, SecurityFocus 2004-08-05
In what prosecutors say is likely the first criminal conviction for wardriving in the U.S., a Michigan man plead guilty Wednesday to a federal misdemeanor for using the Internet through an open wi-fi access point at a Lowe's home improvement store in suburban Detroit.
Expand all |
Post comment
Third guilty plea in Lowe's wi-fi case
2004-08-05
Anonymous (2 replies)
Anonymous (2 replies)
Third guilty plea in Lowe's wi-fi case
2004-08-13
deijmaster (at) hotmail (dot) com [email concealed]
deijmaster (at) hotmail (dot) com [email concealed]
Wardriving guilty plea in Lowe's wi-fi case
2004-08-06
Anonymous (2 replies)
Anonymous (2 replies)
Wardriving guilty plea in Lowe's wi-fi case
2004-08-13
Anonymous (1 replies)
Anonymous (1 replies)
I was arrested just recently for a similar charge.
2005-12-13
domoarigatomr_legato (at) hotmail (dot) com [email concealed]
domoarigatomr_legato (at) hotmail (dot) com [email concealed]

>.> 1) Open wireless access points are like leaving your keys
>> in the door to your house or car and walking away: they're
>> asking for "intruders".
>Yet the intruders would still be guilty of >breaking and entering, regardless.
An unfair analogy, to say the least. Many wirelessly enabled devices are configured to automatically search and connect to any available wireless network. Thus, if the network was not encrypted, they more than likely have the occasional association to their AP, and usage of their bandwidth, unbeknownst to either party. This certainly doesn't sound anything remotely like breaking and entering to me...
>> 2) Wireless itself, due to being broadcasted into the air,
>> should (in my opinion) be declared public domain, as is
>> the case where you can freely record FM radio broadcasts.
>So I can record your cellphone conversations?
Again, as mentioned later by another anonymous poster, cellphone conversations are encrypted, and the equipment necessary to capture data in that bandwidth doesn't come ready to use with mom & pop's new Dell.
>> 3) Wardriving should only be considered criminal if it can
>> be proven that they used it for malicious purposes.
>That's exactly what they did.
I believe this is a case of RTFA. Not everyone did something criminal in this case. Accessing a wireless access point with NO encryption and NO authentication requirements does not seem like a horrible crime.
This is my opinion, of course, but I don't believe that crimes should be as tough as they are, and, furthermore, should be nonexistant if the company did not take the necessary safeguards to protect against fraud or maluse. Why? I wouldn't want to live in a society driven by laws and rules where to break one means certain metaphoric death. I don't like living in society that is so litigious. If you don't want your network "intruded" upon, state so. Don't offer open access to everyone. Find a competent security engineer / architect, design a wireless network that is secure in that it requires valid credentials to associate, and don't broadcast the signal outside of it's intended domain (that is, if it is intended for use within the store, don't broadcast the signal into the parking lot and beyond). Don't know how? That's why security professionals get paid the big bucks.
Yep.. fun stuff.
[ reply ]
Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/articles/9281/27862#27862