WiFi Piggybacking- Illegal?
Moms View Message Board: The Kitchen Table (Debating Board): WiFi Piggybacking- Illegal?
There was a question about this a while ago on the GeneralBoard. If someone logs on to the Internet using an unprotected Wireless Internet Connection without permission from the owner, is it wrong? Or does the owner of the connection deserve to have their connection tapped into if they don't take the measures to protect it?
The answer is yes, it's wrong. And at least in Michigan, it's against the law - a 5-year felony with a $10,000 fine. But in New York's Westchester County, their local government said it's up to WiFi subscribers to protect themselves against piggybackers. Businesses were told to secure their networks or pay a fine.
What do you think?
http://www.woodtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=6546307
Side note: I will grant that the particular case in the story I linked to is ambivalent. The man is accused of stealing a connection from a cafe which offers free WiFi service. I feel that the cafe owner should have placed requirements on her service, such as "Free WiFi to our customers."
But the basic question I am posing is, "Is it stealing if the connection is unprotected and the user is unauthorized?"
Interesting. I live very close to Westchester - two minutes from the boarder - and I agree with the Westchester ruling, cooincidentally. If you have a valuable, it is your place to secure it. Otherwise, you are creating an attractive nuisance and attracting someone to use your property. It's almost like giving permission.
Ame
It's *almost* like giving permission. But not quite. The absolute bottom line is that the person taking advantage of the attraction, or in other words, the thief, is the criminal, not me.
This is a fascinating topic. I have been Googling for the past couple of hours. Debates like this one are everywhere on the Internet. One blogger said, "When in doubt, ask. " He compared the issue to watering his lawn. I place a sprinkler on my lawn and a little bit of water gets on my neighbor's lawn, and I don't mind. But, should my neighbor move my sprinkler closer to his lawn so that he gets more water without asking me first, I would be peeved.
So, the best thing for a person to do is to simply ask first. sheesh. Whatever happened to common courtesy and respect for our neighbor? Now we have to find a law that tells us that we have to ask for and get permission, when back in the olden days, it would have been considered the right thing to do- the only thing to do- without debate.
Here is a compilation of laws in the states.
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/lis/CIP/hacklaw.htm
"Unauthorized access" entails approaching, trespassing within, communicating with, storing data in, retrieving data from, or otherwise intercepting and changing computer resources without consent. These laws relate to either or both, or any other actions that interfere with computers, systems, programs or networks.
Basically, as I always told my children (and as I'm sure you all tell your children) - if it's not yours, leave it alone. If you leave your car unlocked and the keys in the car, you are leaving it unsecured, but if someone drives your unsecured car away, it is car theft. Your insurance company and the police will be unhappy with you and will remind you that you should have secured your car, but the person who took advantage of your unsecured car will be charged with car theft. We had a lengthy discussion about people who take grapes or other fruit from the display in the grocery store and eat it without paying for it, and as I recall, every poster agreed it was wrong and was stealing.
I fail to see the difference between using someone's WiFi network without permission and driving their car without permission, even if the network or the car is unsecured, or eating fruit from the unguarded (unsecured) supermarket display. Just because it's "invisible" doesn't change the fact that you are taking/consuming something that someone else paid for without the owner/payer's permission. In my opinion, it's wrong and it is theft of services. And, it can interfere with the payer's use of the service because it *can* slow down the payer's speed of access.
Sure, I should secure my WiFi, and lock my car. But if I don't, that doesn't excuse the actions of the thief. Ame notes it is "almost" like giving permission. "Almost" isn't the same thing as giving permission. If your kids leave their bikes on the front driveway overnight, the bikes are likely to disappear - is that "almost" like giving permission? Sure, it's stupid and careless, but it isn't giving permission - not even "almost".
I know this is ot, but I thought insurance companies did not honor claims if you left your keys in the car? Hmmm, I will see my insurance agent at the lake this weekend, might have to pick his brain about it.
I myself have never used anyones connection. I know that dh has a couple of times in the past while traveling for business pulled into a hotel parking lot and used theirs to email things back to his office.
Might have to give this more thought.....
