Is it wrong to 'steal' wi-fi?

johnfitz12345

Well, what's your opinion on this/hacking into a neighbour's wifi?

cuppa

well if they leave it open ,fair game

johnfitz12345

cuppa wrote: »

well if they leave it open ,fair game

What if they, em, don't leave it open?!

SoupyNorman

Give a man a loaf of bread and feed him for a day, but give a man a fishing rod and....eh, he can.... make bread?

swingking

nope. I wonder do people change the password on that person's wifi connection so that no one else will try the same

Gary ITR

Anybody that steals wi-fi should be burned at the stake

seanybiker

johnfitz12345 wrote: »

What if they, em, don't leave it open?!

Their fault for giving you a challenge. Fairly small challenge but one none the less. Seriously i dont do it but wouldnt think twice if i needed to.

Xavi6

Is it wrong? Absolutely not.

No password/security = fair game

Holsten

I've tired to steal loads, all my neighbours have protected connections...

No fun.

Feelgood

Yes it is, hes not talking about 'open' wireless, hes talking about hacking the WEP key (very easily done).

I'm reporting you to the FBI as we speak. In fairness its kinda a big deal though, I know your probably just asking in terms of using someone elses broadband etc, but how would you like it knowing that a rougue person was on the same network as your PC and could possibly get access to some of your personal data?.

As the big fella said, do onto others as you would like done to you. Or some crap along those lines. In todays language don't be hacking into other peoples networks....

seanybiker

Holsten wrote: »

I've tired to steal loads, all my neighbours have protected connections...

No fun.

No such thing as protected

Feelgood

seanybiker wrote: »

No such thing as protected

Spoken like a true scourned man who just got some young one up the duff.

seanybiker

Feelgood wrote: »

Spoken like a true scourned man who just got some young one up the duff.

yeah that makes complete sense.
Ha ha any more words of
Wisdom for us.

lebby

If i knew how to scam other peoples wireless i would definitely be doing it.

Amalgam

If you decrypt a wep key to gain access you are committing an offence. Not sure what legislation covers it. Someone here explained that even using an 'open' router might be enough to be prosecuted.

seanybiker, you can get past WPA2 in time for tea then?

Amazing how fragile XP fully updated is though, I shouldn't hang around the Backtrack forums, or watch P5nz0R L333t videos on YouTube. [shuffles off to buy network cable]

Feelgood

Amalgam wrote: »

If you decrypt a wep key to gain access you are committing an offence. Not sure what legislation covers it. Someone here explained that even using an 'open' router might be enough to be prosecuted.

Thats right, your talking about the data protection act.

An extremely riviting read.

Amalgam

No, I think Watty brought it up, some telecommunications act thingy.

Laphroaig52

Xavi6 wrote: »

Is it wrong? Absolutely not.

No password/security = fair game

Why isn't it wrong? You are using bandwidth that you know somebody else is paying for.

Why do you think it isn't wrong?

If you saw a unlocked car in someone's driveway with the key in the ignition, would that be 'fair game' also?

Would it be 'Absolutely not' wrong to steal that car?
What if it was your car that was stolen? Would that be 'fair game' also?

Note that the question wasn't 'Is it easy?' or 'Can I easily get away it?' or 'Is the owner of the Wi-Fi stupid?'. The question is 'Is it wrong?'

4zn76tysfajdxp

Yes.

Overheal

If I leave my router open, it means im in a good mood. go ahead.

I think the telecomm law was to protect consumer ignorance about router secuity; but in reality, probably had a lot to do with internet providers not wanting neighbours to split one bill.

pickarooney

Flyer28 wrote: »

Why isn't it wrong? You are using bandwidth that you know somebody else is paying for.

Why do you think it isn't wrong?

If you saw a unlocked car in someone's driveway with the key in the ignition, would that be 'fair game' also?

Would it be 'Absolutely not' wrong to steal that car?
What if it was your car that was stolen? Would that be 'fair game' also?

Note that the question wasn't 'Is it easy?' or 'Can I easily get away it?' or 'Is the owner of the Wi-Fi stupid?'. The question is 'Is it wrong?'

It's more analogous to jumping on the back of a truck to hitch a lift.

