Leave your WiFi Unsecured !!
p2pnet view Freedom | P2P:- German federal data protection commissioner Peter Schaar was “appalled” by Google’s use of its Street View snoopmobiles to wardrive private WLAN networks and record users’ unique Mac (Media Access Control) addresses, p2pnet recently posted.
When we wondered how that was possible, “Wardriving is not illegal, theft of service is the problem”, explained Robb Tpolski in a Reader’s Write, going on:
“That is to say that it’s legal to passively monitor and take note of what systems are out there broadcasting a beacon, it’s not right to then exploit (consume bandwidth) on that connection as if it was your own.”
Topolski, the network-management expert who famously uncovered Comcast’s plans to shackle users with the claims they were bandwidth hogs so it could improperly throttle their online traffic, continued:
“A wireless AP broadcasts unencrypted packets that contain the MAC address and the network name that the users assigned when they set it up. This information is not private or secret, in fact your AP is rather eagerly broadcasting it!
‘What Google is doing is perfectly fine. You and I can do the same thing, also perfectly legally.”
Given the relentless pursuit of user data by Google, one of the Internet’s top privacy pirates, that wasn’t very reassuring.
So switch everything off. Right?
Not if you’re in the UK where the corporate entertainment cartels have hijacked the government.
In fact, “Don’t secure your wifi!!!” – blogs Adrian Kennard (right), director of UK ISP AAISP.
But his post has nothing to do with Gargle’s insatiable lust for information about users, or its scarfing up people’s WiFi data without their knowledge or permission.
Rather, as ISP Review points out, Andrews and Arnold (AAISP ) has discovered a potential loophole in Britain’s farcical Digital Economy Act 2010 (DEA) that “could actually encourage consumers to setup an open / public Wi-Fi (wireless) internet hotspot, as opposed to discouraging it”.
The Digital Economy Act 2010 “will make it more difficult to setup public Wi-Fi Hotspots due to the potential threat of legal action or disconnection against the owner by Rights Holders”, says the post. “This impedes the ability of businesses (cafe’s etc.) to offer a service and people to get online.”
The answer? Become a “Communications provider”, suggests the story, quoting AAISP.
That’s because the owner is “unfairly made directly responsible for anybody downloading unlawful copyright infringing files over their network”, says ISP Review. “The alternatives of re-classifying yourself as an ISP brings extra legal and cost burdens, as does asking another ISP to ‘manage’ the network for you.
Bloggs Kennard >>>
Firstly let me stress that there a lot of really good reasons to secure your network, not least of which are privacy of your machines and data, viruses spreading, and even costs (you may pay for usage of your internet!). If you have fire-walling facilities allowing you to run a DMZ (de-militarized zone) for public wifi that is safer.
However, the Digital Economy Act has just turned things on their head slightly. It actually encourages you to run an open wifi.
The logic goes like this…
1. Running a public access wifi hotspot is 100% legal – the act does not make it in any way wrong to do that. You may not think so reading it as you can lose an appeal against technical measures if you cannot show you took steps to secure your wifi, but it does not actually require you to take such steps, and if you read on – failing to do so could make you immune from technical measures anyway…
2. Once you are running a public access wifi you are clearly providing a communications service (to the public even). This makes you a communications provider by any reasonable definition of that phrase (and by definitions in the Communications Act).
3. Tell your internet provider that you are now buying the service from them as a communications provider. Well, best to ask first in case they have any extra terms, AUP, or costs, but some (like AAISP) don’t mind at all. In fact go further – advise then that sending you copyright infringement reports would cause you distress and alarm.
4. Now you have done that you are not a subscriber as defined by the Digital Economy Act 2010. But as you have no agreement with the public for them to use the wifi so you are not a service provider either. So you don’t have nasty obligations under the Act either.
5. Your internet provider cannot treat you as a subscriber as the definition is clear in the Act. As such they have no legal requirement to pass on or count copyright infringement notices to you for your IP addresses. In fact, if they do they could be comitting an offence under Protection from Harassment Act 1997, section 22 of the The Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003, or section 127 of the Communications Act 2003.
6. The internet provider must not count the notices they get or take technical measures against you under the Digital Economy Act because you are not a subscriber.
In fact this means you are safe from all of the measures of the Act, basically.
Now, the copyright holders could get your details by use of an expensive court order and take legal (civil) action against you – but you now have the perfect excuse – you run a public wifi so in all probability the copyright infringement was carried out by some random member of the public. After all, you are already on record that you run a public access wifi. You have created plausible deniability.
