[BTP]

First, let me say that what I am asking might seem a bit shady. My intentions are not motivated by anything evil, but it could easily be seen that way.

Tomorrow I am going to be in a place for two weeks and there is no net access. There will be a phone, but not until next week and I do not have dial up access. I was there yesterday and there are over a dozen open wireless networks, but they are far below and the signal is too weak except for 2 that work sometimes. I used iStumbler. There is one strong signal but it is WEP enabled and I know this can easily be broken. I am not about free access, if there were a way for me to pay whomever for it, I'd do it, and it is only for a short while anyway. There are too many places for me to figure out who the strong signal belongs to.

I read up on WEP and learned that in its current form, it is at best a deterrant and not a very secure protocol. I also saw there were *nix apps and windows apps that could use the known exploits to gain access, but the one link to someone using and iBook to do the same was a dead link. From reading, the authors made it seem very easy to access WEP networks.

Does anyone know if any of the programs are written for OS X? Or if there are comperable programs?

Now I'll say it again, I know this sounds shady, but the information is out there and people that are going to break into networks will do it if we are discussing it here or not. Myself, I have come across many opne networks and relatively few closed. But there are so many that are open, I don't need to learn about gain access to the closed ones, it has never been worth doing. Until now. Any help appreciated.

[mitchell_pgh]

This sounds like a very bad idea.

If I were you, I would suck it up and use one of those "free 3 months of XXX" and just go dial up for the next few weeks. Although I would probably try it just for the sake of trying...

Regardless, no, I don't know about the application.

[Gene Jockey]

http://www.binaervarianz.de/projekte...c/index2.shtml

You can figure it out from there. Be good.

To quote the page being linked...

Q. Can I do evil stuff with KisMAC?
A. No comment.

--J

[BTP]

Cool.. I'll give it a shot. From what I read, it might take 2 weeks to get access!

[wadesworld]

What you're trying to do is highly illegal. It's not "shady." You're intentionally breaking the law and intentionally scheming to steal something which is not yours.

I'd advise you to stop thinking that you should be able to do things because you want to.

Am I lecturing? You bet.

But despite the names you'll likely call me, you're still wrong.

Incidentally, accessing open networks without permission is also illegal.

Wade

[BTP]

I won't call you names, why would you think that? I began my post honestly and openly. I have no problem with you lecturing. Lecture on.

I understand your point of view and if you read my post, you would have understood that I recognized this is not on the up and up. Shady was the best way to describe it, as you are incorrect, there is no law covering this, so it is not, in fact, illegal or "highly illegal". And an aside, something is legal or not, there are no degrees of legality. You *might* be able to say cracking WEP was breaking and entering, but that is a stretch. There is no law that actually covers this - yet.

In any case, there are several cafes that offer open networks to all comers. You ony have to be in range. Why would accessing those be "legal" as opposed to other open wireless networks? How would you differentiate that people are sharing their useage from that just didn't lock it up?

Look, I am not saying that cracking WEP on someones network is not stealing, or not intentional. And you are right, the ends don't always justify the means, but you are really splitting hairs. I am talking about checking my email and reading a bit of news in a remote location. So how much of a monetary value would you place on reciveing a few dozen emails and reading some pages? Maybe a 1 MB in a week. As you also didn't seem to note, I would be willing to pay the person but have no idea who it is.

So you won't come back and say I am rationalizing it, re-read the first line of the last paragraph. It is stealing, but serously, could you apply a monetary value? Let's say it was illegal and I were arrested. The judge says to reimburse the person. How much?

I am not a moral absolutist, the world is grey. Those that say otherwise just lack experience.

So I don't know what I am wrong about, since we seem to agree on everything, except that there is no law on accessing wireless networks. If I am wrong about that too, please direct me to the law.

I am sorry that your sensabilities were offended, but I asked a question, didn't hide that it was shady and I just want to know.

I am curious, why did you get so upset?

The best part of this is that on the other side of the house, someone has an open network and I have access. So no cracking WEP for me. Still, I bet that doens't make you any happier.

Finally, what do you say about big ISP's like Speakeasy, that not only allow, but openly endorse shareing wireless?