Why do I have to make sure I have a high fence around a pool? Because someone can go in uninvited and be hurt. I have a responsibility to secure that pool. The same with a wi-fi. If you don't want someone accidentally using it - secure it. It's really easy.
As far as asking permission - most times you don't even know who the network belongs to. There is an unsecure network in my home area. I won't connect to it. I am leery of using any unsecured network.
I don't do it, but I do feel that if someone is not responsible enough to follow the basic instructions and set up a secure network, then they reap what they sow.
Ame
I don't see the big issue myself. I think it is up to the owner. If they KNOW that anyone may have access to an unsecure system, then they know it could be used. If you don't want it used, make it password protected. It's no big deal.
So if you leave money on the kitchen counter your kids would not be wrong for taking it, because it is "unsecured"?
Whatever happened to "If it's not yours, leave it alone!"?
I'm with Ginny on this one.
And everyone is talking about unsecured systems. Would one say that if the system is secured and someone still hacks into it, then it is definitely stealing? Or is the opinion here that if the owner of the system doesn't secure it enough and an unauthorized person is still able to use it it's the owner's fault for not securing it enough and therefore not stealing? Just curious.
I do think there is some merit to if it isn't yours, leave it alone. BUT, I also think that there is some personal responisbilty also. If I walk around the store and put my purse in the shopping cart seat and walk away from my cart, I am asking for trouble. It is up to me to secure my belongings. While it wouldn't be "right" for someone to walk up and take my purse, I also feel in the same breath that I am at fault for not keeping track of it. The example of a fence around a pool is perfect. We have a pool and it was required by my insurance company to have a fence around it. (it is above ground) If we didn't have the fence and a person uninvited got hurt in it, guess what...my fault and no insurance coverage. I think there is personal responsibility to safe guard your own things. Isn't that why we have firewalls and virus and all of that on our computers. In a perfect world no one would mess with something that doesn't belong to them. But that doesn't happen. I guess one of the reasons I don't feel it is a huge deal is that it really isn't an "object" it is air. If dh was going into the hotel and sneaking around and using their computers etc, I would think that was wrong. If he pulls into the parking lot and uses his own lap top than I don't know... if they know it is unsecure and they choose not to secure it, they have to know people can use it and in my eyes, must not care too much about it!!
Vicki, if I hook up to your phone line and make calls without your knowledge or permission, I am not stealing an object, but I am still stealing.
Enchens, the way the law in our state is worded, if you circumvent the security protocols on a computer or network of computers, you are guilty of hacking and are breaking the law.
So what I am asking is if the owner of the system doesn't secure it enough and an unauthorized person is still able to use it, is it or is it not stealing?
I believe that it is still stealing.
I'm adamant - it is stealing. That I don't secure something does not give you the right, morally or legally, to use it. (Well, maybe legally in Westchester. And what is "secure it enough"? Secure it enough so the average unskilled hacker can't use it, or enough so that a skilled hacker can't use it? Given that the learning curve for hackers is much faster and generally higher than non-
If you think it is OK to use something the owner doesn't secure, ask yourself what you are modeling for your children.
Vicki, if I hook up to your phone line and make calls without your knowledge or permission, I am not stealing an object, but I am still stealing.
Correct, your not stealing an object, but you are still physically hooking up to a physical object. In my example of dh sitting in a parking lot, he is not physically taking anything from anyone, it is just air.
Honestly, I do see both sides of the issue.
Like I said, I myself have never done it and I don't even have a laptop to be able to do it. Would I ever get rid of our internet and use my neighbors? No (I would never be able to figure out how to do it anyway) Do I think dh should be arrested and charged with theft because he pulled into a hotel parking lot and emailed a few things to his office? No Do I think if hotels and cafe's etc should take reasonable steps to secure their hi-fi if they are concerned about people using it? Yes Just as I have to take reasonable steps to keep unwanted people from using my pool.
If you think it is OK to use something the owner doesn't secure, ask yourself what you are modeling for your children.
Don't you think this statement is a little over the top for this subject?
I leave money on the kitchen counter all the time. My family is welcome to take it if they need it. However, they ask, because they know who to ask. It's community property in our home.
