nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Is it wrong to 'steal' wi-fi?

johnfitz12345

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

Find more posts tagged with

thou shalt not covet

thy neighbour's wifi

Quick Links

Comments

uncleoswald

A little off-topic but could someone kindly explain how do you go about finding out if someone is using your network?

Explain it to me like I'm a child. With pictures preferably...

stovelid

You shouldn't leave it unsecured, but it's pretty sad to steal it. My friend found a neighbour crouched (with a nice looking laptop of course) in the hallway near his apartment door. He had it unsecured at the time, so it was probably his wifi she was using. His fault (or whoever had the unsecured wireless) sure, but that's pretty sad.

Feelgood

uncleoswald wrote: »

A little off-topic but could someone kindly explain how do you go about finding out if someone is using your network?

Explain it to me like I'm a child. With pictures preferably...

A very basic guide though might be able to guide you in the right direction...

How to tell if some fooker from boards is stealing your Wifi

Amalgam

Feelgood wrote: »

The majority of WEP keys are set to 10 characters which means they have a finite number of possibilities. There is software that you can get that simple brute forces the WEP key by passing all possible codes from a text file to the router. Takes some time but it will ge it eventually.

That is a flawed description, not how WEP decryption works. I'm not getting into an argument about it or posting links to help someone make life miserable for their neighbour.

I'm numbed a bit by how stuff moves forward, tentative steps with WPA and the use of Ethercap and similar, ugh.

As a side note, a neighbour said their Eircom Router was set up for them using WPA2, which I was surprised at.

Amalgam

uncleoswald wrote: »

A little off-topic but could someone kindly explain how do you go about finding out if someone is using your network?

Explain it to me like I'm a child. With pictures preferably...

The easiest way would be to check your router logs.

Rsaeire

I'd like to ask this. The people who are admitting that they think it's wrong to use another user's Wi-Fi connection, as it is stealing, have you ever downloaded a song, movie, software etc illegally?

seamus

Sam Vimes wrote: »

they're all of the format: eircom 1234 5678

Unless you change it

For me, it would depend on the level. If you've to hack their connection, then it's wrong. It's explicitly illegal to do this and the person in question has said, "This is a private connection, f*ck off".

However, if it's incidental and small - e.g. you're sitting on a bus and you need to check the timetable for another bus, so you quickly use someone's random open connection, I don't see a problem with this. And I wouldn't have a problem with my home connection being used in this way either.

But if it's regular or constant use, then it's theft. Examples would be sitting in a certain place in a cafe or in a street every other day so you can use a net connection, or using your neighbour's connection. That's just being too scabby to pay for your own.

It's not necessarily about download limits. There's the cost to that person of electricity. If you spend an hour on their connection, that's an increase in electricity costs over that hour, which that person will have to pay.

How is that fair?

Feelgood

Amalgam wrote: »

That is a flawed description, not how WEP decryption works. I'm not getting into an argument about it or posting links to help someone make life miserable for their neighbour

Its not flawed, its not completely descriptive on the other hand. I wasn't trying to explain WEP decryption. I was trying to explain the brute force method.

Amalgam

You get the target router to generate a specific type of traffic, which you then collect, the key is extracted from that.

stovelid

seamus wrote: »

But if it's regular or constant use, then it's theft. Examples would be sitting in a certain place in a cafe or in a street every other day so you can use a net connection, or using your neighbour's connection. That's just being too scabby to pay for your own.

This sums it up for me.

My connection is secure, but if it wasn't and a randomer needed to use it at a pinch, once-off: no problem. But regular usage...

It's not even the 'crime' aspect of regular jockeying. It's the embarrassing, scabby meanness of it. You shell out for a computer/laptop/hand-held device, but yet can't afford broadband?