[Cipher13]

BTP, if you were a newb I'd have gotten out the flamethrower, but I'm fairly sure your intentions are good... the thing is, though, it is illegal. There are laws governing this.

If a network is closed, then it is assumed that guest access is unwelcome. If the network was open, there wouldn't be a problem. The network is closed, and WEP protected, right?

Is this network VPN'd?

The impression I have of it, as of now, is that it's just some home users network, WEP set up to keep leechers out... they could have bandwidth constraints, or anything, really. Either way, you ARE compromising the security of their network.

Having said that, you could get the WEP key in about 15 minutes...

[wadesworld]

You *might* be able to say cracking WEP was breaking and entering, but that is a stretch. There is no law that actually covers this - yet.

Sure there is. There are all sorts of laws regarding the intentional access of networks which are not intended for public use. How do you think the prosecute hackers? Surely you don't think the goverment throws up its hands and says "Someone just penetrated the DoD network, but there's no laws in place so, oh well."

Make no mistake - it is illegal and you can be fined or possibly go to jail. If you're intentionally breaking WEP, it wouldn't be hard for someone to convince a judge you intended to do harm.

In any case, there are several cafes that offer open networks to all comers. You ony have to be in range. Why would accessing those be "legal" as opposed to other open wireless networks? How would you differentiate that people are sharing their useage from that just didn't lock it up?

If it's an open network designed for public use, there's nothing wrong with it.

Unfortunately, the burden is on you to make sure you're not unintentionally connecting to a network which is open, but NOT intended for public use. Personally, I think this part of the law is wrong - if a company doesn't close their wireless network, they shouldn't be able to sue because people accessed it.

However, the problem is the leaps you can make from there: "Therefore, if the company doesn't implement good firewalls, or forgets to implement host security, it's OK for a hacker to prowl around." or "Therefore, if the company doesn't lock the front door, it's OK to steal stuff inside."

In short, with regard to open corporate networks - yes there's a lot of problems with the current law, but you need to be aware of it currently is.

So you won't come back and say I am rationalizing it, re-read the first line of the last paragraph. It is stealing, but serously, could you apply a monetary value? Let's say it was illegal and I were arrested. The judge says to reimburse the person. How much?

You *are* rationalizing. Read what you just said:

"I'm stealing, but not very much."

I am not a moral absolutist, the world is grey. Those that say otherwise just lack experience.

The world is grey. However, those that claim there is not right and wrong are simply looking to justify their actions.

It's stealing, it's wrong and you know it. That's as black and white as it gets. Yet you want to claim it's grey. Why? Because you *want* something and therefore, you're willing to ignore right and wrong to get what you want.

Be one of the rare few - be one that says "Yes, I want it, but it's wrong, so I'm not going to do it, even though I will be inconvenienced."

So I don't know what I am wrong about, since we seem to agree on everything, except that there is no law on accessing wireless networks. If I am wrong about that too, please direct me to the law.

I'm not a lawyer so I can't point you to a specific law. However, it is most definitely illegal.

Wade

[sandsl]

The law states that unauthorised access to closed networks is illegal eg. using airport to connect to a wireless network without authorisation. UK Law has a Computer Misuse Act 1990 which covers this.

The law (depending on your location) also states that cracking an encryption protocol like WEP is also illegal. Cracking probably also breaks copyrights and/or patents which protect the design and/or creation of digital content but i'm not 100% sure on that.


Bottom line, its illegal. Your not allowed to even join an open network without permission, never mind a closed network without permission.

[Arkham_c]

Why does everyone feel compelled to give a lecture on legality and morality? Just answer the question.

Get KisMac. It can crack WEP.

[sandsl]

The question has already been answered, I was just correcting him. This isn't simply a question and answer website, its a forum - a place for open discussion.

[Arkham_c]

Originally posted by sandsl:
The question has already been answered, I was just correcting him. This isn't simply a question and answer website, its a forum - a place for open discussion.

I just think it's interesting that everyone has to chime in with "it's illegal you heathen!". It's sort of like downloading stuff off Limewire or Carracho -- no one admits to doing it, and yet there are 40 million people doing it.

The bottom line is that if someone is running a wireless access point and depending on WEP to keep them safe, they're stupid and get what they deserve.

