleman for access to something that is free.

Access to private networks is illegal without authorisation, regardless of weather the network is connected to the internet or not. Your friend is a thief, by overcoming security measures he is "breaking and entering" and without out its just simple theft

The internet is not free, it never was and never will be. Technology costs money. Your friend is deluded!

[hypothetical example] Hmmm, my neighbours door is open, think ill help myself to the warm Mcdonalds on her kitchen table, YEA that will hit the capitalist big dicks big time :rolleyes: [/hypothetical example]

CiaranC

Whats wrong with using open access points to browse the web or check your mail? I do it all the time. I had my own network open for over a year and only had to close it when someone started taking the piss with bandwidth.

Its says a lot about our society (with all this talk about 'socialists' and 'anarchists') when the simple act of sharing something with your neighbours makes you naive and them thieves. :rolleyes:

Gone West

Who said the internet is free?
Somebody has to pay the cost of bringing cables across the ocean floor.
Somebody has to pay the cost of the servers and routing equipment that all our data moves through.
those people are called ISP's(mostly the tier1 guys) and they charge you or smaller isps to use their equipment.

And wardriving is so 1998.
Have fun if you try any of mine.

Archytas

CiaranC wrote:

Whats wrong with using open access points to browse the web or check your mail? I do it all the time.

Do these people know? Have they given you consent?

CiaranC wrote:

I had my own network open for over a year...

Thats your decision and nobody is stopping you from doing this.

CiaranC wrote:

...and only had to close it when someone started taking the piss with bandwidth.

Or maybe someone is? :rolleyes:

CiaranC wrote:

Its says a lot about our society (with all this talk about 'socialists' and 'anarchists') when the simple act of sharing something with your neighbours makes you naive and them thieves. :rolleyes:

That is not what anyone said here?? Do you know that these people that are "sharing" with this "wardriver"?? How about you give us your number so that the next time someone is crying on the phone about an internet bill they cant pay can give you a call and you'll give them this BS about how its not wrong??

P.s. Wardriving is such a stupid name for this idiocy.

DemonOfTheFall

It's actually the wrong name too. Wardriving is going around with a laptop seeing how many open APs you can find. This is just using your neighbours internet. Absolutely not the same thing.

Gone West

war paddling for teh win.
http://photobucket.com/albums/a52/peterjv/?action=view&current=image1087.jpg

KdjaCL

LOl know a few cheapasses who were doing this on my mates router, were leeching from FTPs over his unsecured wireless, when i went to fix it (his net was suffering from the leeching *****.
They pulled up outside and started to download a movie and 2 games and a distro from various ftps.
Using his routers software let them get to 98% of all files then blocked the ftp and http ports one by one and renamed the network "car-outside-fukoff"

Wardriving = cheapasses.


kdjac

DonkeyStyle \o/

KdjaC wrote:

renamed the network "car-outside-fukoff"

lol

dalk

Some will argue that since a Open Network broadcasts it existence, it is 'inviting' you to join. And because it requires no password and you are not breaking any encryption, and you were 'invited' to join in the first place, you are not 'breaking and entering'.

So was waiting to see how the the courts would view such trains of logic. Seeing as our legal system is similar to the UK's seems like its pretty straight forward illegal in the eyes of the law...

UK War Driver Fined

di11on

The internet is free? No it's not! Someone somewhere is always paying for it.

The culprit here are the ISPs. Home users should be appropriately informed of the consequences of leaving their network unsecured. The default wireless network settings should result in an encrypted network - that should be standard.

steveland?

Gaillimhtaibhse wrote:

An anarchist friend of mine suggested that we should wardrive whenever possible.

:v:

FIGHT THA POWAH! Your "anarchist" friend sounds very knowledgeable about the internet. As we all know the servers, computers and physical connections that drive the internet were built and put in place at no cost to anyone... therefore making the internet completely free...

It's just those bastards like Eircom who've decided that they're going to pretend that servers and server upkeep cost money...

How DARE they!

no one should pay a capitalist middleman for access to something that is free

I'll bet your "anarchist" friend has no problem paying Asha €50 for an oversized black hoodie with an anarchy symbol on it that some 6-year old made and taking a scissors to it so he looks all cool and anarchish...

Gaillimhtaibhse wrote:

An anarchist friend of mine

Re-quoted just for the sheer hilarity...

jd

di11on wrote:

The culprit here are the ISPs. ...... The default wireless network settings should result in an encrypted network - that should be standard.

I believe they (the isps?) do-well, that was how it (the cdrom) set up my dads network..
jd

Archytas

eircoms netopia 3347nwg comes with wep turned on as standard....

astrofool

New York has made unencrypted wireless network routers illegal out of the box, so the manufacturers have to ensure encryption is in place.

aidan_walsh

astrofool wrote:

New York has made unencrypted wireless network routers illegal out of the box, so the manufacturers have to ensure encryption is in place.

Unfortunatly, that only applies to one county in New York State, and hasn't actually been adopted yet.

Capt'n Midnight

dalk wrote:

Some will argue that since a Open Network broadcasts it existence, it is 'inviting' you to join. And because it requires no password and you are not breaking any encryption, and you were 'invited' to join in the first place, you are not 'breaking and entering'.

