|
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,117
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,117 |
Originally posted by Slack Master Doug:
Originally posted by Pete D:
I have, but I usually don't. No encryption = teh suck. I don't want other people sniffing my data.
I got my router locked down fo sho.
How?
Anyone with a packet sniffer can get your WEP password by collecting enough packets (as little as 5 minutes if you are sending a lot of packets). MAC address locking is the same thing, every packet moving on your network has a MAC address listed along with it. Its not hard to spoof a MAC address. No broadcast SSID? Oh yeah, network stumblers will find them too...
<==== (* time to change the 128 bit encryption code & shut down wireless router when not in use *)
Must be that jumbly-wumbly thing happening again.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,149
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,149 |
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
Too bad. My next-door neighbors sometimes crank their stereo up loud enough for me to hear, too. Under licensing restrictions, this is technically illegal because my listening in constitues them publically "broadcasting" the music.
It is a shame this point was glossed over because it is a good one. What about people who use FM modulators in their car? Don't they "broadcast" content that people should have to pay for? So if I'm in traffic and pick up Sirius on the vehicle next to me on 88.1FM, aren't I just as wrong as the person lifting a wi-fi?
-- 1999 SVT #220 --
In retrospect, it was all downhill from here. RIP, CEG.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,392
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,392 |
Originally posted by bigMoneyRacing:
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
Too bad. My next-door neighbors sometimes crank their stereo up loud enough for me to hear, too. Under licensing restrictions, this is technically illegal because my listening in constitues them publically "broadcasting" the music.
It is a shame this point was glossed over because it is a good one. What about people who use FM modulators in their car? Don't they "broadcast" content that people should have to pay for? So if I'm in traffic and pick up Sirius on the vehicle next to me on 88.1FM, aren't I just as wrong as the person lifting a wi-fi?
no, because they are forcing you to listen to it if you happen to be on that channel. which i find irritating as hell, as the local alternative station i listen to is on one of those frequencies.
02 Mustang GT... Tuned by Nelsons. Low 12's, anyone? 
.....______
___|______\_____
|/-\_________/-\_|
.\_/...............\_/
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220 |
Originally posted by bigMoneyRacing:
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
Too bad. My next-door neighbors sometimes crank their stereo up loud enough for me to hear, too. Under licensing restrictions, this is technically illegal because my listening in constitues them publically "broadcasting" the music.
It is a shame this point was glossed over because it is a good one. What about people who use FM modulators in their car? Don't they "broadcast" content that people should have to pay for? So if I'm in traffic and pick up Sirius on the vehicle next to me on 88.1FM, aren't I just as wrong as the person lifting a wi-fi?
No. And there's at least 4 reasons why it's different:
1> As mentioned, the user is broadcasting it to you and forcing it to your radio on that frequency whether you want to or not. While wireless is broadcast to you, you have to actively seek it to use it. It's rare (and is a problem with securing your own PC) if it is logging onto a network without your express permission. You are actively clicking a button that approves your PC to log on to a network that you know isn't your own.
2> Broadcasting sattelite radio via an FM modulator is a byproduct of the way that service as designed by the provider functions, there's no way around it. Wireless on the other hand, with the rare exception of those companies that do explicitly provide wireless (as opposed to broadband) service, is broadcasted by a consumer, unbeknownst to the person providing that consumer with the service.
The difference between a broadband and a wireless provider is important. Most providers that offer an explicit wireless service understand that the broadcasting of its' network is a byproduct of how its' product functions, and the fact that some people are going to 'steal' it is built into the business model. Many of them even have service structures that not only allow, but promote this. I believe that it is SpeakEasy which allows someone who buys their service to allow others to log onto their network and use their hardware -- in turn the original consumer gets a discount, and the secondary user also gets a discount. With enough people, the 'original' user can even make money on his 'purchase' of the service by allowing others to use his hardware. It's a win/win for everybody involved.
3> Most importantly, unlike sattelite radio, bandwith costs money. Waves from space are free, no matter how many people are consuming them. Broadband costs go up incrementally with every user that consumes more bandwith. A broadband providers charges a consumer charge based on the average bandwith that a consumer will use in a month. If 2 or 3 or 4 consumers are using it, that number will increase exponentially. If a business model is built around the fact that a consumer will use $10 in bandwith and pay $30 for it, and suddenly they're using $30 in bandwith and paying the same $30, something's gotta give.