Smart people put their WAP in a DMZ with firewalls on both sides, and use a VPN client or and SSH tunnel to get to machines on the secure, wired side of things. They also use MAC-filtering, so that WEP is not their only point of defense.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by sandsl:
Bottom line, its illegal. Your not allowed to even join an open network without permission, never mind a closed network without permission.

So I can't even surf the web? (I don't have permission) What about pinging a computer? Where do they draw the line? If I type in "telnet www.apple.com have I broken the law?

I've always wondered about this. It's like saying "Don't look at my glass house when I'm in the shower" If something or someone accesses my computer, can I portscan them? Can I portscan a whole network?

[Eug]

I just think it's interesting that everyone has to chime in with "it's illegal you heathen!". It's sort of like downloading stuff off Limewire or Carracho -- no one admits to doing it, and yet there are 40 million people doing it.

Yes, but generally MacNN doesn't tolerate discussion about it much.

The bottom line is that if someone is running a wireless access point and depending on WEP to keep them safe, they're stupid and get what they deserve.

If somebody is driving a car and is depending on a seatbelt to keep them safe, then they're stupid and get what they deserve, even if somebody intentionally rams them from the side.

Quite frankly if somebody were to leave their network open, and somebody else happened to just get on and only surfed for 5 mins (the internet and not the network), in the grand scheme of things it's probably not a big deal, even if it is illegal.

However, intentionally hacking somebody else's network for your benefit is a complete different kettle of fish.

Can't you go to an internet cafe?

[sandsl]

I'm only stating what the law is, he did ask for correction. I never said I didn't do it, I've used carracho, limewire and regularly access airport networks for which I don't have explict authorisation.

I really couldn't care what people do, he asked for correction, I corrected him. I'm not preaching, or saying I disagree with it or think its bad. I'm just saying its illegal.

What about pinging a computer?
Breaks my ISPs terms and conditions of use.

Its not illegal to access a public website providing you have legal means of doing so.

If something or someone accesses my computer, can I portscan them? Can I portscan a whole network?
Again breaks my ISPs terms and conditions of use. Some argument over legality of it.

[Toyin]

Originally posted by Arkham_c:
Smart people put their WAP in a DMZ with firewalls on both sides, and use a VPN client or and SSH tunnel to get to machines on the secure, wired side of things. They also use MAC-filtering, so that WEP is not their only point of defense.

Don't you think you're being a little harsh. I consider myself computer literate and "smart" and I depend on WEP, MAC-filtering, and a 802.11g only network for security. If a hacker really wanted to get on my network, I don't know how much the additional time and cost to set up all those measures would protect me.

By the way, for the original poster, wouldn't someone who has WEP activated also have MAC filtering? I've been told that MAC filtering easy to get around as well, but if you're not a hacker, it seems like it's another thing you've got to learn.

[Eug]

Originally posted by Toyin:
By the way, for the original poster, wouldn't someone who has WEP activated also have MAC filtering?

Not necessarily. Lots of home routers/gateways don't have that feature.

[BTP]

Well, thanks to those that realize that I am not some evil bastard looking to steal candy from children.

As for laws, there *is* a law in the UK, but THERE IS NO WIRELESS ACCESS LAW IN THE US. Hackers aren't arrested for violating a wireless access law. If there is one, I have been unable to find it. So, Wade, you may not be a lawyer, but you also can't point me to the law. Since you say there are 'all sorts' of laws, show me one. I'd be interested merely to know. What I think you will find is that existing laws that do not specifically cover this, like breaking and entering, computer trespass or plain trespassing. What is making such a law interesting is the fact that the network can pass beyond the property of the network owner. What is definately not illegal, is if I were to watch passively what you are doing on your network, like read your email that comes and goes wirelessly. If your WAP broadcast into my property and I read the signals, it is your fault, not mine. Intersting, but not really related to our discussion, but does have an impact on the formation of a specific law.

So Wade, if the network is open and intended for public use, how do you know that? How can you differentiate between those that are running an open access point from those that just don't know better? Am I going to get arrested because I connect to the router that says "default" and it turns out to be an office above the cafe and not the cafe's wireless router? If so, intent makes the difference? Ignorance? I don't think so.

