| Author |
Using Other People's Wi-Fi Without Permission |
willo
Joined: Sep 21, 2006
Posts: 163
From: Liverpool
PM |
Not a good idea:-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hereford/worcs/6565079.stm |
|
|
Nitro Fan
Joined: Jun 11, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: London
PM |
that will teach the creep to steal
I have owned the ... T68i T610, P800, P900, P910, P990, W950, P1, W960 But SE have now totally lost the plot. |
Tail
Joined: Oct 06, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: SWE
PM |
Well, no more than right
|
masseur
Joined: Jan 03, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Sydney, London
PM |
for reference, this relates to the communication act 2003
specifically section 125 which says:-
125 Dishonestly obtaining electronic communications services
(1) A person who-
(a) dishonestly obtains an electronic communications service, and
(b) does so with intent to avoid payment of a charge applicable to the provision of that service, is guilty of an offence.
(2) It is not an offence under this section to obtain a service mentioned in section 297(1) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (c. 48) (dishonestly obtaining a broadcasting or cable programme service provided from a place in the UK).
(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable-
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both;
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to a fine, or to both.
interestingly, the next section says:-
126 Possession or supply of apparatus etc. for contravening s. 125
(1) A person is guilty of an offence if, with an intention falling within subsection (3), he has in his possession or under his control anything that may be used-
(a) for obtaining an electronic communications service; or
(b) in connection with obtaining such a service.
(2) A person is guilty of an offence if-
(a) he supplies or offers to supply anything which may be used as mentioned in subsection (1); and
(b) he knows or believes that the intentions in relation to that thing of the person to whom it is supplied or offered fall within subsection (3).
(3) A person's intentions fall within this subsection if he intends-
(a) to use the thing to obtain an electronic communications service dishonestly;
(b) to use the thing for a purpose connected with the dishonest obtaining of such a service;
(c) dishonestly to allow the thing to be used to obtain such a service; or
(d) to allow the thing to be used for a purpose connected with the dishonest obtaining of such a service.
(4) An intention does not fall within subsection (3) if it relates exclusively to the obtaining of a service mentioned in section 297(1) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (c. 48).
(5) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable-
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both; and
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to a fine, or to both.
(6) In this section, references, in the case of a thing used for recording data, to the use of that thing include references to the use of data recorded by it.
and I think most of us have or do fall into quite a bit of that 
|
michael the mage
Joined: May 10, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: U.S. of A.
PM |
What a rubbish. That's even worse then here in the US of A.
[addsig] |
ronis
Joined: Apr 10, 2005
Posts: 19
From: Latvia
PM |
What a crap!
If you don't want anyone to connect to your WLAN, make it secured one and/or restrict MAC addresses able to connect.
If you haven't done that, then don't complain when someone connects to your WiFi.
[ This Message was edited by: ronis on 2007-04-18 18:02 ] |
suland
Joined: Sep 06, 2006
Posts: 122
PM |
I wonder how they(police) proved that the guy used "someone's" WI-FI. What a crap!!! If you don't want this happened to your WI-FI - secure it. |
awave
Joined: Feb 11, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: United Kingdom
PM |
On 2007-04-18 19:30:40, suland wrote:
I wonder how they(police) proved that the guy used "someone's" WI-FI. What a crap!!! If you don't want this happened to your WI-FI - secure it.
Yup, what i'd say. If you leave it unsecured I'd say that that was enough as giving someone permission to use the internet access through that AP. edit: just read the news thing. actually hacking someone's network / sitting outside someones house etc etc - that's just plain wrong. If it happens to be there when your trying to do something that just needs the 'net access for something small etc then I don't really see why people should complain.
_________________
Phones:  V600i, PalmOne Treo 650 + lots of t200s! + a t20 + a t18!
I being an fan!  I DO being a 3 dude NOW!!