If I don't want something touched, I take steps to put it away and keep it safe.
If my child leaves a toy in the park and goes to play with something else and another child plays with that toy without asking permission, is that stealing? The child doesn't even know who the toy belongs to.
As I said, I do not use any unsecured network. I think it's not responsible. However, I do not consider my view a bad role model for my children.
It teaches them personal responsibility. If you have something that is yours, that is valuable to you, do your best to keep it secure.
As I said in my example with the swimming pool - one has to take all sorts of steps to secure a swimming pool from trespassers - people who shouldn't be there in the first place! If you do not properly safeguard your pool and a trespasser gets hurt - guess who is liable ... I have the same view of a wi-fi connection. Secure it.
I do not believe that using an unsecure network is stealing - the owner is not incurring additional charges, and is generally not being impacted except for a the possibility of a slower connection speed. As I said, I would never do it because anyone else could be hacking into that netowrk - but it's not like leaving a physical object out and having someone take it.
Oh - and fortunately I live in a place where it is legal, so I'm not really leading my children down the path of ruin and destruction  .
Ame
Oh - and fortunately I live in a place where it is legal, so I'm not really leading my children down the path of ruin and destruction .
How do you find out what is legal in your area? From everything I have been able to find online, no one can say one way or the other what is legal and what isn't!
No, *I* don't think it is over the top. Kids will always go to the extreme of what you model - over the top, if you will. How do you teach your children that if it's not yours, leave it alone - if you don't own it and don't have permission, leave it alone ... when you don't believe it yourself?
Maybe it is over the top. I have a very strong sense of meum/tuum - mine/thine. When we were on welfare and I wrote a check to the supermarket for cash, the clerk gave me $50 because that's what I usually wrote the check for and the clerk knew me - but that check was for $20, and I gave her back the $30, and boy, could I have used it. When my kids were out shopping with me and I had to use a pay phone, if I found money in the return coin cup, I always dropped it in the slot, dialed the operator, and told her the money was the phone company's, not mine. My kids always knew that if it wasn't theirs they were to leave it alone. And yes, they broke that rule, but not often, and always with consequences. And as adults, they also have very clear, strong rules about mine/thine, just as I do. I will never, ever be persuaded that because someone else is careless, I have a right to use or take what is theirs.
Wow. I didn't want this to get this heated. Sorry gals. I am going to try to not get too personal. The only reason I brought it up was because it came up in my county, and a prosecution seems to be unprecedented thus far.
There are 2 different things to consider here. My question is mostly centered around the moral aspect of piggybacking someone else's unprotected WiFi connection without their knowledge or consent. (Even though I just realized that in the title of the thread I put "Illegal?" Sorry.)
For me the legal aspect of it is beside the point. Not all laws are good ones, nor are they all morally correct. Slavery was legal at one time as well, but it most certainly wasn't moral. So to say that because it is legal one needs not worry (for whatever reason) does not necessarily make it morally right.
I do not see what difference it makes as to whether or not it is physical or airborne. It is a service that is paid for by someone else, and for anyone to take advantage of it without the payer's knowledge or permission is wrong.
(There is an interesting discussion going on at my local news station's Website on their forum about radio waves versus a physical connection, and there is so much tech speak that I am not familiar with that I can't sort it out. It made my head spin. )
Vicki, I posted a link above to the National Conference of State Legislatures, and there you will find a list of states and links to their laws.
Ginny, I am reminded of the time that I went grocery shopping and neither the cashier nor I thought about the 24-pack of Coca-Cola on the bottom rack of the cart. I took it home without paying for it and realized it when I looked at my receipt later. I went back the next day (coincidentally with ds) and told a different cashier that I had forgotten to pay for a case of pop, and I needed to pay for it then, so please add it to the order.
Maybe I should have just kept it and said, "Oh well! It's their mistake not mine"??
Do you honestly think that those of us who don't see the huge crime in this would steal groceries or cars or teach our kids to take things that belong to others? That is exactly what I meant by over the top.
Vicki, I posted a link above to the National Conference of State Legislatures, and there you will find a list of states and links to their laws.
