Weekly Edition
Return to the Announcements page
| |||||||||||||
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement
The Electronic Frontier Foundation's Peter Eckersley has put out a call to action for open wireless networks. It goes beyond just advocating for more open access points and sane laws to protect people who open their APs by looking at potential technical fixes for problems like bandwidth hogging. "The best solution to this problem is to have WiFi routers which make it very easy to share a certain amount of bandwidth via an open network, but simultaneously provide an encrypted WPA2 network that gets priority over the open network. Some modern routers already support multiple networks like this, but we need a very simple, single-click or default setting to get the prioritization right."
(Log in to post comments)
First we need to eliminate "child porn" laws Posted Apr 28, 2011 17:35 UTC (Thu) by zaitcev (guest, #761) [Link]
The technicalities of bandwidth and QoS can come later.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 17:55 UTC (Thu) by rvfh (subscriber, #31018) [Link]
The French internet/telephony/television operator Free has done that for years with their FreeWifi service. If you opt-in, you become a provider and can use other people's AP as well (provided they also opted in.)
Last time I tried I was at 30 kB/s when my line speed was ten times that.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 23:20 UTC (Thu) by feth (guest, #69696) [Link]
It's only open to other subscribers of "Free", and they have to authenticate with a login / password. I bet the Internet session is then "secured" with the magic MAC address password.
Note to foreign readers: in France, all major ISP provide illimited Internet access up to something like 100kB/s up, 1.5MB/s down for something like 30 per month (44.46$), so we don't care about passers by downloading full seasons of their favorite series, we just care that they don't eat the whole bandwith.
In the unlikely event of the EFF call being heard, and a large part of French people understanding that their interest is to cooperate and provide free and anonymous wifi access wherever possible, the prosecution by RIAA and their likes would simply collapse.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 30, 2011 16:09 UTC (Sat) by pkern (subscriber, #32883) [Link] Note to foreign readers: in France, [ ] there are remarkably few really open wifi networks in this country, and I think this is because our politicians are trying and enforcing the equation "IP address"=="person that I can sue".Same here in Germany, sadly. And the law has the concept of punishing people who pave the way for others to break the law ("Störerhaftung"). So friendly folks offering free wifi access can get into trouble with law enforcement quite easily if someone abuses it. You have to keep your APs "reasonably" secure in order to get the case dropped. (I.e. if you secured it reasonably at the time it was abused and you can prove that it wasn't you.) If you offer a free net you're basically helping illegal file sharing and thus you can be sued for damages as well. A real pity.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 18:44 UTC (Thu) by yokem_55 (subscriber, #10498) [Link] but simultaneously provide an encrypted WPA2 network that gets priority over the open network. Some modern routers already support multiple networks like this, but we need a very simple, single-click or default setting to get the prioritization right.I would also want to make sure that the users of this network on a different subnet, and have their internet access severely port limited. Also requiring them to log into a radius server with a cell number and a password delivered to them by sms would be nice way to have some kind of info about who is using my pipe....
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 19:43 UTC (Thu) by dkg (subscriber, #55359) [Link] yokem_55 wrote:have their internet access severely port limited.Why? What benefit does limiting by port give you? The more we push for this kind of brittle/senseless port-based firewalling, the more we push for everything to move to TLS-over-TCP-port-443. This is a waste, since many network communications do not need the specific guarantees either TLS or TCP provide, and would perform better without the extra layers underneath. Please don't advocate for port-limiting without having a concrete rationale for it. Also requiring them to log into a radius server with a cell number and a password delivered to them by sms would be nice way to have some kind of info about who is using my pipe....Somehow i doubt that global opt-in centralized digital surveillance is the goal of this EFF initiative.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 20:49 UTC (Thu) by yokem_55 (subscriber, #10498) [Link] the more we push for everything to move to TLS-over-TCP-port-443.Which, for the time being will require people to have some knowledge of networking if they want to BT Hollywood's latest pile of poo over my network and keep dumb neighbor downstairs from going nuts with my pipe. Somehow i doubt that global opt-in centralized digital surveillance is the goal of this EFF initiative.Look, if I'm going to allow random people to use my network to access my bandwidth capped pipe, that I pay for, I'd like at least a nominal identifying bit of information. Typically, when I invite guests into my home, I like to have some knowledge of who they are and this is no different.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 21:09 UTC (Thu) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link]
> Typically, when I invite guests into my home, I like to have some knowledge of who they are and this is no different.
I don't think that is what the EFF is promoting. More like giving away the food you haven't eat, instead of letting it rot in your fridge. I hope you don't treat your guests like that... ;-)
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 21:31 UTC (Thu) by yokem_55 (subscriber, #10498) [Link]
Your analogy to food doesn't quite work. If I had a BBQ party on my front lawn and let all comer's have what they want and then there would be lots of people less hungry than before, but if I run out of food, I run out of food and everyone goes home. If I were to give away my capped internet connection, my ISP will keep the bits coming even when neighbor dude pushes me over my cap while watching a Dexter marathon on Netflix and I start racking up extra charges.
With a phone number, I can at least give my neighbor a call and say, hey, I'd really appreciate it if you helped me out this bill you helped rack up. Or if the FBI knocks on my door and wants to know why I'm downloading CP, I have a legitimate means of saying no, it wasn't me, it was whoever has access to SMS's delivered to this phone number, go ask them.
In the meantime, le resistance operative from across town can park outside and login with a burner cell number, fire up tor over port 443 and plan their subversive activities with me being none the wiser or liable for it....
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 22:14 UTC (Thu) by martinfick (subscriber, #4455) [Link]
> With a phone number, I can at least give my neighbor a call and say, hey, I'd really appreciate it if you helped me out this bill you helped rack up.
