Leo Laporte Smacks Around Caller for "stealing" wifi

[ManyBeers]

Not the same, if I turn my PC on, remove my wifi connection and reboot it will log on to my neighbors without asking me. I did nothing, I didn't open a car door of a running car. Now answer me this, WHY should I have to take steps to keep my PC from automatically connecting to the "default" wireless that's apparently stronger than my own routers signal. It's a PITA because my stupid wifi adapter likes to randomly spazz out and connect to "default" even though I have told it that "default" is not a preferred connection. So now I've said fuck it and use "default" whenever it connects on it's own. I'm not wasting my time here.

If a person turns a computer on and has wireless access that's not theres without them doing shit to make it happen. That shouldn't be illegal.

Oops triple post.

 

[mugs]

Then keep your property out of my living room. Why is it OK for your property to enter mine?

Oh and by the way my quoting your post was to point how how poor your anology was not to argue the law specifically. I use wireless at my home and I encrypt it.

FYI the electromagnetic spectrum is not your property. Also, planes flying above your house are not trespassing, so put your gun away.

Not the same, if I turn my PC on, remove my wifi connection and reboot it will log on to my neighbors without asking me. I did nothing, I didn't open a car door of a running car. Now answer me this, WHY should I have to take steps to keep my PC from automatically connecting to the "default" wireless that's apparently stronger than my own routers signal. It's a PITA because my stupid wifi adapter likes to randomly spazz out and connect to "default" even though I have told it that "default" is not a preferred connection. So now I've said fuck it and use "default" whenever it connects on it's own. I'm not wasting my time here.

If a person turns a computer on and has wireless access that's not theres without them doing shit to make it happen. That shouldn't be illegal.

Does Windows actually connect to wireless networks automatically? I thought you had to manually connect the first time and then tell it you want to connect to that network in the future.

These guys and their ridiculous analogies which have no bearing on the point they are trying to make.
Apparently they can't see the difference between someone accessing a neighbors radio signal that has entered their living room and someone
walking down the street and trying to steal unlocked cars. How is that possible to not see the difference?

No analogies are needed. Unauthorized access to a computer system is illegal. Lack of security is not implicit authorization.

Obviously it's unlikely that someone would be prosecuted if they were unaware that they were doing something wrong, but if you regularly use someone's wireless network without their explicit permission you could get in trouble for it.

 

[ultimatebob]

Does Windows actually connect to wireless networks automatically? I thought you had to manually connect the first time and then tell it you want to connect to that network in the future.

All versions of Windows from XP SP2 on up ask if you're sure that you want access an unsecured network before joining it. That said, if you tell your laptop that it's OK to join "linksys" once, it will go ahead and automatically join any unsecured network called linksys in the future.

Of course, you can also set a preferred wireless network in Windows as well, but Windows will automatically join the next available network in your list if your preferred connection is down. I've found myself automatically connecting to my neighbors WiFi because of that, because my access point went down for whatever reason.

That said, does that make me a thief for accidentally connecting to their WiFi? No. Does it make my neighbor an idiot for being the only person in the area who doesn't secure their WAP? Definitely.

 

[Wheezer]

This. Your computer asks their access point if it can connect to the network. The access point says, "sure, come on in". If there's a password that you crack (even just WEP), then sure, you can make a case for some equivalent to trespassing or whatever (cybertrespassing? iTrespassing?), but you can't leave your network open and then get mad about people connecting, any more than you can invite people into your house and then shoot them for trespassing.

how about this...you leave your car unlocked and I walk by and decide.."hey, he left it unlocked so he MUST be inviting me in to rummage through his glove compartment."

OR how about you are paying for trash, and since I am too cheap to pay for it I decide to throw my trash with yours, after all why not?....yours is out there in the open just waiting for the trash man to come, not in some container so you MUST be inviting me to add mine with your and the trash man not gonna know one way or another.