Internet is a luxury, not a necessity. If you can afford the hardware, you can pay for your own connection.

seamus

Brute force on WEP would be a waste of time. 128-bit WEP uses a hex string of 26 characters which means that there are
3,787,675,244,106,352,329,254,150,390,625
possible WEP keys in existence. Assuming that the computer could try possible 100 keys every second (a pretty big overestimation), it would take
1,201,063,940,926,671,844,639
(1,200 billion billion) years to try all possible keys.

Brute force is useless in this case.

BaconZombie

If somebody is sending unauthorised signals onto my property I can sue then for hacking since their signal is comprising my network integrity .

So OP = FAIL

http://xkcd.com/466/

http://xkcd.com/341/

TerrorFirmer

'Stealing' Wifi to browse the web casually - no problem.

Using it to download considerable files - a problem.

I sometimes use a neighbours Wifi while I'm downloading a lot of files, just to browse boards and the like. Never use it to download files and wouldn't.

ShooterSF

seamus wrote: »

Brute force on WEP would be a waste of time. 128-bit WEP uses a hex string of 26 characters which means that there are
3,787,675,244,106,352,329,254,150,390,625
possible WEP keys in existence. Assuming that the computer could try possible 100 keys every second (a pretty big overestimation), it would take
1,201,063,940,926,671,844,639
(1,200 billion billion) years to try all possible keys.

Brute force is useless in this case.

True but with a lil software and know how you'd be on it in 15 minutes tops. Fair enough it's wrong to do but a lot myself included when stuck will do it. There is the other issue that joe public has to realise that you really should read up a little on security and be a bit more knowledgeable about how these things work.

Feelgood

seamus wrote: »

Brute force on WEP would be a waste of time. 128-bit WEP uses a hex string of 26 characters which means that there are
3,787,675,244,106,352,329,254,150,390,625
possible WEP keys in existence. Assuming that the computer could try possible 100 keys every second (a pretty big overestimation), it would take
1,201,063,940,926,671,844,639
(1,200 billion billion) years to try all possible keys.

Brute force is useless in this case.

True Seamus, though the problem is that people don't opt for a 26 character Hex key instead they use the simple pass phrase key generator that comes as standard on most routers nowadays that generates a 10 digit hex.

99.9% of routers with the simple pass phrase key generator use exactly the same algorithm to generate the key, an algorithm which is ultimately flawed.

I'll not go into all the techie bits unless your interested?, but its possible then to reduce the seed to 21 bits, then using a run of the mill 1Ghz pc at roughly 60,000 guesses a second you could guess a 40 Bit WEP key in about 60 seconds.

Again as highlight, only possible on a 40 Bit / 10 Hex key that was generated by a simple pass phrase algorithm, but yes your right 104 bit is something like 10 to the power of 19 years to guess.

Tip: Always enter your WEP key manually if using 40bit or use a 104bit key..

BaconZombie

WTF...,

You do not need to go to that trouble, the main stucture of WEP is flawed and can be cracking in under 5sec.

seamus wrote: »

Brute force on WEP would be a waste of time. 128-bit WEP uses a hex string of 26 characters which means that there are
3,787,675,244,106,352,329,254,150,390,625
possible WEP keys in existence. Assuming that the computer could try possible 100 keys every second (a pretty big overestimation), it would take
1,201,063,940,926,671,844,639
(1,200 billion billion) years to try all possible keys.

Brute force is useless in this case.

WEP =! Security

WPA2 with a VERY LONG COMPLEX pass-phrase is the only answer and at the it's still crackable but will take a long time but only it do used a GOOD passphrase.

stovelid

ShooterSF wrote: »

Fair enough it's wrong to do but a lot myself included when stuck will do it. .

Explain stuck?

questioner

Rsaeire wrote: »

I'd like to ask this. The people who are admitting that they think it's wrong to use another user's Wi-Fi connection, as it is stealing, have you ever downloaded a song, movie, software etc illegally?

