> On Thu, 7 Jul 2005 15:00:24 -0400, "Louie"
> <louiethelizard@flies.hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/ind...tatute&Search_
String=&URL=Ch0815/SEC06.HTM&Title=->2003->Ch0815->Section%2006#0815.06
>
> Ah, much better than what I excavated. Thanks.
>
> The very first item is:
>
> 815.06 Offenses against computer users.--
> (1) Whoever willfully, knowingly, and without authorization:
> (a) Accesses or causes to be accessed any computer, computer
> system, or computer network;
>
> which covers the illegal access. 2(a) makes it a 3rd degree felony.
>
> Thanks much. Now, lets see if the D.A. decides to prosecute. I'll
> bet on the perpetrator pleading guilty to some lesser charge, and
> "volunteering" for rehabilitation.
I agree. Maybe a period of "probation", followed by a period of "community
service" (how's that for a free labor euphemism?), then maybe "counseling"
(getting your head shrunk). And then, of course, let's don't forget that
the "offender" has to pay big bucks for all the above.
> >Full FL computer crimes chapter:
>
>http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/ind...tatute&URL=Ch0
815/ch0815.htm
>
> That explains what Florida means by "access".
>
> 815.03 Definitions.--As used in this chapter, unless the context
> clearly indicates otherwise:
>
> (1) "Access" means to approach, instruct, communicate with, store
> data in, retrieve data from, or otherwise make use of any
> resources of a computer, computer system, or computer network.
>
> Egads. One can't even approach a computer in Florida without breaking
> the law.
lol. You ought to see some of our other "laws". I think I remember seeing
an article about approx 100 high school students in PA might be charged with
3rd degree felony for procuring the schools password and reconfiguring their
'puters for more Internet access and porn sites. What a world!
Another link of "Signal Theft ".
Its an older news item :
Toronto police have charged a man with theft of telecommunications in a
bizarre case that involves downloading child pornography from a laptop
in a moving car and using other people's computer networks to obtain
the images.
Det. Sgt. Paul Gillespie of the Sex Crimes Child Exploitation Section
described at a news conference "a relatively interesting set of
events," that seem to mark a new era in criminal behaviour and police
investigative techniques.
The case began two weeks ago Wednesday, at 5 a.m., when Sgt. Don Woods
of 11 Division noticed a vehicle driving the wrong way down a one-way
street in a residential neighbourhood.
When Woods stopped the car, he noticed the driver, a man, was naked
from the waist down. In the car was a laptop computer and on its screen
was an image of a 10-year-old girl in a sex act with an adult male.
Gillespie's child exploitation unit was called in to investigate.
Police discovered the laptop computer used a Wi-Fi (wireless fidelity)
card that allows wireless access to the Internet.
Police suspected that the man in the car was downloading pornography
from the Internet, by cracking into a computer in a nearby home.
Det. Sgt. Frank Goldschmidt, of the Ontario Provincial Police's Project
P, picked up the investigation because the suspect's home was in Delhi,
Ont., outside of Toronto.
A warrant was obtained, a search was executed, and a large amount of
material was seized and taken to Toronto Police for further
investigation.
Walter Nowakoski, 36, has been charged with possession of child
pornography (two counts), accessing child pornography, distributing
child pornography, theft of telecommunications, and making child
pornography.
Nowakoski is in custody and will appear for a bail hearing on Monday
morning.
Louie wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Jul 2005 15:00:24 -0400, "Louie"
> > <louiethelizard@flies.hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/ind...tatute&Search_
> String=&URL=Ch0815/SEC06.HTM&Title=->2003->Ch0815->Section%2006#0815.06
> >
> > Ah, much better than what I excavated. Thanks.
> >
> > The very first item is:
> >
> > 815.06 Offenses against computer users.--
> > (1) Whoever willfully, knowingly, and without authorization:
> > (a) Accesses or causes to be accessed any computer, computer
> > system, or computer network;
> >
> > which covers the illegal access. 2(a) makes it a 3rd degree felony.
> >
> > Thanks much. Now, lets see if the D.A. decides to prosecute. I'll
> > bet on the perpetrator pleading guilty to some lesser charge, and
> > "volunteering" for rehabilitation.
>
> I agree. Maybe a period of "probation", followed by a period of "community
> service" (how's that for a free labor euphemism?), then maybe "counseling"
> (getting your head shrunk). And then, of course, let's don't forget that
> the "offender" has to pay big bucks for all the above.
