RE: WIRELESS THEFT

["Teodorski, Chris" <cteodorski () ppg com>]

I am amazed that this discussion continues.....it seems to me....theft of services is theft of services.   You can't 
break into my house and use my stuff just because I don't lock the door......

-----Original Message-----
From: Raoul Armfield [mailto:armfield () amnh org]
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 12:59 PM
To: Alaric Darconville; Jeff Knox
Cc: Mike Dresser; security-basics () securityfocus com
Subject: RE: WIRELESS THEFT




:-----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