Obviously this is not legal advice, but sounds pretty simple to me – the new Digital Ecomony Act actually encourages people to run public wifi to make themselves immune to the copyright infringement reports, technical measures, and even direct civil cases.
“Maybe it is a cool and useful act after all?” – Kennards suggests dryly.
“Well done labour.”
Follow p2pnet on Twitter … ..… and identi.ca
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi
p2pnet – Google Street View cars scoop WiFi data, April 22, 2010
how that was possible – How come Google can wardrive?, April 23, 2010
throttle their online traffic – Say No! to Comcast P2P settlement: Topolski, April 15, 2010
blogs – Don’t secure your wifi!!!, April 23, 2010
hijacked the government – BPI to launch UK sue ‘em all campaign, April 17, 2010
ISP Review – UK Digital Economy Act Loophole Entices ISP Users to Setup Public Wi-Fi, April 26, 2010
AAISP – Don’t secure your wifi!!!, April 23, 2010
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/feed
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Click here to learn what technologies might help you bypass censorship in your area.
April 26th, 2010 at 9:41 am
My respect goes out to Mr. Robb Tpolski. But, I wouldn’t call what google did “perfectly fine”.
What google did was create a database of addresses associated to peoples MAC address and who knows what else. In effect, using any reverse look-up we can make a database of peoples name from their addresses. Peoples unique names at a unique address are now associated to a unique MAC in other words. All done without anyone knowing.
That perfectly fine with you? It isn’t to me.
April 26th, 2010 at 9:51 am
Also, the way the ISP’s are locking things down to prevent sharing (ie sharing of access) there are only very few people who can afford to leave their wifi unsecured, in Canada that is. I don’t know about the B/W caps and the cost associated in the UK.
But here in Canada there are only very, very, few ISP’s you can get (if you can get them), like Teksavvy Internet for instance, who offer unlimited and reasonable prices, and not 30 or 60-gig total that the big telco’s offer & require a second job to afford going over their limit.
What’s it like in the UK?
April 26th, 2010 at 9:41 pm
Hi,
I have some reservations regarding the above as stated in a previous post here http://www.p2pnet.net/story/38781/comment-page-1#comment-1009320
Am I the only one seeing the connection here.
““Don’t secure your wifi!!!” – blogs Adrian Kennard (right), director of UK ISP AAISP”
>>>
“Tell your internet provider that you are now buying the service from them as a communications provider. Well, best to ask first in case they have any extra terms, AUP, or costs, but some (like AAISP) don’t mind at all”
>>>
AAISP price list http://aaisp.net.uk/broadband-prices.html
>>>
“Obviously this is not legal advice, but sounds pretty simple to me ”
>>>
“It is not legal advice, and I am not a lawyer” from http://aaisp.net.uk/dea.html
>>>
“You have created plausible deniability”
Not to say this couldnt work for a while if you could fill a couple of things.
1. get a ISP that will allow this
2. Live near a public place shops/park etc
3. Have loads of money
However being as your house isnt a open house like bking, sbucks etc which is why I feel it has been written that way so they dont get into trouble IMHO this will end in a few ways.
1. You goto court plead innocent, court says ok fair enough but you know have to put serious restrictions in place to prevent future mishaps.
2. Same as one but the court says you have done this on purpose and you are banned from the net.
3. Same as one but the court says ok not your fault but you cant be a comms provider anymore.
So to put it in context you may get away with it for 3 months maybe longer, you dl what say 100 songs and 50 movies shop value i dunno £500 whilst your connection is getting owned by all your neighbours which is going to be owning your wallet. Then the courts impose one of the above resulting of one of the below.
1. You have to put restrictions in place so unless you say your being hacked whats the point in paying the extra fees to be a comms provider.
2. Back to playing hop scotch
3. Back to normal net with the Digital Economy Act 2010 restrictions imposed
Overall end result best case you have just paid a ISP a small fortune that you could have just spent in the shop without the hassle/fees of court.
Worst case you have just paid a ISP a fortune and been knocked off the net.
So when that ISP who just fooled you into parting with loads of cash drives past you in their ferrari laughing and shouting things like “Obviously this is not legal advice” and “It is not legal advice, and I am not a lawyer” or “plausible deniability” then what.
If you want to dl without getting caught I posted a sugestion here and it is alot cheaper/safer http://www.p2pnet.net/story/38488
I could go on but I wont.
Peace out!