A really gray area, IMHO. It's one thing to break into a secured WiFi network. But it's another thing to "borrow" bandwidth from an unsecured WiFi network. I think if someone leaves his WiFi network open, without encryption; then it should be construed that he's allowing others to access it for free.
well i sorta agree with Adrian. but say if we're talking about leaving your house door open or locked. then it can be arguable ain't it. if you left your door open, you might be inviting unwanted guest but that could not be your intention in the first place.
That's why it's a very gray area. How will people know if someone is leaving the connection for free use? Or not? Besides, WiFi connection extends beyond physical boundaries. If using an unsecured connection can be considered illegal, then shouldn't the extension of your neighbour's WiFi network into your house be considered intrusion? IMHO, it would be better to limit the law to protecting those who protect their own networks. If you refuse to even encrypt your network or limit access by MAC address or even hiding the SSID, then what right do you have if someone borrows your bandwidth? If we keep binding everything under different legal treaties, it will only limit our freedom and well, only the lawyers benefit.
Yep, well said Adrian. Personally, all the wireless networks I set up have been setup with a unique SSID, encryption, new router/access point password, and MAC address filtration. If someone piggy-backs the connection, then they are in fact hacking into it, making it illegal. At the same time, I have had to work on open networks, and neighbors piggy-backed the signal. I told the person, and they were surprised. I couldn’t do anything because they requested that I do nothing about it. Now, if someone unauthorized access a network I set up, they will be pursued. But, under the conditions that I place, it's a good thing to go after the person. Over open networks, IMO, is where the problem becomes gray. But putting laws all over the place is just stupid.
maybe the owner is having a open house party, everyone's invited? Anyway here's what i think.... (originally wrote this in another post, but too lazy to type it out again.)
Leaving a WiFi-net unprotected is as same as "illegal" like using someone's without permission, 'cause by this you do "invite" ppl to do something "illegal". That's how our government is handling such things. Would be the same like leaving you car open and get your radio stolen out of it. You'll get a fine too 'cause you did not lock it up. And I do agree with it.
To me, it's more like "collecting 50 dollar note I found on the ground"... well, it's my opinion anyway.
you get fined if you don't lock the car up? first time i heard of that. I doubt it works like this in Malaysia....
It's called "enticing to a criminal offense" (hopefully I've translated it right ^^) and it's depending on the situation, of course. Btw. I dun talk 'bout Malaysia, cuz I do not live there. ^^
If piggybacking on an unsecured network (in this age where everyone's so afraid of hackers, etc.) can be considered criminal, then I would personally think the presence of a "foreign" network on my house to be an intrusion into my physical space! The thing is when are we going to stop litigating each other over the smallest thing?? If that person made use of the unsecured network to do something illegal, yes, go after him. But if all he did was to check his e-mail, or browse up on a product he wanted to buy, why prosecute him??? Do they have nothing better to do??? Remember, Osama is still out there, free as a bird.
this reminds me when i lived in a apartment there was unsecure networks i played with. One left their Linksys router to defaults pass admin admin or what ever and i logged in a made the name of the wireless. YOUR NETWORK IS A LITTLE UNSECURE lol next day it was 64bit encripted had a few laughs from that...