4> The 'stealing' of bandwith, unlike sattelite radio, affects the experience of the consumer that is actually purchasing the service since you are taking some of their bandwith and slowing the very high-speed service that they purchased. If done to a large enough extent this may affect their decision to keep the service, not only costing the provider with the incremental cost of the bandwith that you were 'stealing' but also the revenue from a paying customer.
2003 Mazda6s 3.0L MTX
Webpage
2004 Mazda3s 2.3L ATX
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 175
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 175 |
The way I feel about it is the person who decides to broadcast an unsecured network is, in most cases, breaching their own TOS with their ISP. If they do such a thing, the person that logs on to that network should not be held responsible. In many cases my laptop would just logon to an unsecured wireless network. Originally posted by from a blog @ http://life.firelace.com/archives/wireless/wifi/index.php:
Then Mr. Crume says one of the most generalized things known in security field:
As for security issues, the bottom line is that you should not connect to any network that "you don't personally control or can't be sure is trustworthy unless you are willing to assume that everything you see at your end of the connection could be seen by others," Crume advises.
Hello? Anyone home? Every network in the world is not controlled at the end-user. If you want to use the Internet, there is the chance that your cable company is sniffing your modem, a hacker is sitting at the node-router sniffing the network, and so on, so forth. Even applied to WiFi, his argument lies invalid since even if you own the WiFi hotspot, there is nothing that says a hacker can't still sniff the network. Wireless feeds mean that the laptop generates a signal and broadcasts to whatever range its little antenna can handle. Then hopefully, some antenna from the user-owned hotspot picks it up and decrypts the messages and sends it off to the wild blue yonder of the Internet. There is nothing stopping anyone from sniffing the airwaves (unless you think WEP/WPA actually does something). There is a reason behind Netstumbler, Kismet, and other wireless sniffing tools. The pairing of Kismet and Ethereal allows any hacker to read wireless packets if they are not encrypted.
98 Contour GL 4 cyl 131,000 miles
- 57,000 w/o a CEL!
Get Firefox
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,149
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,149 |
Originally posted by sigma:
1> As mentioned, the user is broadcasting it to you and forcing it to your radio on that frequency whether you want to or not. While wireless is broadcast to you, you have to actively seek it to use it. It's rare (and is a problem with securing your own PC) if it is logging onto a network without your express permission. You are actively clicking a button that approves your PC to log on to a network that you know isn't your own.
The end result is the same. Someone is receiving services for which they did not pay. Theft is theft, no? Or are we absolving the satellite radio listener because he didn't seek it out--it just came to him??? hmm...
"Hey! Someone left a Ferrari on my lawn with the keys in it and the door open. Must be my lucky day!"
The courts would hardly grant that fortitous homeowner with a new 360 Modena even though he didn't seek it out, yet you are saying the satellite radio listener is in the clear because he, too, didn't seek it out. Can you say double-standard? 
Originally posted by sigma:
3> Most importantly, unlike sattelite radio, bandwith costs money. Waves from space are free, no matter how many people are consuming them.
It most certainly cost a substantial amount of money to get those satellites into space. Sirius/XM's return on investment depends on paying users.
Originally posted by sigma:
If 2 or 3 or 4 consumers are using it, that number will increase exponentially. If a business model is built around the fact that a consumer will use $10 in bandwith and pay $30 for it, and suddenly they're using $30 in bandwith and paying the same $30, something's gotta give.
Yes, like the employee who sold the company the idea that they can overcharge for services and no one would be the wiser.
Originally posted by sigma:
4> The 'stealing' of bandwith, unlike sattelite radio, affects the experience of the consumer that is actually purchasing the service since you are taking some of their bandwith and slowing the very high-speed service that they purchased. If done to a large enough extent this may affect their decision to keep the service, not only costing the provider with the incremental cost of the bandwith that you were 'stealing' but also the revenue from a paying customer.