>
> > >Full FL computer crimes chapter:
> >
> >http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/ind...tatute&URL=Ch0
> 815/ch0815.htm
> >
> > That explains what Florida means by "access".
> >
> > 815.03 Definitions.--As used in this chapter, unless the context
> > clearly indicates otherwise:
> >
> > (1) "Access" means to approach, instruct, communicate with, store
> > data in, retrieve data from, or otherwise make use of any
> > resources of a computer, computer system, or computer network.
> >
> > Egads. One can't even approach a computer in Florida without breaking
> > the law.
>
> lol. You ought to see some of our other "laws". I think I remember seeing
> an article about approx 100 high school students in PA might be charged with
> 3rd degree felony for procuring the schools password and reconfiguring their
> 'puters for more Internet access and porn sites. What a world!
>
> Louie
> Gainesville, FL, USA
>From the Seattle Times Newspaper.
Wonder if Bill will read this collumn and have a solution for this
reader's quandary .
"Q&A
Don't piggyback on neighbors' Wi-Fi without permission
Q: I recently bought a laptop with Wi-Fi access, although we only have
a dial-up account at home. When I first plugged it in, I was surprised
to discover it detected five wireless hot spots in my residential
Seattle neighborhood, including two that were unsecured! What is the
protocol here? Should I knock on my neighbors' doors, try to find out
whose they are and see if it's OK to use them? If I use them without
obtaining permission, will I slow my neighbors down? If they are
unsecured, should I be extra careful about what I do on the Internet? "
frankdowling1@yahoo.com wrote:
> Another link of "Signal Theft ".
> Its an older news item :
>
> Toronto police have charged a man with theft of telecommunications in a
> bizarre case that involves downloading child pornography from a laptop
> in a moving car and using other people's computer networks to obtain
> the images.
>
> Det. Sgt. Paul Gillespie of the Sex Crimes Child Exploitation Section
> described at a news conference "a relatively interesting set of
> events," that seem to mark a new era in criminal behaviour and police
> investigative techniques.
>
> The case began two weeks ago Wednesday, at 5 a.m., when Sgt. Don Woods
> of 11 Division noticed a vehicle driving the wrong way down a one-way
> street in a residential neighbourhood.
>
> When Woods stopped the car, he noticed the driver, a man, was naked
> from the waist down. In the car was a laptop computer and on its screen
> was an image of a 10-year-old girl in a sex act with an adult male.
>
> Gillespie's child exploitation unit was called in to investigate.
> Police discovered the laptop computer used a Wi-Fi (wireless fidelity)
> card that allows wireless access to the Internet.
>
> Police suspected that the man in the car was downloading pornography
> from the Internet, by cracking into a computer in a nearby home.
>
> Det. Sgt. Frank Goldschmidt, of the Ontario Provincial Police's Project
> P, picked up the investigation because the suspect's home was in Delhi,
> Ont., outside of Toronto.
>
> A warrant was obtained, a search was executed, and a large amount of
> material was seized and taken to Toronto Police for further
> investigation.
>
> Walter Nowakoski, 36, has been charged with possession of child
> pornography (two counts), accessing child pornography, distributing
> child pornography, theft of telecommunications, and making child
> pornography.
>
> Nowakoski is in custody and will appear for a bail hearing on Monday
> morning.
>
>
>
> Louie wrote:
> > > On Thu, 7 Jul 2005 15:00:24 -0400, "Louie"
> > > <louiethelizard@flies.hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/ind...tatute&Search_
> > String=&URL=Ch0815/SEC06.HTM&Title=->2003->Ch0815->Section%2006#0815.06
> > >
> > > Ah, much better than what I excavated. Thanks.
> > >
> > > The very first item is:
> > >
> > > 815.06 Offenses against computer users.--
> > > (1) Whoever willfully, knowingly, and without authorization:
> > > (a) Accesses or causes to be accessed any computer, computer
> > > system, or computer network;
> > >
> > > which covers the illegal access. 2(a) makes it a 3rd degree felony.
> > >
> > > Thanks much. Now, lets see if the D.A. decides to prosecute. I'll
> > > bet on the perpetrator pleading guilty to some lesser charge, and
> > > "volunteering" for rehabilitation.
> >
> > I agree. Maybe a period of "probation", followed by a period of "community
> > service" (how's that for a free labor euphemism?), then maybe "counseling"
> > (getting your head shrunk). And then, of course, let's don't forget that
> > the "offender" has to pay big bucks for all the above.