Sam Vimes

pickarooney wrote: »

It's more analogous to jumping on the back of a truck to hitch a lift.

this is true. If you steal a car, the person you stole it from doesn't have a car anymore but if you 'steal' their internet they still have it and worst it's a bit slower and someone who's computer illiterate enough to leave their router open most likely wouldn't even notice that. A victimless crime

Run_to_da_hills

If you just used someones Wifi for browsing I couldn't see a problem as I believe its up to the owner to secure it. However if you deliberately reset your IP address to avoid detection and started to download illegal material, child xxx etc it would be a different story.

Hacking someones wep key is a serious offense. If I'm in the city I would set my PC to log automatically into the strongest unsecured signal. I was once told off by security at the Ilac Ctr not to be using the Wifi at the library.

Lemming

Sam Vimes wrote: »

this is true. If you steal a car, the person you stole it from doesn't have a car anymore but if you 'steal' their internet they still have it and worst it's a bit slower and someone who's computer illiterate enough to leave their router open most likely wouldn't even notice that. A victimless crime

You can still be prosecuted for the digital equivalent of "trespassing". It's no different to someone leaving the door to their house open. If you set foot inside, even to just "look around", you're trespassing and can be done for it. The digital equivalent is no different (albeit very foolish), be it an unsecured system or a wifi router.

Xavi6

Flyer28 wrote: »

Why isn't it wrong? You are using bandwidth that you know somebody else is paying for.

Why do you think it isn't wrong?

If you saw a unlocked car in someone's driveway with the key in the ignition, would that be 'fair game' also?

Would it be 'Absolutely not' wrong to steal that car?
What if it was your car that was stolen? Would that be 'fair game' also?

Note that the question wasn't 'Is it easy?' or 'Can I easily get away it?' or 'Is the owner of the Wi-Fi stupid?'. The question is 'Is it wrong?'

Stealing a car means the person doesn't have it anymore. If you steal wifi the person still has it, you're just availing of it.

Bad analogy I'm afraid.

Run_to_da_hills

Xavi6 wrote: »

Stealing a car means the person doesn't have it anymore. If you steal wifi the person still has it, you're just availing of it.

Bad analogy I'm afraid.

Not necessarly true. If the person has a 10 Gig cap and you steal 4 gigs of it. He is hit with the excessive charges if he goes over that limit.

Xavi6

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Not necessarly true. If the person has a 10 Gig cap and you steal 4 gigs of it. He is hit with the excessive charges if he goes over that limit.

A valid point.

Ah well. I'm not gonna say it's a bad thing as I've done it and don't want to be a hypocrite.

/shrug

Feelgood

Yeah but where do you draw the line?, basically what most people in this thread are saying is that yeah its alright to steal or use something that
doesn't belong to you.

Just because its Wifi doesn't make it any less ok to do, its still an stealing an item which is not owned or paid for by you so analogies don't really apply at all. stealing is stealing, period.

If its ok to steal your neighbors stuff, then why not run a pipe from his heating tank to heat your own house?. Actually why not go the whole hog and just take a dump in his jacks whenever you feel like it.

At the end of the day, if you figured out that someone was jockeying off your Wifi I guarantee it would not be as simple as as sure fook it, its only my broadband connection.

Run_to_da_hills

You can look it another way, your neighbours are invading your airspace. I used to have a laptop that would latch on to the strongest signal by boot up default often over riding my own, I would ld say nothing. I had other neighbours that copped on quite quickly and put a block on it,

BaconZombie

Technically you only have to intercept the signal so even having your wireless enable is breaking the law in Ireland.

Also 2.4Ghz can be "intercepted" with all of random objects: forks, woks, wire, cans, microwave ovens, etc.
This is all coved under the wire-tapping laws and Unauthorised accessing of data.

Berty

Using a WEP algorithim is a different story. In the wrong hands you could steal information from their PC and anything else on the LAN.

Its also not very nice as they are paying for the connection and you are feeding off their bandwith. None of my neighbours have wireless so just in case I have strong security settings just in case they try to piggyback on mine which is low enough anyway(living in the country).

I use hotels WIFI only because its a benefit they ofer. Right now Im waiting for the pharmacy to open using the WIFI off Moyross library. Its public library so public internet.