As for rationalizing, I should have added 'rationalizing, etc' to cover whatever you might say. I have already acknowledged that it is stealing, how many times will I need to repeat that so you will understand? It is similar to speeding, going 2 mph above the speed limit is a violation, but just not a bit one. Still, you weren't able to tell me a monetary value. Can you?

You are trying to impress your views and morals on me and I don't share them. I think you have higher standard than I do, that's fine. Differences are what make the world less boring. In less than 2 weeks, I'll be back on my own network and this will be a fading memory. I could call the police and tell them I am using someone's open network and getting my email by stealing bandwidth. Do you think they would come and arrest me? How about if I called and told them I was driving 57 mph in a 55 mph zone?

So here you are Wade, a recap to hopefully prevent you from repeating yourself and misunderstanding me:

It is stealing. You misunderstood that grey part is not if it stealing or not, but the seriousness. There is no law on wireless access. You have different moral values than me. I respect your morals, please respect that I can choose to be more or less moral than you. I wanted to know something and I asked, I didn't want your lectureing, I wanted an answer. I have been respectul of your views though I disagree with them. There is more to why I needed this, but I am not going to air my private life here and I am sure some people, not you, would understand bettter. Not likely condone it, but understand.

Eug:
I can go to an internet cafe or even drive home in 1/2 an hour, but the point is, I actually need stay and not leave for large amounts of my time. I'll take the dial up but there is no phone service installed yet.

Chipher:
Thanks. I agree with you as well. But here there is no law (yet) that specifically covers this. A prosecutor could use many different laws, but not one speaks directly to wireless. You are right, I have no bad intentions and I would gladly give the owner of the WEP access point payment for access. If I find the person whose open access point I am accessing now, I'll pay them. I think this would take a serious turn if I were asking how I could randomly access WEP networks so I didn't have to pay for net access. You are right, the network is closed and WEP is enabled. That means stay out. When I asked this, that looked to be my only possibiliy of access and I am inconviencing myself for another, but I really needed to be connected. I thought that was my only way, now I don't need to do that and this has turned into a moral discussion, mostly.

Arkham-
Thanks.

Toyin-
All Airports have that feature and a lot of WAP's do, like the D-link and Linksys, but that's the extent of the wireless routers I know. From what I see, most people are too lazy to set it up correctly.

[all_about_collaboration]

There are so many laws that cover what you are trying to do that you will have your head spin when you get hit with all of them. I chase bad guys like you for a living and must assure you that there are number of statues that will lock you up for a while.

[Gene Jockey]

Originally posted by BTP:
Toyin-
All Airports have that feature and a lot of WAP's do, like the D-link and Linksys, but that's the extent of the wireless routers I know. From what I see, most people are too lazy to set it up correctly.

Well, it's not all laziness. I have WEP+Mac Filters, and it's a pain to administer those MAC filters. Once I couldn't figure out why the hell Windows update wouldn't work in Virtual PC, and I had it on Virtual Switch and hadn't added the VPC "MAC" to the list on my router. I just shook my head.

--Josh

[el_humpo]

All this 'moral' grandstanding is a little tiresome...

Personally I think the DMCA and related laws that allow poor saps in the US to be arrested for breaking encryption are just an excuse so that 'security' companies can sell crappy products, then lock up anyone who tries to expose them. It's already been publicly acknowledged that WEP is horridly broken.

Oh and BTW, you can use the wretched, morally bankrupt tool of satan 'ifconfig' to change your MAC address.

I'm off to rot13 all my files so you can't read them now.

</sarcastic_and_cranky_rant_mode>

[Gene Jockey]

Originally posted by all_about_collaboration:
I chase bad guys like you for a living and must assure you that there are number of statues that will lock you up for a while.

I think the idea of being chased and locked up by an unholy army of living statues is enough to deter me from a life of crime



--Josh

[sandsl]

Under US law unauthorised use of a computer service comes under existing theft and trespass statutes.

If you illegitimately or without authorization, obtain services to which you are not entitled it would be termed theft and/or trespass under current US law.

Computer Trespass in the second degree is only a "gross misdemeanor" - just get on with it, your very unlikely to be convicted or arrested.