I think a more appropriate question would be(for some of the more nefarious users of course), when was the last time you legally downloaded copyrighted material.

is stealing wifi wrong, yes. is not paying for your tv license wrong, yes. is paying cash to a tradesman wrong, yes. are you going to hell for doing any of the above, of course you are.

would i steal wi-fi? that depends on two factors, 1. Can i afford my own 2. what type of connection do they have? i.e unlimited or 10gb cap . and before anyone starts pulling me on the various moral implications of such behaviour and their logical corollaries when applied to different scenarios (i.e would it be ok to steal a loaf of bread if the baker had a magic bakery that baked unlimited loaves of bread for a certain fixed price each month), take note that im not saying its logical or right im just saying that these are the considerations i would apply.

seamus

ShooterSF wrote: »

True but with a lil software and know how you'd be on it in 15 minutes tops.

Quicker usually

There is the other issue that joe public has to realise that you really should read up a little on security and be a bit more knowledgeable about how these things work.

While there is something of an onus on joe public to be a little more computer knowledgeable, I wouldn't expect them to know the ins and outs of the different types of security, nor would I expect them to know that WPA > WEP.

When a person is sold an alarm for their home, they have the expectation that the alarm is as secure as it can be at that price and that there are no literal back doors or easy hacks. A salesman selling an alarm which he knew to have massive flaws and be easily disabled, would find himself in legal hot water.

In the same way, there should be something of a standard set for wireless networking equipment - it should be illegal to sell new equipment with WEP (so we can phase it out) and they should be required to have WPA-PSK enabled by default, out of the box.

run of the mill 1Ghz pc at roughly 60,000 guesses a second you could guess a 40 Bit WEP key in about 60 seconds.

You wouldn't have a hope of getting anything approaching this level of attempts over a standard wireless network with a standard machine. They would number in the hundreds at most. Even a standard attempt at cracking a packet locally I'd be surprised if you got this kind of number of guesses.

As BOFH points out though, there's software that'll do it for you in seconds with far less hassle than a brute force.

Dave!

I really need to at least put a password on my wireless..... It's been about 3 years without one.

Amalgam

ShooterSF wrote: »

There is the other issue that joe public has to realise that you really should read up a little on security and be a bit more knowledgeable about how these things work.

Your average joe public is sold the Windows OS with the premise that that's all they need. I'm a PC, toss my salad.

I don't think anything will change as long as Microsoft doesn't carry any liability. If the EU brought in some byzantine legislation overnight, you might see some worthwhile efforts to change the situation, and ship PC's with viable security.

ShooterSF

stovelid wrote: »

Explain stuck?

I said earlier but again when in some of my mates houses they still use dial-up so piggybacking the neighbours connection saves me the hassle of dial up and my mate the price of the call. I don't claim it's any better than stealing outright. I'm just saying it's done.

seamus wrote: »

Quicker usually
While there is something of an onus on joe public to be a little more computer knowledgeable, I wouldn't expect them to know the ins and outs of the different types of security, nor would I expect them to know that WPA > WEP.

When a person is sold an alarm for their home, they have the expectation that the alarm is as secure as it can be at that price and that there are no literal back doors or easy hacks. A salesman selling an alarm which he knew to have massive flaws and be easily disabled, would find himself in legal hot water.

In the same way, there should be something of a standard set for wireless networking equipment - it should be illegal to sell new equipment with WEP (so we can phase it out) and they should be required to have WPA-PSK enabled by default, out of the box.

You wouldn't have a hope of getting anything approaching this level of attempts over a standard wireless network with a standard machine. They would number in the hundreds at most.

Agreed. on top of that I think Eircom and BT and co should have to send out an explanation to customers how to upgrade from WEP and why. It's the ones with wide open networks that I would have no sympathy for. It's like leaving your door open and being outraged when someone robs you.

Irishcrx

Theres a decent unprotected one near my house that I used when I first moved in until I got my own. Still use it sometimes if mine is down etc...**** it like..If shes there with the legs spread ya gotta..