OR...you don't lock up the water spicket outside your house...how about I hook up my own hose and fill my pool or water my yard....you didn't lock it up so what the hell, you MUST be inviting me over to use it.

 

[Lotheron]

I'm surprised that many people here listen to him. His podcasts are geared for the lowest common denominator and as such are really dumbed down topics that many here are probably already versed in. I can only listen to his podcasts so long before it becomes boring and repeated info.

 

[yllus]

I'm surprised that many people here listen to him. His podcasts are geared for the lowest common denominator and as such are really dumbed down topics that many here are probably already versed in. I can only listen to his podcasts so long before it becomes boring and repeated info.

Yep. I stopped listening to TWiT years ago because it had become a bunch of well-known but generally lacking in knowledge has-beens discussing news that usually isn't even that recent.

The above may come off as if I was never a fan or don't like Laporte, Rose, Prager and the rest - but that's not true. I simply realize their limitations. When I found that I knew more about almost every subject they discussed than they did - to the point where I wanted to interject and correct them - I unsubscribed.

 

[Fritzo]

That caller sounds like every single one of our customer 🙁

 

[Pegun]

I'm half tempted to set this as my new ringtone

Screw you!

 

[ManyBeers]

FYI the electromagnetic spectrum is not your property. Also, planes flying above your house are not trespassing, so put your gun away.



Does Windows actually connect to wireless networks automatically? I thought you had to manually connect the first time and then tell it you want to connect to that network in the future.



No analogies are needed. Unauthorized access to a computer system is illegal. Lack of security is not implicit authorization.

Obviously it's unlikely that someone would be prosecuted if they were unaware that they were doing something wrong, but if you regularly use someone's wireless network without their explicit permission you could get in trouble for it.

Well if the electromagnetic spectrum within my living room isn't my property neither is it my neighbors.
I didn't mention airspace Outside the confines of my living room. Why are you?

Big deal, lot's of things are illegal. It is illegal in many countries including the United States for consenting adults to injest,inject or otherwise consume certain substances. Doesn't make it right.

 

[mugs]

Well if the electromagnetic spectrum within my living room isn't my property neither is it my neighbors.
I didn't mention airspace Outside the confines of my living room. Why are you?

Because you appeared to believe that anything within the boundaries of your proerty belongs to you, which is not the case.

You're right, the electromagnetic spectrum within your living room doesn't belong to your neighbor either. I didn't say it does, so why are you bringing that up? 🙄 (See, works both ways)

The wireless router belongs to your neighbor, and connecting to it without his permission is illegal. Lack of security is not implicit permission.

 

[dwell]

I'm surprised that many people here listen to him. His podcasts are geared for the lowest common denominator and as such are really dumbed down topics that many here are probably already versed in. I can only listen to his podcasts so long before it becomes boring and repeated info.

While TWiT, etc are not "highly technical", they are about industry news. Problem is the amount of time wasted talking about bullshit on TWiT far, far outweighs the good content.

Oh, and who said Steve Gibson is smart? 😀 The guy is a fucking idiot. He is the one who said XP was going to destroy the internet because it allows for raw sockets :awe: He also still runs Windows 2000 and disables JavaScript in his browser. What kind of "security expert" does not run a modern install?

 

[OutHouse]

Well if the electromagnetic spectrum within my living room isn't my property neither is it my neighbors.
I didn't mention airspace Outside the confines of my living room. Why are you?

Big deal, lot's of things are illegal. It is illegal in many countries including the United States for consenting adults to injest,inject or otherwise consume certain substances. Doesn't make it right.

stealing is stealing. is it that hard to understand?

 

[frostedflakes]

This. Your computer asks their access point if it can connect to the network. The access point says, "sure, come on in". If there's a password that you crack (even just WEP), then sure, you can make a case for some equivalent to trespassing or whatever (cybertrespassing? iTrespassing?), but you can't leave your network open and then get mad about people connecting, any more than you can invite people into your house and then shoot them for trespassing.

