The legalities of wardriving. - Page 2

Enforcer · 04-26-2006, 07:20 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by PURDooM

With that being said, I think accessing networks found from wardriving is valid topic involing "the legalities of wardriving". This thread isn't to debate usage of a word, its to discuss ethical and legal responsibilities of obtaining wireless internet through wifi for our cars. Is there a better term than wardriving to describe "detection and unauthorized use of unsecured access points for non-malicious purposes"? Yeah, I can't think of one. So please quit *****ing about grammer kthx.

NO.

if you are going to debate the legalities of a subject, the minimum requirement about the initial question and statement is to get the correct terminology. Otherwise any discussion after wards is invalid as you already have uncertainty about the subject you are debating.

Wardriving and accessing open AP's are seperate subjects, although they can be combined and used together. Similar to someone going around canvassing houses as part of a consensus and someone breaking into a house.

there is nothing wrong with going round canvassing houses, however if you then decide to break in because you know the house is empty.

Although again that would involve physically tresspassing onto some one property as opposed to using something which is available on public land (airwaves)

Freelander · 04-26-2006, 01:01 PM

@ Enforcer: I disagree that they are seperate subjects. war driving shows the intent to use other people's service. And canvassing AP's is like wandering down the street looking into people's windows and marking their house on a map. There may not be a law against it specifically, but the cops will get you for something.

WarDriver · 04-26-2006, 02:27 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by Freelander

but the cops will get you for something.

HA!...Yea right. I know cops (State and Local) personally and have used their in car systems. Most have WiFi and many use netstumbler to find an open network to check email.

I'm a consultant and a computer guy too...I've found open networks and have actually talked with their owners and showed them how they can be increase their network security.

But on the flip side I also know people (myself included) who want people to connect to my network if they are out and about. There are easy ways to set up a DMZ on your network for just this very thing.

-WarDriver-
Malicous WarDrivers give us all a bad name

Jahntassa · 04-26-2006, 03:15 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by Freelander

And canvassing AP's is like wandering down the street looking into people's windows and marking their house on a map.

No, because by your example, if you're looking into their windows, you're on their property and seeing what they have.

If you're going down the street just marking down "Red house, metal door, deadbolt", then you're not infringing on their privacy, you're just looking at the outside.

Same with Netstumbler. You aren't looking on their network (looking in the window), you aren't attaching to their network (stepping on their lawn), you're simply seeing what their house looks like. (Red house = AP, Metal door = Encrypted / Open, Deadbolt = WEP/WPA)

Just for fun, let's see if this is an accepted definition of 'Wardriving'. From dictionary.com:

wardriving

<security> (From wardialer in the "carrier scanner" sense of
that word) To drive around with a laptop with a wireless
card, and an antenna, looking for accessible wireless
networks.

(2003-06-24)

Source: The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing, © 1993-2005 Denis Howe

Okay, if we use THAT definition, then my analogy stands. There's NOTHING illegal about it. You aren't invading privacy, you aren't infringing on rights, you're simply making note of what's publicly viewable.

Freelander · 04-26-2006, 04:23 PM

@wardriver: i see cops roll through red lights and stop signs all the time. that doesn't mean they won't bust you for doing it. a police officer doing it has nothing to do with it's legality.

@jahntassa: you found a general, short definition of war driving.

am I missing something here? what is the point of ONLY war driving?

Jahntassa · 04-26-2006, 08:06 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by Freelander

@jahntassa: you found a general, short definition of war driving.

am I missing something here? what is the point of ONLY war driving?

That's fine, give me a more specific, long, and agreed upon definition of Wardriving.

By itself, there probably isn't a point, but that's not what the topic title is.

adaminc · 04-26-2006, 10:22 PM

I'm no lawyer, but i'm sure Wardriving could be considered "conspiracy to commit computer fraud", and I'm sure some day someone will be busted for something like this, after checking their email on someone elses wifi network

phc · 04-27-2006, 01:06 AM

That would be a tough argument. Wardriving in itself does not show intent- if you are only receiving wifi signals, you are not actively transmitting & joining networks. What's wrong with that? You are merely listening to what's being broadcast around you.

Wardriving could be usefull for finding T-Mobile Hot-spots or ChilliSpots right?

Regarding wifi security, I only use WPA encryption with the maximum random encryption password - totally unhackable.

WarDriver · 04-27-2006, 08:46 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by phc

Regarding wifi security, I only use WPA encryption with the maximum random encryption password - totally unhackable.

Not so much. When your wireless device connects with you AP it transmits a small piece of youe WEP. If you capture enough packets the WEP can be cracked.

The better and more secure thing to do is utilize a random WEP but also limit the devices that can use your AP by filtering the MAC address. This can be cracked too...that can take some time. Unless someone has a reason to crack it they will pass right on.

-WarDriver-

phc · 04-28-2006, 08:40 PM

Yes, WEP is easily crackable, WPA is not.

tj!2k4 · 04-28-2006, 08:56 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by WarDriver

HA!...Yea right. I know cops (State and Local) personally and have used their in car systems. Most have WiFi and many use netstumbler to find an open network to check email.

Yup, I know many cops who do this as well.

diet_pepsi · 05-04-2006, 01:29 AM

"Does that mean that you can simply walk in and use their POTS (plain old telephone service) phone mounted on their kitchen wall?"

Im not so sure i agree with this analogy as it applies to the argument. If somebody attaches a 200 yard cord to their home phone and ran it down the street, around the corner, through a hedge row, over a creek, and placed it next to a park bench, you really think anyone would get arrested for making a call on it?

As for the issue opf the legality of wardriving. There's nothing illegal about the act itself or the collection of data. But if you get popped for fraudulently exploiting that data, expect it to be used against you in a court of law!

WarDriver · 05-09-2006, 12:13 AM

Long Live Non-Encripted Wireless Transmissions
and People Who Send Them Out.

BarryWoods · 05-14-2006, 02:34 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by phc

Yes, WEP is easily crackable, WPA is not.

WPA is pretty easy as well, just takes a little longer. Wardrivers don't connect, period. Once you connect you are a thief, period. 99% of all internet prividers have a no sharing clause in their TOS.

phc · 05-15-2006, 01:03 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by BarryWoods

WPA is pretty easy as well, just takes a little longer.

Little longer? Like decades right? WPA encryption is not crackable.

User Name		Remember Me?
Password