If I can listen to my friends XM feed for free why should I subscribe? Face it, these examples result in the SAME situation where people are receiving services that they didn't pay for. Only one gets publicity because it is the "moral dilemma du jor" 
BTW, do passengers in my a car need to pay a fee to record companies if we listen to a CD? I mean, THEY didn't pay for the CD but are getting to listen; shouldn't they have to pay?????
-- 1999 SVT #220 --
In retrospect, it was all downhill from here. RIP, CEG.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 681
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 681 |
Originally posted by bigMoneyRacing:
BTW, do passengers in my a car need to pay a fee to record companies if we listen to a CD? I mean, THEY didn't pay for the CD but are getting to listen; shouldn't they have to pay?????
Supreme Court here we come!!!
99 Silver CSVT
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882 |
Originally posted by deftoned989:
Originally posted by bigMoneyRacing:
BTW, do passengers in my a car need to pay a fee to record companies if we listen to a CD? I mean, THEY didn't pay for the CD but are getting to listen; shouldn't they have to pay?????
Supreme Court here we come!!!
not to mention if theyre deaf, boderline retarded, wheelchair-bound african-american lesbians. 
edit: oh yeah, and theyre Vegans too 
Last edited by svt4stv; 12/07/05 08:43 PM.
Originally posted by Tourgasm:
Sometimes you can mess up a word so bad that spell check doens't know what the hell you're talking about.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220 |
Quote:
The end result is the same. Someone is receiving services for which they did not pay. Theft is theft, no? Or are we absolving the satellite radio listener because he didn't seek it out--it just came to him??? hmm...
"Hey! Someone left a Ferrari on my lawn with the keys in it and the door open. Must be my lucky day!"
The courts would hardly grant that fortitous homeowner with a new 360 Modena even though he didn't seek it out, yet you are saying the satellite radio listener is in the clear because he, too, didn't seek it out. Can you say double-standard?
If someone puts something in your bag and you walk off with it, did you 'steal' it? Simply receiving something is not theft. Knowingly using something that you know isn't yours would be. If I find said item in my bag and can reasonably assume that my wife put it there for me to find, did I 'steal' it?
I wouldn't know if someone was broadcasting Sirius to me to me on a channel, AFAIK I'm listening to 88.1FM. If I continue to listen to it knowing that its sattelite radio that is the same as clicking that "Log On" button on your PC, and, yes, that would be 'stealing'.
Quote:
It most certainly cost a substantial amount of money to get those satellites into space. Sirius/XM's return on investment depends on paying users.
True. But is the broadcasting from FM modulators has virtually no impact on their sales at all. You have virtually none of the functionality (you can't listen to anything other than the car you're tuned in to) and it's highly impractical since the range of those things isn't really exceptional; you'd have to follow a car rather closely for an extended period of time to get any value out of it.
Quote:
Yes, like the employee who sold the company the idea that they can overcharge for services and no one would be the wiser.
Simply because a company 'overcharges' for a service doesn't make it acceptable to steal it.
Quote:
If I can listen to my friends XM feed for free why should I subscribe? Face it, these examples result in the SAME situation where people are receiving services that they didn't pay for. Only one gets publicity because it is the "moral dilemma du jor"
Listening to your buddy's XM feed is highly impractical and not a viable alternative to purchasing the service. Using your buddy's wireless yields 100% of the usability and none of the costs.
The reason one gets more publicity is because it's exponentially more widespread than the other. Satellite radio has about 2 million subscribers and Broadband/Wireless users number about 100 times that. Couple that with the inherent impracticality of sharing a satelitte radio signal compared to a wireless, and the massive prevalence of one form of 'stealing' over the other, and you see why it's a much bigger deal.
2003 Mazda6s 3.0L MTX
Webpage
2004 Mazda3s 2.3L ATX
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,392
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,392 |
Originally posted by sigma:
If someone puts something in your bag and you walk off with it, did you 'steal' it? Simply receiving something is not theft. Knowingly using something that you know isn't yours would be. If I find said item in my bag and can reasonably assume that my wife put it there for me to find, did I 'steal' it?
don't know about where you live, but posession of stolen property is illegal here in MI, if you knew it was stolen or not.
02 Mustang GT... Tuned by Nelsons. Low 12's, anyone?
.....______
___|______\_____
|/-\_________/-\_|
.\_/...............\_/
|
|
|
|
|