Sam Vimes

Lemming wrote: »

You can still be prosecuted for the digital equivalent of "trespassing". It's no different to someone leaving the door to their house open. If you set foot inside, even to just "look around", you're trespassing and can be done for it. The digital equivalent is no different (albeit very foolish), be it an unsecured system or a wifi router.

oh i know you can be done for it but under trespassing laws, not stealing laws

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Not necessarly true. If the person has a 10 Gig cap and you steal 4 gigs of it. He is hit with the excessive charges if he goes over that limit.

that's why it's only ok to break into eircom networks. they don't charge for going over the limit :P

Feelgood wrote: »

Yeah but where do you draw the line?, basically what most people in this thread are saying is that yeah its alright to steal or use something that
doesn't belong to you.

big difference between steal and use

Feelgood wrote: »

Just because its Wifi doesn't make it any less ok to do, its still an stealing an item which is not owned or paid for by you so analogies don't really apply at all. stealing is stealing, period.

except when the person still has the item you stole after you've apparently stolen it. if i use your cutlery and put it back afterwards, what have i stolen?

iPlop

johnfitz12345 wrote: »

What if they, em, don't leave it open?!

it's fair game anyway!:D

Mark200

It mightn't be wrong but it's illegal

S.I.R

johnfitz12345 wrote: »

Well, what's your opinion on this/hacking into a neighbour's wifi?

if its open source its grand,


if you have an easy password... your fault not mine.

if you get caught, Sucks to be you.


but with all these silly wifi assisted peices of junk on the market.... its never gonna stop...

Run_to_da_hills

Mark200 wrote: »

It mightn't be wrong but it's illegal

I wouldn't be surprised if the authorities clamped down on it with heavy penalties. "Terrorists" could avail of pirated WIFi to communicate and make unanimous skype calls.

Zapho

Its a tough enough debate really. I often piggybag off other wifi networks. Some encrypted, some not. Sometimes unintentionally (with the unencrypted ones, of course). You walk down a street almost anywhere, with a wifi enabled mobile phone, and you'll pick up plenty of unencrypted networks. After visiting friends in London a couple of times, I wondered why anyone in a London apartment would ever bother buying internet when everyone around them have unencrypted routers!

Anyway, as far as I'm concerted, as long as you're just browsing the net, you're not eating up enough of someones bandwidth to affect their experience....but! The second you start torrenting or using P2P programs, then you're hitting really dodgy ground. Not only will you kill their bandwidth, you could potentially get them into trouble for copyright theft or other illegal internet activities.

Feelgood

Sam Vimes wrote: »

except when the person still has the item you stole after you've apparently stolen it. if i use your cutlery and put it back afterwards, what have i stolen?

The person doesn't still have the item after you've stolen it and you definitely haven't put it back.

Say your neighbour is paying for a broadband service with a monthly cap of 10GB, you jockey off his connection and reduce his monthly cap by 2GB. So essentially you have just stolen 2GB of a product or service that he/she is paying for.

Now lets say your neighbour has an oil tank with 10 litres of oil in it - again a product he/she is paying for , you siphon 2L out of it and use it for yourself. Is that not exactly the same thing?.

Your not replacing the bandwidth that your taking from him, your using it without consent or knowledge - essentially stealing it.

Just because bandwidth doesn't look like oil doesn't mean its any less quantifiable.

So if its alright to jockey off someone elses phone line, then I take it that it would be alright to rack up a couple of hundred euro in phone calls as well on the same line?.

Sam Vimes

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I wouldn't be surprised if the authorities clamped down on it with heavy penalties. "Terrorists" could avail of pirated WIFi to communicate and make unanimous skype calls.

omg you're right. and terrorists can also buy knives and use those knives to hijack planes. knives must be banned!!!11!!11!!11!!!11!!

btw, unanimous means that everyone agrees, anonymous means you don't know who someone is

Sam Vimes

Feelgood wrote: »

The person doesn't still have the item after you've stolen it and you definitely haven't put it back.

Say your neighbour is paying for a broadband service with a monthly cap of 10GB, you jockey off his connection and reduce his monthly cap by 2GB. So essentially you have just stolen 2GB of a product or service that he/she is paying for.

Now lets say your neighbour has an oil tank with 10 litres of oil in it - again a product he/she is paying for , you siphon 2L out of it and use it for yourself. Is that not exactly the same thing?.

Your not replacing the bandwidth that your taking from him, your using it without consent or knowledge - essentially stealing it.

Just because bandwidth doesn't look like oil doesn't mean its any less quantifiable.

So if its alright to jockey off someone elses phone line, then I take it that it would be alright to rack up a couple of hundred euro in phone calls as well on the same line?.

that's why i mentioned eircom connections where there is no penalty for going over the limit. you've essentially stolen 2gb of an infinite limit, thereby still leaving him with an infinite limit

Feelgood

Sam Vimes wrote: »

that's why i mentioned eircom connections where there is no penalty for going over the limit. you've essentially stolen 2gb of an infinite limit, thereby still leaving him with an infinite limit

But if your jockeying a Wifi connection how do you know if its an Eircom connection or not?.