Oops, didn't see that. Sorry! However, I can't make much sense of what it says anyway. LOL
I pay for my own internet here at home and have no intention of getting rid of it and trying to get it free someplace though! Just curious more than anything.
No, I am not assuming that you would.
But that is exactly what we mean by stealing. To us, it ISN'T any different than stealing groceries or cars.
Just because you can't see or touch a WiFi connection doesn't mean it has any less value than a case of pop or a car. It is there because someone else is paying for it with their hard earned money, and for someone to take advantage of it just because it is available and unsecured doesn't make it morally right or excuse it in any way.
I talked to my dh about this before he went to work. He agrees with those who say it's not stealing from an unsecured network. His reasoning, from what I understood, was that it wasn't stealing because the original owner of the network isn't experiencing a loss. The worst thing that would happen would be a slower network. On the other hand, when the unauthorized user encroached on personal information, then it was stealing.
BTW, it got pretty heated at our kitchen table this morning. lol
Oh dear. I am so sorry Enchens. Must be you were on the other side of the argument. 
But to rebut that argument (which I have read a lot of) I go back to my phone line example. (Or maybe you already did.) Say I plug my phone into the junction box on the side of your house and make a bunch of phone calls without your knowledge or permission. Assuming none of my calls were long distance, you would not be incurring any loss. But I would be stealing (and it is a law BTW.)
Or say that I kept that case of pop without paying for it. It could be argued that it's no big loss to the store. After all, they don't make their money on the groceries anyway, they make their money on the general merchandise. They can afford to lose the few cents they would have profited had I paid. It's no big loss to them. No big deal.
It's a matter of attitude and of character.
Don't worry Lisa. It got heated, but not ugly. It's been a while since Dh and I had an "adult" conversation.
I haven't used the phone line example yet. I'll ask him when he gets home (after he's had time to relax of course).
We're getting way off base here. Taking an item from a store, knowingly accepting wrong change, these are stealing - no two ways about it. You might be surprised, that I too, have returned to the store with an infant in tow and something under the cart that had not been scanned (and yes, I'd already buckled him into his carseat -so I had to take him out. Did I mention I also had a broken thumb?) That it was really difficult, physically, to do the right thing? Yet I did, because it would have been morally and legally wrong not to pay for the item. There have been humdreds of times when we have all been faced with a similar scenario. We follow our conscience and do what is right. Character is doing the right thing when there's nobody around to see you do it.
Let me say again, I don't use anyone else's wi-fi. I am so wired that I have email and the web pushed right to my smartphone. I pay temendous amounts of money for multiple internet connections (home, office, phone). I secure my connections. If I didn't and someone else used them, my attitude would be shame on me for not protecting myself.
Is it legal? Depends ... The fact that there are very different laws on this topic should tell us that we will never really agree on an answer - especially if "brighter" legal minds than ours can't agree.
Is it morally wrong? I think there are far greater moral dilemas that need to be addresssed before this one is even considered. As far as it being a matter of character - again, there's a lot more to consider about one's character than whether or not the person has used an unsecure internet connection without permission ... As Echen's husband argued (and Ididi ina previous post) no one is losing service or getting charged extra.
It's in the air! It's like a radio! Pay-radio, like satelite, does not allow your reciever to get it unless the reciever is authenticated by their network.
Same as wi-fi. It's in the air! If you don't want someone else to access it, then make sure all users are authenticated.
It really is a simple matter of setting up a password on your router, via the web, and giving the password only to those who you want to use your network.
It comes down to responsibility. A dog bites a person - who is responsible the "victim" whose been bitten, or the owner who failed to secure the dog? A teen trespasses into your backyard and falls drunk into your pool because you forgot to lock the gate. Who is responsible, the teen who is clearly doing something illegal or you, the property owner for failing to secure your pool?
It's the same thing with wi-fi. Everyone who has a connection has a responsibility to secure it, even with a simple password. If you leave your network unsecured, you have to know someone else is going to use it. If you know that, and still leave it unsecured, then you are giving permission.