So was waiting to see how the the courts would view such trains of logic. Seeing as our legal system is similar to the UK's seems like its pretty straight forward illegal in the eyes of the law...

UK War Driver Fined

I'd say the courts would take the same view as they do currently with regard to the defence of "it wasn't breaking and entering, cos the window wasn't locked" or "someone had put thier bag down on the ground, so I knew they wanted me to help myself"

There was a time in this country where people didn't lock doors when they went out, this practice continued in rural Sligo till the 80's at least. Because of freeloading scummers we now need deadlocks and monitored alarms and chains.

Gaillimhtaibhse

There are some cities in the States that are attempting to provide free wireless access for their citizens, but the cable companies have been fighting it. They have somehow influenced their elected government officials at the state level to pass laws that would prevent these cities from offering free WiFi on the grounds that it would hurt private sector for profit corporations. If you don't believe this thread, then check out the recent laws passed in the State of Pennsylvania (Harrisburg is the capital where all this legislation has occurred affecting this state), for example.

Gone West

Jeez.
There are a LOT of uninformed posters on this thread talking absolute shi'ite.
Go read up on the subject matter before contributing youre drivel as fact.

BopNiblets

Huh, 1st I've heard of wardriving, now all I need is a car, driving lessons, and a laptop with wireless....

Ah screw it.

gline

tell ur mate to pay for broadand like everyone else, the cheapass. Its not fair to freeload off a neighbour, different if its a big company.. but your own neighbours :mad:

AARRRGH

Gaillimhtaibhse wrote:

ShoAn anarchist friend of mine suggested that we should wardrive whenever possible. He says that the Internet is free, and that no one should pay a capitalist middleman for access to something that is free.

Your friend is an idiot. Who does he think pays for the cabling, data transfer, routers, servers, network admins, developers, etc etc.?

The internet is not free.

ShiverinEskimo

Doubt we'll be seeing much of the OP in these parts again..only 11 posts in - he was just so young - it just doesn't-get-any-easier!!!

Hobbes

DemonOfTheFall wrote:

I'd say that someone's network is fair game if they're running eircom defaults. I wouldn't abuse their bandwidth with bittorrent or something, but I definitely would for surfing.

By that step of logic it means if my neighbour leaves thier window or door open then I should be allowed loot their fridge. I won't take all the food but I'd certainly drink their milk. :rolleyes:

Not having a protected wireless point you can certainly expect someone to come in on it, doesn't mean that they are allowed to.

To the OP, your friend is an idiot.

Gone West

"friend"

DemonOfTheFall

Actually Hobbes it's not quite the same thing. You're using the RIAA/MPAA/IRMA logic there. I later clarified that and said that yeah, if I couldn't actually get BB myself I would use a neighbour's unencrpyed AP, as long as it wouldn't negatively affect their experience. Eg. no bittorrent/downloads.

Please, Please, PLEASE don't use the taking their milk from the fridge cos they left the door open. It is entirely unsuited to the situation. If they never even noticed and you never used much of their bandwidth what does it matter ? I know it's wrong from a moral standpoint, but like honestly, what is the big deal ?

Get off your high horse, I didn't say I would go in and rape then murder them in their beds or something.

aidan_walsh

DemonOfTheFall wrote:

If they never even noticed and you never used much of their bandwidth what does it matter ?

It matters simply because they're paying for a service, and you're helping yourself for nothing.

DemonOfTheFall wrote:

honestly, what is the big deal ?

DemonOfTheFall wrote:

I know it's wrong from a moral standpoint

Ta-da!

DemonOfTheFall wrote:

Get off your high horse, I didn't say I would go in and rape then murder them in their beds or something.

No. No, thats a completely wrong analogy :rolleyes:

CiaranC

Hobbes wrote:

By that step of logic it means if my neighbour leaves thier window or door open then I should be allowed loot their fridge.

If you neighbour had practically endless litres of milk running in open pipes directly through your house your analogy might have some relevance. Then you could help yourself to a glass.

Theres nothing wrong with using a few mbs of transfer if its available. Why does everyone assume that the person running the access point would give a ****? People have more to worry about.

Some of the posters on this thread must avert there eyes when walking past their neighbours garden in case they get some pleasure out of their neighbours pretty flowers without having paid for them. :rolleyes:

DemonOfTheFall

EDIT: couldn't be arsed. I don't steal BB and don't intend to ever live anywhere that I can't get it anyway so the conv. doesn't even really apply to me.

Thanks for once again not being able to have a conversation without bringing out the :rolleyes: smilies.

Karoma

:rolleyes:

Thomas_S_Hunterson

You could always get a job with one of the broadband companies, i presume they offer their employees connection as a perk. therefore you'll get paid to get broadband access!!!!!!!!;)

a5y

Gaillimhtaibhse wrote:

...He says that the Internet is free, and that no one should pay a capitalist middleman for access to something that is free.

Hmm. Anarachists always seem so eager to publicly shout about how we should all destroy the system, yet remarkably quiet when it comes to what we should do once it's destroyed.