However, there doesn't seem to be any specific federal law covering wireless computer misuse, so existing federal and state statutes are applied. Obviously different depending where you are located.
I was going to find out your areas specific laws but 34.06N 118.47W isn't particularly useful to me - near Tucson, AZ maybe?

Legal stuff is so boring, we know its illegal...lets get back to the mac stuff

[Cipher13]

Originally posted by el_humpo:
All this 'moral' grandstanding is a little tiresome...

Personally I think the DMCA and related laws that allow poor saps in the US to be arrested for breaking encryption are just an excuse so that 'security' companies can sell crappy products, then lock up anyone who tries to expose them. It's already been publicly acknowledged that WEP is horridly broken.

Oh and BTW, you can use the wretched, morally bankrupt tool of satan 'ifconfig' to change your MAC address.

I'm off to rot13 all my files so you can't read them now.

</sarcastic_and_cranky_rant_mode>

Not all of this is moral grandstanding.

My comment, for one, made no judgement... I think I know what BTP is like well enough from his 2000-odd posts here to know he isn't some lame-ass script-kiddy that wants to download his porn on his neighbours connection instead of his. My comment was solely for his own sake - if he does this and gets caught, there could be terrible repurcussions. A warning of the possible but unlikely consequences, no more.

AirSnort will take care of the situation also, IIRC. It may not... the network may use a custom VPN or something. This *may* be a corporate/office network, not a home one. If you still intend on cracking it, find out a little about it before you start using it... find out how many comps are on the network, etc, to give you an idea as to the scale of the network. Nmap is your friend.

[moki]

Originally posted by BTP:
Well, thanks to those that realize that I am not some evil bastard looking to steal candy from children.

As for laws, there *is* a law in the UK, but THERE IS NO WIRELESS ACCESS LAW IN THE US.

Not making a judgement on what you're attempting to do, but you are incorrect. There are a few statutes that you could be prosecuted under, including the DCMA.

You're essentially picking a lock and using someone else's resources without their consent.

[BTP]

Moki-

I agree that there are laws that they could try people under, but there is no specific law that deals with this issue. As I said before, they could likely prosecute under the same law as a burglar or some similar way. Since you mentioned the DCMA, that's a case in point, since it has been used in unintended ways as well. I should take this time to clarify that just because there is no specific law doesn't mean that you can't be procescuted under another law that might cover it.

NO mistake here, cracking WEP is taking what someone doesn't want you to have. Plain stealing. But the measure is debteable.

all_about_collaboration-

Learn to read. Please. "Chasing down bad guys like me".... You must have a boring job/little to do if you are chasing "bad guys like me" for a living. If you read the thread then you know I had (past tense) an interest cracking WEP and now it has passed, since I have access to an open network and can't be bothered to break into a network. Since you do it for a living, what law do most of the "bad guys like me" get prosecuted under? Do the "bad guys like me" go posting on public boards that they are about to crack WEP on a private network?

For those joining late, this was originally about getting access to a closed system in a residential area for no more than two weeks. I no longer need to, but I did seriously consider it. Then this turned into mostly a debate about semantics, nomenclature, laws and most of all morality. To sum up, I was splitting some hairs as well, but this was mostly an effort on my part to learn something. It is only a short term that I will be here and before long I will be using my own *wide open* network and no one else's.

I agree that if you break into someone's network and you get caught, you could get into trouble. I personally think that if you are stealing files, running a w@r3z server or something equally stupid, you deserve to get caught. My original point was merely to have some simple access for email and reading news. Still wrong, but the intent was different. The intent was to use (steal) bandwidth, but not do any harm.

I appreciate the comments, suggestions and help in digesting this topic.

[King Bob On The Cob]

Originally posted by BTP:
Moki-

I agree that there are laws that they could try people under, but there is no specific law that deals with this issue. As I said before, they could likely prosecute under the same law as a burglar or some similar way. Since you mentioned the DCMA, that's a case in point, since it has been used in unintended ways as well. I should take this time to clarify that just because there is no specific law doesn't mean that you can't be procescuted under another law that might cover it.

The DMCA has successfully prosecuted people for breaking encryptions before and if you get caught, it's the law you'd be tried under. Just something to chew on.