Ame
Nothing will change the fact that the WIFI owner - the person who pays for the service - is the only person who should be using it, and anyone the subscriber gives permission to. That the subscriber doesn't secure his/her service doesn't change the fact that someone who pulls up outside that house and uses the service without permission is doing just that - using something s/he didn't pay for, without the permission of the person who pays for it. I will never believe that is right, allowable, or acceptable. That the subscriber is not harmed or is only minimally inconvenienced doesn't change the intent or action of the person who deliberately hacks into someone else's WIFI without permission.
In my opinion, blaming the WIFI user is different only in degree from blaming the homeowner who doesn't lock his doors and windows and is burglarized, or the kid who leaves his bike in the driveway and finds it gone an hour later. Yes, all of them are careless and should be more careful. But that does not excuse the person who takes or uses something s/he didn't pay for and does not have permission to take or use.
So, even if the subscriber knows that the connection will be used by others if it is not secure, the subscriber has no responsibility to secure it? That does not make sense to me.
If the subscriber knows that he or she has not taken the proper and simple steps to secure his or her network and it has the potential to be used by someone without his or her knowledge, then the subscriber is hanging out a sign that says, "Come use my network, I don't care"
I truly believe that an unsecure wi-fi nowadays leaves an invitation to use.
It's the victim thing in our society. We're all victims, no one wants to admit that they have responsibility for something. It's easier to blame the user, who may not be internet savvy and whose computer automatically logs onto an unsecure network than it is to blame the subscriber who knows his or her connection will be used.
Unsecure=Invitation=Permission. IMHO.
Ame
BTW - were we all itching for something good to debate, or what?
Ame
Ame, when I read your second to last entry, it was like listening to my dh all over again. He would agree with what you said in that particular entry. It was just kinda deja vu to see his exact opinion written. lol
Leaving money on the counter is not the same. It can only be used by one person at a time. With the wireless, I still have my own full use of the feature. It doesn't bother me to share with someone else. It only reaches so far, so it's not like I'm sending it out to thousands of people. And if they didn't ask, then I just consider them the lucky ones.
It is more like a neighbor benefiting from the other neighbors brand new fence that that neighbor just spent a fortune on. It is not considered stealing if I don't put up my own fence next to theirs. Not only did that neighbor pay for the fence, but the labor and the permitting. Plus they are responsible if the fence needs repairs. And yet, I still have a fence around one part of my yard.
Ame, you said exactly what I feel.
"It's the same thing with wi-fi. Everyone who has a connection has a responsibility to secure it, even with a simple password. If you leave your network unsecured, you have to know someone else is going to use it. If you know that, and still leave it unsecured, then you are giving permission."
We have wifi and if we don't want to share, then it is our job to password protect it. It is that simple. If we don't then we are automatically giving permission for open use.
DH thinks people should just go into a coffeeshop, with their laptop, if they need the internet. We have at least 3-4 coffeeshops in town, that all have free wireless internet! LOL! He thinks it would be stealing, if someone were using our wireless connection parked out in front of our house. We have ours locked down, though.
I have a water spicket and hose on the outside of my houe. If a neighbor were walking the neighborhood and got hot and thirsty, I would not mind if they used it to cool down or get a drink. But I would mind if they decided to pull up in my driveway and wash their car.
Same thing. My computer is protected. But if it weren't and someone got onto my network to try out a new laptop and hadn't gotten service yet, I would be okay with that for a few days. But I would mind if I paid for the service and they piggybacked permanently off me.
Ditto, Debbie. I don't think any of us would feel the need to secure our source of water. I would be quite peeved if someone took advantage as stated in her response. For me it comes down to consideration and respect of others, and simple good manners. Our neighbors have one of those portable basketball hoops near the curb of their house. Dd is fascinated with basketball, and once asked if she could throw her ball through the hoop. Our neighbors weren't home. My response was, "Let's wait until they are home and ask for permission." I mean, if we as a society must secure all of our belongings in an effort to protect them, I feel this is very sad. What's happening? Is respect for others and their belongings no longer expected? My dd also loves to pet other's dogs when we are in public. I've taught her to always ask first. Many people make a point of thanking her for asking, and almost seem surprised.
On principle alone, I don't feel it's right to use something that I didn't pay for, and doesn't belong to me.
|
Members