[ This Message was edited by: awave on 2007-04-18 19:09 ] |
masseur
Joined: Jan 03, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Sydney, London
PM |
um, so if any of you leave your car unlocked thats as good as giving someone permission to take it?
and can we assume you all know everything about everything unlike the man in the street who just wants wifi broadband and doesn't know much about technology? I mean I don't know how a fridge or washing machine work but I still use them! (well, perhaps not a washing mashing machine!)
I think its fair enough if someone is paying for something then others should not use it, no matter what it is, without express permission
|
BobaFett
Joined: Jan 06, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Kamino (wish it would be Lund)
PM, WWW
|
i dont wanna live ain a police state, where even using someone else's wifi is a crime. ppl should lock it, if i am in places, i usually serach for free connections. its not my "bad behaviour", more their stupidity not to lock it
|
chamak
Joined: Jan 05, 2006
Posts: 226
From: Bangladesh
PM |
@MASSEUR
I actually disagree with you in this point. To me, WLAN and Car are not the same things to give the proper example.
To me, Unprotected WLAN is kinda like a very sexy undressed girl . If she roams around you, you may have a look and you definitely won't ask for permission  BUT u should not try something more (like stealing the AP of WLAN )
But I'm definitely not encouraging the topic here....but u know...why don't have a look ?
|
Nitro Fan
Joined: Jun 11, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: London
PM |
On 2007-04-18 19:01:44, ronis wrote:
What a crap!
If you don't want anyone to connect to your WLAN, make it secured one and/or restrict MAC addresses able to connect.
If you haven't done that, then don't complain when someone connects to your WiFi.
[ This Message was edited by: ronis on 2007-04-18 18:02 ]
So I take it from you response you condone theft? |
Nitro Fan
Joined: Jun 11, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: London
PM |
On 2007-04-18 20:07:22, awave wrote:
On 2007-04-18 19:30:40, suland wrote:
I wonder how they(police) proved that the guy used "someone's" WI-FI. What a crap!!! If you don't want this happened to your WI-FI - secure it.
Yup, what i'd say. If you leave it unsecured I'd say that that was enough as giving someone permission to use the internet access through that AP. edit: just read the news thing. actually hacking someone's network / sitting outside someones house etc etc - that's just plain wrong. If it happens to be there when your trying to do something that just needs the 'net access for something small etc then I don't really see why people should complain.
_________________
Phones: V600i, PalmOne Treo 650 + lots of t200s! + a t20 + a t18!
I being an fan! I DO being a 3 dude NOW!!
[ This Message was edited by: awave on 2007-04-18 19:09 ]
So if I leave my car unattended I am giving creeps the right to take it away?
it is the same thing, sorry but your argument is flawed
I have owned the ... T68i T610, P800, P900, P910, P990, W950, P1, W960 But SE have now totally lost the plot. |
Nitro Fan
Joined: Jun 11, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: London
PM |
On 2007-04-18 20:24:04, BobaFett wrote:
i dont wanna live ain a police state, where even using someone else's wifi is a crime. ppl should lock it, if i am in places, i usually serach for free connections. its not my "bad behaviour", more their stupidity not to lock it
Many people buy a solution in a box (its sold as being so simple a kid can set it up), they may not be technical enough to set up password protection they may not even understand the consequenses of poor network security that does not give the hacker cart blanche to log on, its got nothing to do with police states and everything to do with HW suppliers providing equipment that provides users with automatic protection as the default settings. You simply cannot adopt the "moral high ground" by saying people are stupid they are not, they might just not be as savvy as some of us! using your argument I ave the right to steal anyones car who is not smart enough to install security features over and above that fitted by the factory
stop being silly and see the problem for what it is.
I have owned the ... T68i T610, P800, P900, P910, P990, W950, P1, W960 But SE have now totally lost the plot. |
Large
Joined: Feb 26, 2007
Posts: 29
PM |
I think that the manufacturers should supply a directional antenna with every wifi sold that sits in the front window in your house pointing outside so that there is a signal everywhere, obviously that should make is so your PC is not accessible |
|
|
Posted: 2007-04-18 08:34
