Can I snoop on my own wireless network?

[imported_trajan]

My old wireless router died last night, which is a shame since its less than a year old and had great power. Everything reported as fine, except that no internet was being passed on either via wired or wireless. Resetting didn't help. So its in the trash heap. I had a spare which I set up last night but it was late and I was tired so I didn't bother configuring it, just got it up and running, turned my computers off, went to bed.

This morning, I start configuring and discover I've got not one, but two neighbors (presumably) connected through my unsecured router. Bah! Now, I'm a fan of free wireless and while I'm not a public provider, I don't blame a person for getting something for free when they can. I'm curious though -- this is my router, my connection, my network. Am I evil if I snoop a little on the traffic to figure out who these people are? I'm not interested in stealing their passwords/SSN/money, I just want to get e-mail addresses and maybe freak them out just a tiny bit before I put the lock back on the network.

Obviously Jesus wouldn't do this 😉 but I'm sure highly regarded ethicists would disagree over whether spying on my own network is OK or not, even if its a little dirty.. what do you guys think? Again, I'm obviously not planning on doing this for more than a few minutes, I want my network secure again soon.

I leave it entirely in the hands of the forum-goers, especially because I only have rudimentary knowledge on how to view network data so I'd need a couple hints 🙂 And since I stand to be having the fun in this endeavor I'm probably not objective.

 

[tcsenter]

Why? You left the network unsecured, you had to know someone might happen upon it in fairly short order these days.

Just bump them off and give yourself a pat on the back for being so generous of a person as to give them some free internet access for half-a-day. You have the choice to turn it into something selfish or not.

 

[JackMDS]

Many times people are Not even aware that they are using someone else connection.

So many are called Linksys. 😉

However what the OP is planing to do is like putting a snooping camera in a Motel's room.

If One does not like people using his connection, One should secure it.

From the weakest to the strongest, Wireless security capacity is.
No Security
MAC______(Band Aid if nothing else is available).
WEP64____(Easy, to "Break" by knowledgeable people).
WEP128___(A little Harder, but "Hackable" too).
WPA-PSK__(Very Hard to Break).
WPA-AES__(Not functionally Breakable)
WPA2____ (Not functionally Breakable).

Note 1: WPA-AES the the current entry level rendition of WPA2.

Note 2: If you use WinXP and did not updated it you would have to download the WPA2 patch from Microsoft.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/893357

The documentation of your Wireless devices (Wireless Router, and Wireless Computer's Card) should state the type of security that is available with your Wireless hardware.

All devices MUST be set to the same security level using the same pass phrase.

Therefore the security must be set according what ever is the best possible of one of the Wireless devices.

I.e. even if most of your system might be capable to be configured to the max. with WPA2, but one device is only
capable to be configured to max . of WEP, to whole system must be configured to WEP.

If you need more good security and one device (like a Wireless card that can do WEP only) is holding better security for the whole Network, replace the device with a better one.

 

[imported_trajan]

You're absolutely right about security, but you have to admit, your analogy is flawed. Its not like putting a video camera in a motel room. It's like me putting a security camera that spies on my back yard. I haven't built a fence around the yard, but I'm not required to and its still *my* yard. I'm not permitted to harm or shoot or steal from people because they are on my property*, even if they're breaking things there or mooching off my vegetable garden, but I don't need to have them sign film releases if I want to tape them and they're on my property without permission.

* in most states 🙂

 

[tcsenter]

Originally posted by: JackMDS
Many times people are Not even aware that they are using someone else connection.

So many are called Linksys.

Also client utilities that will roam by default.

 

[tcsenter]

Originally posted by: trajan
You're absolutely right about security, but you have to admit, your analogy is flawed. Its not like putting a video camera in a motel room. It's like me putting a security camera that spies on my back yard.

More like building a restroom in your front yard that very much resembles a stand-alone restroom you might see at a rest area or other public facility, facing a public sidewalk or through-way, along with a nice little sign that reads "Restroom", then claiming you can put a video camera inside because:

- its on your private property
- your sign didn't say 'public' restroom
- people should have known or assumed it wasn't a public restroom

 

[imported_trajan]

Is it better then if I put a sign that says "KEEP OUT" on it? I am glad we have moved away from motels but this still isn't right, I'm not in any way holding my network out to be free. It's like when I was a kid, if I walked through the neighbor's yard to get to school it was an awesome short cut since otherwise I had to go half a block to get to the street he fronted. We never got along with that neighbor, he definitely didn't like us on his property. I'd take the short cut a lot anyyway, its not like I was harming him or trampling his garden or anything, but I knew I wasn't supposed to.