[Moose]

Originally posted by King Bob On The Cob:
The DMCA has successfully prosecuted people for breaking encryptions before and if you get caught, it's the law you'd be tried under. Just something to chew on.

Not quite. The DMCA forbids breaking encryption to circumvent copy protection technology to copy copyrighted material. Breaking encryption, in and of itself, is not illegal. Breaking encryption to access a wireless network is certainly illegal--not under the DMCA, but under existing "hacking" statutes which make it illegal to gain access to a network without the owner's consent.

[wadesworld]

Why does everyone feel compelled to give a lecture on legality and morality? Just answer the question.

Because so few people care about morality or legality these days. I like to remind folks that there are *some* people who try to do what's right.

Far too many people decide that they want what they want, and if it's illegal, that's just too bad because they want it.

They try all sorts of justifications: "If I can steal expensive software while I'm a student, I'll purchase more of it when I graduate." (Yeah, right)

Far too few people take the stance of: "It's wrong, and I'm not going to do it, regardless of whether it inconveniences me or if everyone else is doing it."

With thousands of people telling computer users every day that piracy is OK, downloading music is OK, accessing wireless networks is OK, etc, there are computer users who think it IS OK because nobody has ever told them differently.

Am I the moral compass of the world? Nope. But I do buy my software, my shareware, my music, and generally try to make sure things I do are right, rather than wrong. Just because you want something doesn't mean it's OK. You should have the backbone to say, "I'm not going to steal this - I'm either going to save my money or do without, because that's the right thing to do."

In short, we should have more people posting on the morality of stealing software, music, network access or whatever, not fewer.

Wade

[Arkham_c]

Originally posted by wadesworld:
They try all sorts of justifications: "If I can steal expensive software while I'm a student, I'll purchase more of it when I graduate." (Yeah, right)

That's pretty funny that you say that. When I was in college I downloaded warez (this was pre-internet -- we did so on a local BBS over a modem). Now that I am out, commercial software is available much more easily (and faster) via the internet, and yet I buy software when I need it. Why? Because I make 4000% of what I was making in college every year and can now afford it.

Morals are subjective -- what you (or the legal system of some countries) deem to be right or legal are not necessarily the views of everyone else.

Personally, I think the DMCA is a BS law and would practice civil disobedience at every opportunity if I had the need back up my legally purchased DVDs, CDs, or other copy-protected media.

[graveguy]

I'm not sure if BTP even cares anymore, but, in honor of the original request, I'll point out that just because they are running WEP, doesn't mean that the network is necessarily closed. When I travel, I often open up my iBook and 'borrow' an internet connection for a few minutes to browse a few pages, check mail, etc.

I'll also remind you that if you do choose to do this, the person who administrates the wireless connection point has access to all of your TCP/IP packets (even if they do use WEP)...The most likely reason for a wide open network is, of course, ignorance, but there is always that possibility of someone leaving it intentionally open in hopes of ensnaring someone. For this reason, always use some additional form of encryption for anything that matters...

[Moose]

Originally posted by graveguy:
I'm not sure if BTP even cares anymore, but, in honor of the original request, I'll point out that just because they are running WEP, doesn't mean that the network is necessarily closed.

Uh. If they're running WEP, you need the WEP key to access the network. You get this either from the network's administrator, or from breaking the encryption. The latter is quite illegal. It is illegal to access networks and systems that you are not authorized to access.

A "closed" network is simply one that doesn't broadcast its SSID. Being "open" or "closed" and using (or not) WEP are two different things.

[wadesworld]

That's pretty funny that you say that. When I was in college I downloaded warez (this was pre-internet -- we did so on a local BBS over a modem). Now that I am out, commercial software is available much more easily (and faster) via the internet, and yet I buy software when I need it. Why? Because I make 4000% of what I was making in college every year and can now afford it.

Did you ever go back and buy an extra license you didn't need to make up for the one you stole in college?

The fact you didn't have money in college wasn't an excuse. You did it because it was more convenient than saving your money, going to the public computer lab, borrowing someone's computer or whatever. (You can argue that wasn't the case, but I attended college too, and worked in computer support at the university, so I saw *all* the excuses)

Morals are subjective -- what you (or the legal system of some countries) deem to be right or legal are not necessarily the views of everyone else.