If you want to get technical, it's probably unauthorized access to a network (or something along those lines), which is very illegal. I suppose you could try to make the argument that, because the network is open, the owner is implicitly granting you access, but I don't know how far you'd get with that defense. 😛

edit: Looks like mugs beat me to it.

 

[rh71]

are they convicting people anyway who used the excuse that other people who piggybacked onto their wifi network were the actual piraters?

 

[SilentRavens]

http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=13494

A nice page that collects links to relevant state laws concerning computer/network access. Although not a felony, the couple states I looked at (Utah & Washington) described accessing a computer network without authorization (and there is no implied consent here either) as a class B misdemeanor. The offense is not particularly egregious, but still illegal regardless of the above silly arguments about the neighbor's radio waves propagating through my living room.

Interestingly I live in an apartment complex in Seattle and all of the networks I could access from my home are secured by at least WEP. There are no completely unsecured networks in my area.

 

[frostedflakes]

Nice link. Appears to be a misdemeanor here as well. However, the law seems to make a distinction between intentional and unintentional computer trespass, which is probably intended to protect people like the caller who didn't even realize what she was doing was wrong.

 

[Muadib]

It appears that I could be sued for the fair market value. So typical for this state.😀

 

[Muadib]

Nice link. Appears to be a misdemeanor here as well. However, the law seems to make a distinction between intentional and unintentional computer trespass, which is probably intended to protect people like the caller who didn't even realize what she was doing was wrong.

She knew it was wrong. She said she was stealing it when Leo asked what he thought was a dumb question.

 

[ManyBeers]

Because you appeared to believe that anything within the boundaries of your proerty belongs to you, which is not the case.

You're right, the electromagnetic spectrum within your living room doesn't belong to your neighbor either. I didn't say it does, so why are you bringing that up? 🙄 (See, works both ways)

The wireless router belongs to your neighbor, and connecting to it without his permission is illegal. Lack of security is not implicit permission.

Again I'm not going to get into this. I was merely pointing out how weak some other posters analogies were which involved unlocked car doors.
You agree with the law. good for you.

 

[QueBert]

FYI the electromagnetic spectrum is not your property. Also, planes flying above your house are not trespassing, so put your gun away.



Does Windows actually connect to wireless networks automatically? I thought you had to manually connect the first time and then tell it you want to connect to that network in the future.

The built in wireless zero configuration thing in XP does ask, but I use my wifi adapters software, which does not. It does whatever it wants pretty much. I like the interface better than XP's default one. It's illegal cool, but I'm not going to spend time to block it every time I reboot, or use XP's built in wireless config shit. As far as I'm concerned "default" internet is a gift from Jebus.

 

[sygyzy]

Slaps around? Good try. It's funny how people sensationalize stories. On Digg, hundreds of people were praising Laport for handling it quite well and being a pretty nice guy to the caller.

 

[frostedflakes]

She knew it was wrong. She said she was stealing it when Leo asked what he thought was a dumb question.

Ah I didn't realize that. I didn't listen to the call, but was under the impression she didn't realize what she was doing.

 

[ghost recon88]

Wow, this Leo guy is an asshole.

 

[clamum]

I met Leo Laporte at CES 2010, I was totally un-prepared for it and was starstruck.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

I generally see unsecured Wifi as sharing, and doing anything at all to secure it or even naming it "private" or something to that effect is saying "I'm not sharing.". But that said, use it like you are a guest. I wouldn't run torrents or use it for my normal internet connection. That's just abusing the hospitality.

I see it more as like having an open front yard. If your neighbors want to play and extend a game out onto it a bit, it doesn't hurt anything as long as they're being polite and cleaning up. But put a fence or hedge, and you're saying keep out.

What the caller did was basically be an idiot and think that somehow it was theirs that just magically appeared and proceeded to be upset when it went away. That's not being neighborly.