Sam Vimes

Feelgood wrote: »

But if your jockeying a Wifi connection how do you know if its an Eircom connection or not?.

they're all of the format: eircom 1234 5678

Amalgam

Zapho wrote: »

Its a tough enough debate really. I often piggybag off other wifi networks. Some encrypted, some not. Sometimes unintentionally (with the unencrypted ones, of course).

If you're intentionally getting past WEP or similar, there's no grey area, no debate, you have trespassed.

Zapho

Feelgood wrote: »

The person doesn't still have the item after you've stolen it and you definitely haven't put it back.

Say your neighbour is paying for a broadband service with a monthly cap of 10GB, you jockey off his connection and reduce his monthly cap by 2GB. So essentially you have just stolen 2GB of a product or service that he/she is paying for.

Now lets say your neighbour has an oil tank with 10 litres of oil in it - again a product he/she is paying for , you siphon 2L out of it and use it for yourself. Is that not exactly the same thing?.

Your not replacing the bandwidth that your taking from him, your using it without consent or knowledge - essentially stealing it.

Just because bandwidth doesn't look like oil doesn't mean its any less quantifiable.

So if its alright to jockey off someone elses phone line, then I take it that it would be alright to rack up a couple of hundred euro in phone calls as well on the same line?.

I dunno, I prefer to think of this analogy: Wifi is a signal right? Electromagnetic, passes through walls, etc...Well sound is also a signal. So lets say my neighbour likes to listen to music alot. Loudly. Loudly enough so it passes through the walls and I can hear it just fine. Now, I definately didn't not ask for this music to be played...but I have two choices. I can ignore it, pretend its not there......or I can listen to it and enjoy it. I'm not stealing anything. True, my neighbour is being charged for the electricity he used and had to pay for the music he's listening to but if he wanted to make sure I couldn't enjoy the music too, then he would have taken steps to prevent that.

I agree that using any part of a capped internet connection is being an asshole, but it doens't take a genius to find out what provider someone is on and if they're capped or not.

nice1franko

If you "steal" enough to do a bit of browsing, check email etc I don't think it really matters... I wouldn't mind if some of my neighbours were taking that much anyway.

If they were using to download films using so my speed was reduced to a crawl then I'd be annoyed though.

Can you open your wifi connection but give your own devices priority?

Feelgood

Sam Vimes wrote: »

they're all of the format: eircom 1234 5678

Hehe, no there not. That's the default broadcast ssid on some Eircom routers, that doesn't mean that that ssid hasn't been changed.

Anyway I think I have made my own point. Like I said it would be a very different story if you were sitting at home some night trying to connect to Xbox Live, boards or youtube only to find out that the fooker next door used up all your bandwidth or was downloading some 4.2gb DVDrip.

Wossack

mitm attacks ftw!

Sam Vimes

Feelgood wrote: »

Hehe, no there not. That's the default broadcast ssid on some Eircom routers, that doesn't mean that that ssid hasn't been changed.

if they've changed the SSID i wouldn't be able to get the wep key (easily) in that case anyway. i say easily because i know it's possible but i wouldn't know how to. if it's in the eircom 1234 5678 format i (and anyone with google) can get the wep key in seconds

Feelgood wrote: »

Anyway I think I have made my own point. Like I said it would be a very different story if you were sitting at home some night trying to connect to Xbox Live, boards or youtube only to find out that the fooker next door used up all your bandwidth or was downloading some 4.2gb DVDrip.

well that's a different story altogether of course.

Lord Nikon

I use my phone to surf on unencryped networks, but no serious downloading, just surfing. If my connection at home was unencrypted and someone was using it, i would only notice if I exceeded my 50gig DL limit, then i would question it and encrypt it.

With regards to downloading childpron etc, the law can search my comp if they like, and they will find nothing.

Sam Vimes

neuromancer wrote: »

I use my phone to surf on unencryped networks, but no serious downloading, just surfing. If my connection at home was unencrypted and someone was using it, i would only notice if I exceeded my 50gig DL limit, then i would question it and encrypt it.

With regards to downloading childpron etc, the law can search my comp if they like, and they will find nothing.

na i hacked into your network and hid some choice pics around your computer the other day. expect a call from the FBI :P

311

I've called my connection ASS KICKER ,kind of taunting someone to hack it