I agree they're subjective. But saying they're subjective is not an excuse to do something you know is wrong. Saying, "I'm sure there's a country where stealing software is legal and that's how I set my moral boundries" is not an excuse for stealing software.

Personally, I think the DMCA is a BS law and would practice civil disobedience at every opportunity if I had the need back up my legally purchased DVDs, CDs, or other copy-protected media.

I think many such provisions of laws are BS too. You can ignore them if you wish - just understand that there could be penalties and "My moral code was different" isn't going to work in court.

My point in making these arguments is to hopefully make some people reexamine how casually they treat the theft of software, music, bandwidth or other such items. Many of them think it's "no big deal" because they have so many people with "subjective morals" telling them that it's no big deal.

You can argue about your personal moral code all you want, but you're simply trying to justify your theft. If you don't steal, you don't spend time trying to justify the "subjective morality" of theft.

Wade

[drmcnutt]

Originally posted by BTP:


I agree that if you break into someone's network and you get caught, you could get into trouble. I personally think that if you are stealing files, running a w@r3z server or something equally stupid, you deserve to get caught. My original point was merely to have some simple access for email and reading news. Still wrong, but the intent was different. The intent was to use (steal) bandwidth, but not do any harm.

I appreciate the comments, suggestions and help in digesting this topic.

It takes little imagination to see this thread reversed and appear in the Lounge (alternate universe of course), titled "Help me get back at the A$$hole stealing my bandwidth".

In this thread the MacNN users help suggest what the "victim" should do to screw the guy stealing his bandwidth by illegally using his wireless connection and offer detailed advice on how to prevent it from happen. "Delete his directories that'd show him", "find anything valuable and take it cause he's got it com'in" and other wrongs to make this right.

And someone will make the heartfelt plea to let that guy go cause he probably is just doing it to "get by", give a brother some internet love. Yeah right, FRAG HIM!

DRM

[Scarpa]

It's only wrong if you get caught.

Bypassing all the 'moral grandstanding' and legal discussion, I was under the impression that it takes a LOT of data to crack WEP, in any form.

I highly doubt that you would have been able to crack a residential network in two weeks. That however, is purely speculation.

[Cipher13]

Originally posted by Scarpa:
It's only wrong if you get caught.

Bypassing all the 'moral grandstanding' and legal discussion, I was under the impression that it takes a LOT of data to crack WEP, in any form.

I highly doubt that you would have been able to crack a residential network in two weeks. That however, is purely speculation.

Incorrect.

[BTP]

Move along. Nothing to see here...

Wade, I think this will be my last comment, I think most people get your points, as I do. However, this scenario seems to be one you have come across in your college days and are concious of the larger issues of stealing bandwidth/software/etc.

Some people view this as wrong, most I'd say. However, something that is wrong may have a certain degree of acceptability to each individual person, yourself included. You are able to state your case here, and we can all agree it makes sense in the exact interpretation. It also occurs to me that morality has degrees to which you would roll your eyes, such as some may do with your arguements. Some people adhere to rules and laws to an absurd degree. Others may have higher moral standards.

Do you swat mosquitoes? Have you driven over the speed limit? Do you eat meat? Have you ever lied? Does your wardrobe have leather, silk, wool or any other animal products? My previous point still stands that I agree that it is not right to steal bandwidth, but I can *only* speak for myself. I know what I consider moral and you know what you consider moral, but you have to understand that people have different tolerances. You rationalize your own morality and measure me by it, but I am sure that there are others that could criticize both of us.

Point is, there are no moral absolutes, there are no moral benchmarks for a "one size fits all' and people are going to make their own choices. Being told what to do and that they are immoral is not going win over any converts. I don't think there are too many here that can make any absolute moral judgements, since everyone can't meet all the moral standards people have.

If it makes you feel good to get your point out, more power to you, however if you really wanted people to consider adopting your stance, you leave something more to be desired. You might have just made your point and left it at that. Feel free to preach, just as I will feel free to point out that if you really wanted to do something about people's disregard for legality and morals, your post could have had a less preachy tone so people might not have been so put off. It seems that you were upset over this discussion and you are free to express your feelings, but there is something to be said about catching flies, honey and vinegar.