It seems many before me have already pointed out that wires, electricity, beige boxs and human labor (which make up the web) are not actually free so I'll skip that and get to my point.

I'm assuming what your anarchist friend means is the Internet should be free and no one should have to pay a capitalist middleman for access to something that is free.

Well maybe he has a point. The web is a fantastic resource that can benefit education, industry and porn distribution, and frankly Ireland in my opinion desperately needs all of the above. But to deliver free web access to everyone would be a bloody hard thing to do.

First up, the government sold off Telecom Eireann and it's now Eircom, a lukewarm excuse of a telecoms co if you ask me. So it's not like they're really in controll of the web in any way.

Secondly, they can't pass law, I'm sure there's some legislation that stops the gov interfering with private business resources (I mean the wire & beige etc etc)

So the gov can't make the web free.

As for the rest about systems left on default being an open invite to steal bandwidth? That's just another argument to throw on the pile of whether downloading MP3s & Torrents is OK... Personally I think exploiting someone who has to pay a phone bill is different to exploiting industries whose greed led to the development of new digital lossless formats as a new gimic, only for it to backfire and blow up in their face.


Put it this way. Let's assume the total cost bandwidth your mate is taking from the default kit users is €1 and he does it for a week.

Is that acceptible but going into someones house and grabbing the same in money less acceptible?

Archytas

DemonOfTheFall wrote:

Get off your high horse

I'm sorry but since when was tellin someone that stealing was wrong being up on a high horse?

And have to agree with a5y... how is it that using something that someone else has paid for isn't stealing but taking the money itself is?

CiaranC wrote:

Some of the posters on this thread must avert there eyes when walking past their neighbours garden in case they get some pleasure out of their neighbours pretty flowers without having paid for them.

Thats clearly not the same thing... Flowers are planted by people for their own enjoyment and as a pretty thing in their garden. These people know that someone is going to be looking at it. However with BB, most people assume that it is theirs? A private thing. And again what about eircom time customers? What happens if you use all their allocated hours??

DemonOfTheFall

I hadn't considered that some people might have a set limit of hours on their BB actually, that's a very good point. In that case I fully agree that it'd be incredibly scabby to use someone's connection, it could actually cost them money.

I just don't think that the milk from the doorstep analogy is very apt. As long as you don't take the piss or do it very often, they won't ever notice if you use their (non-time limited) broadband connection, or ever lose anything financially from it.

God it's shameful that we have to consider that some people might have a timed DSL line in this country!

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Was going through town on the bus with my laptop... the amount of networks that I got connected to, very strong signals too. Of course I don't believe it's right to use someone elses connection. It's simple robbery.

Could ya find out who was doing this to you? Is there a way of finding who is on the network???

Gone West

of course.
If you had connected unauthorised to any of my wifi nets, id log your MAC, and try to trace you.(probably futile, but worth a shot)
It'd also be automatically added to my MAC blacklist.
My scripts would alert me if you ever connected up again, and I would(and have done before) track you down to your exact location and confront you.

Gaillimhtaibhse

FuzzyLogic wrote:

Jeez.
There are a LOT of uninformed posters on this thread talking absolute shi'ite.
Go read up on the subject matter before contributing youre drivel as fact.

Uninformed? Try reading WIRED magazine regarding the post on the State of Pennsylvania, in particular the City of Philadelphia's efforts to offer their citizens free WiFi. It's all there in black and white about the prohibitive legislation influenced by the cable companies (Verizon, was one of them).

Agent Smith

from trinity college to Foxrock there was 79 networks, about 40% unemcrepted.


didnt connect, Just used netstumbler to Find them

Gaillimhtaibhse

agent smith wrote:

from trinity college to Foxrock there was 79 networks, about 40% unemcrepted.


didnt connect, Just used netstumbler to Find them

Spoken like a true wardriver.

CiaranC

Thats clearly not the same thing... Flowers are planted by people for their own enjoyment and as a pretty thing in their garden. These people know that someone is going to be looking at it. However with BB, most people assume that it is theirs? A private thing.

So flowers planted on my neighbours property are public and radio waves that he broadcasts into my house are private. That makes sense.

Face it, people who look at flowers that they havent paid for are nothing but THIEVES. The garden centre industry should set up an umbrella group to tackle this illegal thievery. They could staff it with posters from this thread.

Archytas

CiaranC wrote:

So flowers planted on my neighbours property are public and radio waves that he broadcasts into my house are private. That makes sense.

Face it, people who look at flowers that they havent paid for are nothing but THIEVES. The garden centre industry should set up an umbrella group to tackle this illegal thievery. They could staff it with posters from this thread.

What are you talking about??? People put them there for people to see?? They know other people will look at them! But with wireless networks some people don't know that other people can look at them. That these other people can steal their bandwidth and download allowance. Your flowers analogy is pretty dreadful and not at all the same thing.

CiaranC

You assume that everyone is as mean as you and somehow would care that a neighbour was using a few mbs of their transfer. I am suggesting that they dont care any more than they care about other people getting pleasure from looking at their flowers. The analogy is prefectly valid.