RE: WIRELESS THEFT

[Alaric Darconville <alaric () cowboy net>]

It's not harmful despite the fact that it lowers the bandwidth available
to authorized users?  Suppose you did a ping -f on multiple hosts on the
network, cutting their effective bandwidth due to the traffic you
generated.  Would that not be harmful?  So would downloading a file and
cutting into their bandwidth be any different?  The end result is the
same, you generate traffic and use bandwidth to which you are not
entitled, depriving others of their entitled bandwidth.

The whole sidetrack into the FCC rules is moot-- by actively using the
bandwidth to which you are not entitled is an act of theft.  Again, listen
all you want, don't broadcast.

Alaric

 On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Raoul Armfield wrote:

> :-----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