He wasn't within his rights to set a bear trap on the shortcut, or anything, but I couldn't have complained if he jumped out from a bush to scare me, or attacked me with a water gun.

If your analogy is true, then you're suggesting that unsecured wireless networks are justifiably viewed as a public commodity. Just because many people use them this way doesn't mean its justified. If I were a network user who came around whimpering that someone had just snooped my e-mail address off their unsecured network, I think you'd be telling me "thats a dirty trick but what were you doing on someone else's network? be glad all that happened was your e-mail address was taken"

 

[tcsenter]

Ah...so your motive in all of this is to selflessly educate the public about the risks of using unsecured networks, as opposed to feeling entitled to snoop on their activities out of revenge because they sneakered onto your wittingly unsecured and broadcasted network without asking first?

If that rationalization works for you...

 

[imported_trajan]

No I think it's probably immoral even if it is isn't unethical. And it's potentially illegal. I really think the closest to 100% correct analogy is this:

Residents of the city of Anandopolis do not have free street trash collection. Instead, they pay the city (or a private collector) $50 a month. They put their trash in bins outside, on their property, and if they pay the monthly fee, a collector comes by each morning and empties the bins. The bins are bought separately and often have the names of the most popular bin-makers on them, "TrashSys" being a very common brand -- but many people choose to give their trash bins fanciful or descriptive names. (One, in my neighborhood, is titled "penispenispenis".) Barry is a pretty good guy and a law abiding citizen but he doesn't pay the monthly fee, so he is obligated to take his trash in his car and go downtown, where there are public bins, which look vaguely similar to private ones, except they usually have the word "Public" on them, and are always in public locations, not in residential neighborhoods. Barry is tired of removing his own trash, but hates fees. One day, he does a little circle of his immediate neighborhood, peering from the sidewalk at each of his neighbor's bins. Most of them are locked, and only the resident and the trash collector have keys. This prevents harmful bacteria and viruses from contaminating the trash bins. But Barry knows some people are lazy or trusting and foolishly don't lock their bins. Sure enough, Trajan's house has an unlocked bin. Trajan pays a flat monthly fee, Barry thinks. It doesn't cost him anything if I put my trash in his bin.." So there it goes.

I notice Barry doing this and am mildly offended at his laziness, lack of proprietary, sense of entitlement, or belief in his own immunity -- I am not sure which one of these it is, but it's at least one. I dig around his trash bag and discover his bank account information. I can't do anything with that -- it would be theft -- so I keep going. There's a crummy poem that he wrote on a napkin and then threw away. I can't publish the poem -- he threw away the napkin and the ink, not the intellectual right to the words. But then I have an idea.

"Nice use of iambic pentameter," I write on the napkin. "You really shouldn't use other people's utilities, you know. This is one reason." I mail him back his napkin, chuckle, and put a lock on my trash bin.

I really think that is a more accurate analogy.

 

[tcsenter]

Roaming WLAN utilities and the prevalence of public wifi networks makes your analogy fail. Now build into your analogy the potential for people to unwittingly put their trash into your bin and you'll be good.

 

[imported_trajan]

Ok. I'll re title the network "PRIVATE, HOME NETWORK" before I go to bed. I think you are giving users a bad rap thinking they can't tell the difference between a private network and a public one, but you're probably the admin of a network somewhere, so you can speak from better experience than I can as to the idiocy of users 🙂 But I still bet you 4 out of 5 people connecting to other people's networks in residential neighborhoods know very well they on someone's else's private network. When I was a student in NYC it was probably the source of home internet for half my non-university friends, and they certainly all knew.

I'm curious to see how many 'guests' I'll have on the network tomorrow when I wake up... I'd bet "PRIVATE" will scare at least a few would-be visitors away but only because it sounds serious and not because they didn't already know it wasn't free.

 

[spidey07]

There is no analogy that works. By connecting to a network you do not have explicit permission to use is a federal crime. Period.

No permission = you don't have permission.

 

[tcsenter]

Originally posted by: trajan
Ok. I'll re title the network "PRIVATE, HOME NETWORK" before I go to bed.

Better, "MONITORED_USE" should give some people pause.

By connecting to a network you do not have explicit permission to use is a federal crime. Period.

Its not a strict liability offense. Reasonability tests that go to intent and awareness apply.