Re: WIRELESS THEFT

["Meritt James" <meritt_james () bah com>]

Jesse James said much the same thing, but he was referring to Banks.

Differentiate between "dirty money" and the rest.

theft is theft is theft.  

Orion Robillard wrote:
> You know some people do want to give away their wireless service. If I go
> down to my local internet coffee shop and get free wireless everyone is
> happy. Why would I care if my neighbor is seemingly offering the same
> service? How do I distinguish between free and non-free? I would rather live
> in a world where I didnt have to question every free connection I get. If
> there is a private SSID then I wont bother to use it. If im tresspassing on
> someones land to receive the signal then I wont use it. But if I can sit at
> home and open my iBook and a connection pops up, im using it.
>
> I think the people at http://www.austinwireless.net/ or
> http://www.bawug.org/ would agree.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Teodorski, Chris [mailto:cteodorski () ppg com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 12:46 PM
> To: Alaric Darconville; Jeff Knox
> Cc: Mike Dresser; security-basics () securityfocus com
> Subject: RE: WIRELESS THEFT
>
> 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

-- 
James W. Meritt CISSP, CISA
Booz | Allen | Hamilton
phone: (410) 684-6566