> >
> > > >Full FL computer crimes chapter:
> > >
> > >http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/ind...tatute&URL=Ch0
> > 815/ch0815.htm
> > >
> > > That explains what Florida means by "access".
> > >
> > > 815.03 Definitions.--As used in this chapter, unless the context
> > > clearly indicates otherwise:
> > >
> > > (1) "Access" means to approach, instruct, communicate with, store
> > > data in, retrieve data from, or otherwise make use of any
> > > resources of a computer, computer system, or computer network.
> > >
> > > Egads. One can't even approach a computer in Florida without breaking
> > > the law.
> >
> > lol. You ought to see some of our other "laws". I think I remember seeing
> > an article about approx 100 high school students in PA might be charged with
> > 3rd degree felony for procuring the schools password and reconfiguring their
> > 'puters for more Internet access and porn sites. What a world!
> >
> > Louie
> > Gainesville, FL, USA
On 16 Jul 2005 17:07:37 -0700, "frankdowling1@yahoo.com"
<frankdowling1@yahoo.com> wrote :
>Q: I recently bought a laptop with Wi-Fi access, although we only have
>a dial-up account at home. When I first plugged it in, I was surprised
>to discover it detected five wireless hot spots in my residential
>Seattle neighborhood, including two that were unsecured! What is the
>protocol here? Should I knock on my neighbors' doors, try to find out
>whose they are and see if it's OK to use them? If I use them without
>obtaining permission, will I slow my neighbors down? If they are
>unsecured, should I be extra careful about what I do on the Internet? "
>
As I understand it, using a neighbours WiFi without permission is
illegal and it's possible you could be charged if found out.
I was inadvertently caught in a similar situation, but worse.
My laptop as supplied was configured to automatically connect to any
available network, switching between WiFi's and Ethernet's
automatically according to what was available. I was working at my
daughters house, no WiFi so supposedly off-line, when Norton AV popped
up a window announcing it had just updated my virus definitions. Big
Surprise! I thought I was offline! So I checked and found I had been
connected automatically to someone else's unsecured WiFi. But who's
was it, and where were they?
To avoid illegal activity the only immediate option I had was to
disable the automatic switching - quite an embuggerance. I couldn't
just turn off the WiFi - the switch also disabled my bluetooth. After
a few days of door knocking, the owner was found and said he couldn't
care less if I used it, and couldn't be bothered securing it to
prevent unauthorised access either. So that particular instance is
now OK, although I only have a verbal agreement, albeit witnessed.
But I'm sure countless thousands of laptop owners are also
inadvertently breaking the law due to the default WiFi configuration,
without even knowing it. Sure, pop-up windows announce any
connection, but if you are not looking at the screen at the time, you
won't see it. I think this is a problem that should be addressed by
MS - the default should be to only connect automatically to designated
networks, and to pop up a window with connection options if the
designated networks are not available while others are.
As for slowing down the neighbours connection, it depends a bit on
usage and broadband speed. If you start downloading half a dozen 50MB
videos simultaneously, I think he would notice it quickly, whatever
download speed he subscribed to. Just getting your email, it's
unlikely, particularly if his download speed is 512kbps or more. It's
not likely to affect his WiFi operation - that is typically operating
at 10Mbps or more, while the max broadband download speed is down
around 1.5 (although some locations can get 8).
And yes, if the link is unsecured, be a bit careful about transmitting
credit card numbers and other private info in clear. If the WiFi
owner is a bit savvy, he can identify you and your traffic and monitor
it, even if he doesn't know exactly where you are.
IMHO, anyone who doesn't secure his WiFi network is just lazy and is
asking for trouble. It's quite easy to do and although it isn't the
most secure system available, it does prevent casual use and
discourages malicious use.
Correct me if I am wrong
Are not those the standard default Microsoft Windows XP settings that
are installed on most new laptops ?
A high percentage of new computer purchasers are nubes .
Remember if only 1 % of Windows users had trouble connecting the
wireless on their new laptops that would be a lot of calls and angry
customers.