Rsaeire

questioner wrote: »

I think a more appropriate question would be(for some of the more nefarious users of course), when was the last time you legally downloaded copyrighted material.

is stealing wifi wrong, yes. is not paying for your tv license wrong, yes. is paying cash to a tradesman wrong, yes. are you going to hell for doing any of the above, of course you are.

would i steal wi-fi? that depends on two factors, 1. Can i afford my own 2. what type of connection do they have? i.e unlimited or 10gb cap . and before anyone starts pulling me on the various moral implications of such behaviour and their logical corollaries when applied to different scenarios (i.e would it be ok to steal a loaf of bread if the baker had a magic bakery that baked unlimited loaves of bread for a certain fixed price each month), take note that im not saying its logical or right im just saying that these are the considerations i would apply.

I understand your opinion, however, I do disagree. It seems that in this digital age, acquiring something either online, or through digital means, doesn't have the same negative or criminal connotation that it would if it was a tangible item that was stolen.

ShooterSF

Rsaeire wrote: »

I understand your opinion, however, I do disagree. It seems that in this digital age, acquiring something either online, or through digital means, doesn't have the same negative or criminal connotation that it would if it was a tangible item that was stolen.

That's true. How many can answer here that they've never downloaded a song, movie or software illegally or hell even watched copyrighted material on youtube (even if it's just a clip it's still illegal)?

stovelid

ShooterSF wrote: »

I said earlier but again when in some of my mates houses they still use dial-up so piggybacking the neighbours connection saves me the hassle of dial up and my mate the price of the call. I don't claim it's any better than stealing outright. I'm just saying it's done.

I think we'll just agree to differ.

I certainly don't think breaking into an (even poorly) encrypted connection is justified because it saves you some 'hassle' and your mate a few cents.

Drummerboy08

Just on the point of actually getting a WEP code. I used to work in a phone and BB provider, and you would be amazed at the things you learn and see people do.

There is a website (as far as i know its still active) that allows you to obtain a WEP key in seconds. The amount of people i'd hear using it is amazing. So if you want, and know how to, it can be done in seconds.

Kimbot

ShooterSF wrote: »

That's true. How many can answer here that they've never downloaded a song, movie or software illegally or hell even watched copyrighted material on youtube (even if it's just a clip it's still illegal)?

But it still doesn't mean its right now does it??

This thread really has me p!ssed off with peoples attitudes.

You are stealing a product that a person is paying for, regardless of the Cap they may have, they are the ones paying for it and not you. Get yourself a better job, drink one less pint each night you go out and the money you save would pay for your BB every month. But no, its typical in this day and age that people are scabby b@$tard$ and would resort to stealing from their neighbours.

I do agree that alot of people keep their connections open but you should not use it without permission unless its a library/public access network, last year in my estate I found loads of connections that were unsecured. I popped into the houses concerned (A car was parked outside my house with loud music and gangs of idiots stealing BB all day every day) and secured their routers, was offered money but said no as it was the neighbourly thing to do.

ShooterSF

stovelid wrote: »

I think we'll just agree to differ.

I certainly don't think breaking into an (even poorly) encrypted connection is justified because it saves you some 'hassle' and your mate a few cents.

Fair enough. I never expected anyone else to see it as justified and I know plenty of people including my dial up using mates who follow the law to letter and I respect that. Me, I already download films and d odd song, hell I even drive unaccompanied as a provisional driver without L plates so I already break laws. I don't try and justify it but I wont be a hypocrite and condemn it either.

Rsaeire

ShooterSF wrote: »

That's true. How many can answer here that they've never downloaded a song, movie or software illegally or hell even watched copyrighted material on youtube (even if it's just a clip it's still illegal)?

My point exactly. I am not here to act as a moral compass, I merely posed the question that some of those who are so quick to condemn others for using another person's Wi-Fi connection, are most probably doing something illegal themselves; however ignorant of their actions they might be.