WiFi

[Melton Fox]

Must be showing my age. A few years back the WM scs was described by an enquiry as the "most efficient organised crime outfit in the country"

Got ya :icon_redf

 

[Macky]

I have a friend in the force who tells me it isn't a crime

The unauthorised access of data from any computer system is an offence under the computer misuse act of 1990 m'Lud.

So technically speaking, stealing bandwidth alone isn't an offence but accessing the wireless signal to get to the bandwidth is.

 

[Durham Fox]

thanks everyone, as you can see though my neighbour is on at the moment so so am i. gonna risk a tournament now if you fancy pkr

Surely your neighbour isnt turning his router on and of when hes using it?

 

[Macky]

Surely your neighbour isnt turning his router on and of when hes using it?

Nah, he's probably moved in with him & they're sharing the laptop in bed. :icon_wink

 

[Melton Fox]

So technically speaking, stealing bandwidth alone isn't an offence but accessing the wireless signal to get to the bandwidth is.

It isn't illegal to access a wireless signal, particularly if you are using it for the purpose of which it was intended

 

[Macky]

It isn't illegal to access a wireless signal, particularly if you are using it for the purpose of which it was intended

Unauthorised, intentional, access to wireless data is an offence under the act, especially if you are using that data to break encryption.

 

[Melton Fox]

Unauthorised, intentional, access to wireless data is an offence under the act, especially if you are using that data to break encryption.

I'm not talking about encrypted.

Lets say I open up my laptop and I find an unrestricted signal. I'm not trying to break any encryption and there is no visible notice telling me that I'm not authorised to access it and I haven't accessed the hard drive, I am not breaking the law.

 

[Macky]

I'm not talking about encrypted.

Lets say I open up my laptop and I find an unrestricted signal. I'm not trying to break any encryption and there is no visible notice telling me that I'm not authorised to access it and I haven't accessed the hard drive, I am not breaking the law.

I agree

 

[Melton Fox]

I agree

No you don't, but I'm glad you do.

I saw you had responded and I thought, OMG I can't be fecking bothered I'm too tired, but you beat me to it

 

[Steven]

A member of the west Midland serious crime squad no doubt :icon_bigg

They "enjoy" the reputation of being corrupt.

 

[Steven]

Unauthorised, intentional, access to wireless data is an offence under the act, especially if you are using that data to break encryption.

Unless there is a notice saying that only authorised persons persons may access the network, any access must surely be deemed authorised?

 

[Melton Fox]

Unless there is a notice saying that only authorised persons persons may access the network, any access must surely be deemed authorised?

'Ere, that's what I said

 

[Jeff]

Unless there is a notice saying that only authorised persons persons may access the network, any access must surely be deemed authorised?

So does that also mean if you don't have a notice on the door of your house saying only authorised people can enter, anyone can just walk in?

 

[Macky]

Unless there is a notice saying that only authorised persons persons may access the network, any access must surely be deemed authorised?

Why? Please explain.

Anybody that accesses a network without being given authorisation... is unauthorised.

 

[Melton Fox]

So does that also mean if you don't have a notice on the door of your house saying only authorised people can enter, anyone can just walk in?

Yes they can, as I found when I had somebody in my house

 

[Steven]

Why? Please explain.

Anybody that accesses a network without being given authorisation... is unauthorised.

To answer Webbie and you, the determining factor as to whether authorisation is given, is merely down to the openness of the access. In the case of the Webbie question, if the door was open that would be an invitation to come in? N'est-ce pas? Closed door obviously not.

With regard to the open network that literally anyone can connect to, surely the same principle could be applied? If I can get access to it, and connect to it without encountering any obstacle then by extension I must be authorised to connect to it and use it.

Lastly much like the closed door scenario above if the entity providing the network wants to only have authorised users then they would need to implement a mechanism, a closed door.

 

[Melton Fox]

if the door was open that would be an invitation to come in? N'est-ce pas? Closed door obviously not. .

Close but not entirely accurate.

My door was closed, and the intruder came in. If it was locked and he broke in he could be charged with breaking and entering.

If the intruder doesn't break anything to gain access, then he has committed no crime.

****ing crazy

 

[Jeff]

If the intruder doesn't break anything to gain access, then he has committed no crime.

Does trespass not count as a crime then?

So all those signs saying trespassers will be prosecuted are bollocks?

 

[bocadillo]

Does trespass not count as a crime then?

So all those signs saying trespassers will be prosecuted are bollocks?

Most of them are just that - BOLLOCKS!

Trespass is a civil matter and not a criminal offence, except in certain specific circumstances, e.g. trespass on railway, MOD land, educational premises and some other places. If I were just to trespass in your garden or a farmer's field, it's not a crime.

 

[Jeff]

Most of them are just that - BOLLOCKS!

Trespass is a civil matter and not a criminal offence, except in certain specific circumstances, e.g. trespass on railway, MOD land, educational premises and some other places. If I were just to trespass in your garden or a farmer's field, it's not a crime.

But as a civil offence you can take legal action against someone - and presumably Melton could have done that if he'd wanted. Not that it would have done him any good.