Peter Wilkins wrote:
> On 16 Jul 2005 17:07:37 -0700, "frankdowling1@yahoo.com"
> <frankdowling1@yahoo.com> wrote :
>
> >Q: I recently bought a laptop with Wi-Fi access, although we only have
> >a dial-up account at home. When I first plugged it in, I was surprised
> >to discover it detected five wireless hot spots in my residential
> >Seattle neighborhood, including two that were unsecured! What is the
> >protocol here? Should I knock on my neighbors' doors, try to find out
> >whose they are and see if it's OK to use them? If I use them without
> >obtaining permission, will I slow my neighbors down? If they are
> >unsecured, should I be extra careful about what I do on the Internet? "
> >
> As I understand it, using a neighbours WiFi without permission is
> illegal and it's possible you could be charged if found out.
>
> I was inadvertently caught in a similar situation, but worse.
> My laptop as supplied was configured to automatically connect to any
> available network, switching between WiFi's and Ethernet's
> automatically according to what was available. I was working at my
> daughters house, no WiFi so supposedly off-line, when Norton AV popped
> up a window announcing it had just updated my virus definitions. Big
> Surprise! I thought I was offline! So I checked and found I had been
> connected automatically to someone else's unsecured WiFi. But who's
> was it, and where were they?
>
> To avoid illegal activity the only immediate option I had was to
> disable the automatic switching - quite an embuggerance. I couldn't
> just turn off the WiFi - the switch also disabled my bluetooth. After
> a few days of door knocking, the owner was found and said he couldn't
> care less if I used it, and couldn't be bothered securing it to
> prevent unauthorised access either. So that particular instance is
> now OK, although I only have a verbal agreement, albeit witnessed.
> But I'm sure countless thousands of laptop owners are also
> inadvertently breaking the law due to the default WiFi configuration,
> without even knowing it. Sure, pop-up windows announce any
> connection, but if you are not looking at the screen at the time, you
> won't see it. I think this is a problem that should be addressed by
> MS - the default should be to only connect automatically to designated
> networks, and to pop up a window with connection options if the
> designated networks are not available while others are.
>
> As for slowing down the neighbours connection, it depends a bit on
> usage and broadband speed. If you start downloading half a dozen 50MB
> videos simultaneously, I think he would notice it quickly, whatever
> download speed he subscribed to. Just getting your email, it's
> unlikely, particularly if his download speed is 512kbps or more. It's
> not likely to affect his WiFi operation - that is typically operating
> at 10Mbps or more, while the max broadband download speed is down
> around 1.5 (although some locations can get 8).
>
> And yes, if the link is unsecured, be a bit careful about transmitting
> credit card numbers and other private info in clear. If the WiFi
> owner is a bit savvy, he can identify you and your traffic and monitor
> it, even if he doesn't know exactly where you are.
>
> IMHO, anyone who doesn't secure his WiFi network is just lazy and is
> asking for trouble. It's quite easy to do and although it isn't the
> most secure system available, it does prevent casual use and
> discourages malicious use.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Peter Wilkins
On 17 Jul 2005 00:33:52 -0700, "frankdowling1@yahoo.com"
<frankdowling1@yahoo.com> wrote :
>
>Correct me if I am wrong
>Are not those the standard default Microsoft Windows XP settings that
>are installed on most new laptops ?
>A high percentage of new computer purchasers are nubes .
>Remember if only 1 % of Windows users had trouble connecting the
>wireless on their new laptops that would be a lot of calls and angry
>customers.
>
I'm not completely sure what the default is. My XP SP2 system came
set up to connect to anything automatically, and I assumed that was
the default, but it may not be, in which case I apologise to MS.
But, as you say, it makes sense for MS to default to connecting
automatically for newbies and if so MS could be aiding and abetting
illegal activity!
Want to sue them???? :-)
--
Regards,
Peter Wilkins
Peter Wilkins <wilkinsp_nospam@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> I'm not completely sure what the default is. My XP SP2 system came
> set up to connect to anything automatically, and I assumed that was
Windows XP-SP2 will not automatically connect to a new WAP that is
unencrypted. It pops up a box with a caution about an open network.
--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8,-122.5
dold@xrexxmanxc.usenet.us.com wrote:
> Peter Wilkins <wilkinsp_nospam@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> I'm not completely sure what the default is. My XP SP2 system came
>> set up to connect to anything automatically, and I assumed that was
> Windows XP-SP2 will not automatically connect to a new WAP that is
> unencrypted. It pops up a box with a caution about an open network.
Unless it happens to be the same SSID as one you have already agreed to
connect to.
--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8,-122.5
Re: Man Charged With Stealing Wi-Fi Signal 
Linear Mode
