Security Basics mailing list archives
RE: WIRELESS THEFT
From: "Raoul Armfield" <armfield () amnh org>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 12:59:07 -0400
:-----Original Message----- :From: Alaric Darconville [mailto:alaric () cowboy net] :Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 3:48 PM :To: Jeff Knox :Cc: Mike Dresser; security-basics () securityfocus com :Subject: RE: WIRELESS THEFT : : :"that means harmful interference to other devices" :Which is precisely what I was talking about. To get any 'usable' :downstream, you have to send upstream, at first just to initiate the :connection that you want, and then the normal TCP acknowledgments as you :receive the data. The bandwidth you use is bandwidth unavailable to the :other users, therefore the interference you generate IS harmful (as it :adversely impacts their authorized usage.) So are you saying that if I own a two way radio and interfere in the conversation of a third party that I am breaking the FCC regulation? Don't get me wrong I agree that it is not proper to use the Wireless signal that is being transmitted into the posters livingspace but it is a bit farfetched to call it harmfull interference. Raoul
Current thread:
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT, (continued)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT khayes (Oct 17)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT Högman, Lars (Oct 18)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT Orion Robillard (Oct 18)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT Merrell, Sam (Oct 18)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT Brett Hiscock (Oct 18)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT Alaric Darconville (Oct 18)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT Mike Dresser (Oct 18)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT Alaric Darconville (Oct 21)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT Jeff Knox (Oct 21)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT Alaric Darconville (Oct 22)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT Raoul Armfield (Oct 22)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT Alaric Darconville (Oct 23)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT Mike Dresser (Oct 18)
- Cisco PIX - Anti Spoof - ip verify reverse -path McKenzie Family (Oct 21)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT David (Oct 21)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT Jason Kohles (Oct 22)
- RE: WIRELESS THEFT Jay DeSotel (Oct 22)