RE: Interlopers on the WLAN

["Moody, Thomas (Contractor) (DDC)" <tmoody () ddc dla mil>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I would have to agree with Al on this one.  Not implementing security
measures, is like leaving the front door to a store open after hours. 
The fact that someone just 'waltzes' in and steals all your goods does
not mean that a crime was not committed.  However, the owner would be
looked at rather as rather stupid if he ran a business in such a
fashion.

Tom

. -----Original Message-----
. From: Al Potter [mailto:apotter () icsalabs com]
. Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 10:02 AM
. To: pjklist () ekahuna com
. Cc: firewall-wizards () icsalabs com
. Subject: Re: [fw-wiz] Interlopers on the WLAN 
. 
. 
. First, I am not a Lawyer, etc., etc....
. 
. 
. > Is it reasonable to assume that those who access WLANs without the

. > permission of the owner are violating the same cybercrime laws
that 
. > apply to any unauthorized access of a computer network?
. 
. I do not think this is a reasonable assumption in all cases.
. 
. > 
. > Some have recently argued this is not the case if someone doesn't 
. > "enable the security features", but personally I don't see the 
. > distinction between this kind of activity and anything normally 
. > prohibited by laws such as California Penal Code section 502a and 
. > various other cybercrime laws.  It doesn't seem to me that the law

. > makes a distinction about whether the network in question 
. was secured 
. > or not. (what does 'secured' mean anyway?)
. 
. The Law probably does not foresee that you would run a 
. network cable out 
. to the parking lot and install a hub with patch cables there 
. for all to 
. use. This is the equivalent of an unsecured wireless network.
. 
. WEP is broken, no argument.
. 
. Turning WEP on, despite the debatable value it has for providing a 
. protective layer, does send a clear indication of a closed network.
. 
. To borrow a phrase from Robert Moscowitz, "Think of WEP as the No 
. Trespassing sign of Wireless LANs."
. 
. 
. If nothing else, independent of requirements (or the lack 
. thereof) in the 
. law for enabling security measures, I do believe most would 
. agree that it 
. would probably make it easier to convince a Judge / Jury that 
. a crime had 
. been committed, if one could show that a security measure was 
. present, and 
. circumvented.
. 
. 
. 
. AL
. 
. 
. 
. 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5

iQA/AwUBPcgC5EPIhgyJA/LVEQLL7wCfYs0Hzwasj+HxYnYNPoS4J+YRUz0AmwcH
+MNZE5Yzb+zFtyteaajiLsYn
=4l7Y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

***********************************************************************
This message is intended only for the use of the intended recipient and
may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and/or CONFIDENTIAL.  If you
are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use,
dissemination, disclosure or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please
destroy all copies of this message and its attachments and notify us
immediately.
***********************************************************************

_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards