BB FANS

This made me laugh thought I'd share it

It also helps promote that wireless internet is not secure

I love stealing your internet

The number of people with wireless without encryption is shocking.

Do an AdHoc network search and see how many networks you can find ,you could be amazed.

If you don't protect you wireless network people could be using it to download heaven knows what !!

Great article, and has got me thinking since I just got a new wireless modem - although i'm using USB via it since I like my wires.

Calrissian: transmitting to most of London, maybe

It is worrying how many people don't secure their connections. I don't think the spotty sales staff in PC World even think about advising the poor humble customer. Mind you, if software providers wrote in English rather than techy geek-speak I'm sure more people would be conscious. Rather than using techno-babble, a simple question in plain English, such as 'do you want to share your internet connection with the general public? Yes, I don't care/No, I pay for it, it's mine' would prob be better.

Some interesting points to add.

Under the Telecommunications Act 2003 you cannot provide a network service with permission from OFCOM.
And running an unsecured wireless network could be said to be providing a network service. Especially if laptops are set to automatically logon to an available network as you might not be connecting to your own signal. And I do know of at least one case of this.

With a bit of simple searching I've discovered that the WEP keys are not secure and can be discovered very quickly using a number of Linux programs.

One of the recommendations is to turn off the Beacon which the router sends out all the time with your Sidd (router name). And to change the default Sidd as not to identify what model and make of router your using.
Plus change the default username and password for the router as lists of default ones are available with a very simple search.
Now as some of the login details (Username /Password combinations) can be used to reset some of the router it's even more important to turn off the beacon. Say you change the username and password but leave the Sidd and Beacon as per default and don't secure the system then someone could use one of the system resets to reset the default settings then access the router and change the settings. Plus if your on ADSL they could recover you account Username and password as some allow you to download the settings using plain text.

Another weakness is using the shared access which reveals the keys even quicker as it sends a series of packets back an forth between the router and the users both clear and encrypted which can be used to recover the keys.

If you've seen the thread in the news section about the 'war driver'. 'War Driving' appears to be the name for driving around looking for insecure wireless networks to access. Just look on Ebay and you'll find mag-mounted aerials for cars to be used for wireless adapters for this purpose.

But someone was convicted of nothing more than using another service in July. He got a £500 fine and a suspended sentence of 12 months. The report seems to leave a lot of information out. It say Police were called after complaints from residents. Now unless he was doing heavy downloads most users would never know anybody was using their system.
When found he was holding a laptop I think it says above his head looking for a network in a residential area. But they was no evidence that he had any malicious intent eg he was not trying to gain access to the PC(s) on the networks. It also says that he was charged under the Telecommunications act 2003 but ,although only quickly looking ,have been unable to find the section it claims was used against him.

In this case because he went out with the intent to use another network ,might have been the reason he was charged. But as I said before the owner of the Network technically was in breach of OFCOM rules by providing a network service even though unintentially. By making an attempt to secure the network and thus blocking access to unauthorized users they would be ok.

I might add that I don't know of anybody who has been fined for providing a Network service this way though in theory you could. And this is the only known case of someone being charged for accessing such a service. If it had been a secured Network which he had to hack into the penalties would have been far greater.

Food for thought.