If you go over you limits, then you are no longer giving out unused food, you are purchasing food for others. Again, not at all what the EFF is promoting.
> Or if the FBI knocks on my door and wants to know why I'm downloading CP, I have a legitimate means of saying no, it wasn't me, it was whoever has access to SMS's delivered to this phone number, go ask them.
If you have records and they don't indemnify you, you are likely screwed more screwed than if you have records. With no records, its an easier (and time honored and accepted) defense: "anybody else could have done it".
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 6:45 UTC (Fri) by ekj (guest, #1524) [Link]
But the EFF ain't recommending letting "all comers have what they want", they're recommending sharing a small fraction of the available bandwith, with priority for the non-shared part so that if there's congestion the freeriders get nothing.
If you really want it in food-analogy, it'd be the same thing as suggesting that random passerbys be allowed to eat any leftover food.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 21:20 UTC (Thu) by dkg (subscriber, #55359) [Link] yokem_55 wrote:[I want to] keep [my] dumb neighbor downstairs from going nuts with my pipe.I sympathize with this goal, but the proper solution to this is bandwidth shaping/limiting, not port restrictions. That way, even if your neighbor downstairs is a network engineer, they can't go nuts with the pipe you're sharing with them. Port-based restrictions don't solve the problem you're looking to address, and they introduce a host of other problems.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 8:28 UTC (Fri) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link]
> What benefit does limiting by port give you?
The ability to selectively block brain-dead and insecure protocols like SMTP or Samba. This is admittedly a workaround, but a very effective one.
http://guide.netfronts.com/Email/Port_25_Blocked_for_SMTP...
Now granted, the current trend of overly restrictive firewalls everywhere, misconfigured by people who do not have a clue, is quite ridiculous.
There is the "ideal Internet" on one hand, and the real Internet on the other hand. The real one is littered with spam, botnets, copyright violations and credit card fraud, but the EFF could still be living in the former.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 19:53 UTC (Thu) by rillian (subscriber, #11344) [Link]
So, I've generally left my wifi open as a matter of hospitality, and relied on end-to-end encryption to protect my own traffic. I understand that manufacturer defaults have changed, which is why I'm the only open network I can see from my apartment, but I'm surprised to hear technical people relying on wifi encryption.
Is wpa actually trustworthy these days, such that it's safe to e.g. run nfs or smb over it? It would be nice to be able to do that.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 21:10 UTC (Thu) by smoogen (subscriber, #97) [Link]
With my old Netgear54g running various Os's.. I have had no more difficulty with SMB/NFS via wireless on an open network or a WPA2 one. Wireless in either case works like a hub network. It is either going to work great or it is going to go horribly. Most of the time it was horrible whether or not the network was encrypted so I didn't do it. Trying to do it on newer hardware has not shown any improvement. It works fine on a reasonably well behaved heterogeneous network, but make things funky and its all over the place.
WPA2 is considered pretty secure Posted Apr 29, 2011 7:36 UTC (Fri) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] If you setup WPA2-based access correctly then it's pretty airtight. It's still more complex then, for example, ssh so there are more attack vectors. Wikipedia contains pretty good overview (well, it's pretty good at the moment - you can never be too sure when vandals will corrupt Wikipedia article).
Suggestion: use "public" in the network name Posted Apr 28, 2011 19:57 UTC (Thu) by david.a.wheeler (guest, #72896) [Link]
I think that there should be a cultural convention that if a network is not encrypted, it's intended for public use. MANY people already believe that. Unfortunately, some people don't agree with that convention. So to make sure it's clear, I suggest using "public" somewhere in the network name, to make it clear that the access point is intended for public use.
If EFF is really serious... Posted Apr 29, 2011 8:13 UTC (Fri) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] It should just put some kind of subdomain (for example openwifi.eff.org) with 26 mirrors (called, for example, a.openwifi.eff.org, b.openwifi.eff.org, etc). On this subdomain it should keep some information about OpenWiFi project AND the open network should be named accordingly (for example "x.openwifi.eff.org"). Sure, at first people will not trust such points because they expect something like "public-access", but people are fast learners - and such direct link to a single page will provide MUCH better court protection (in case it'll ever be needed). Of course that means EFF should be ready to help people who'll be in hot water when they'll open "EFF-public access point". P.S. It must be subdomain because full URL is technically valid SSID but many implementations don't like "/" character in the name.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 21:32 UTC (Thu) by fest3er (guest, #60379) [Link]
I pondered this a while ago. My thought was that wireless routers should have a provision to allow three or four VoIP users to connect without needing authentication, with firewall rules that restrict access to only VoIP and only to the internet. I believe voice communication should be, and can be, free today. If the infrastructure can be set up, I would think that most people would be willing to make some of their bandwidth available for voice. If you want to surf the web or send pictures and videos to family and friends, pay for the bandwidth. But until high bitrate, symmetric internet links are commonly available, there just isn't enough bandwidth available on a typical home link to make it freely available for other than low-bitrate voice communications.
As to WAP and encryption, I do not trust wireless encryption or password-based authentication; VPNs based on pre-shared certificates are fairly secure, provided they use modern encryption. I do not allow wireless on any wired LAN I maintain that does, or may, contain sensitive information. I always segregate wireless from wired with a decent firewall and require VPN from wireless or the internet to access the protected LAN. Even at home.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 21:41 UTC (Thu) by lutchann (subscriber, #8872) [Link]
This is an insane proposal. Let's say somebody uses your open network to share a bunch of copyrighted songs. The RIAA sends you one of their customary "Send us $3000 to settle or we'll sue you for copyright infringement" letters. (They still do that, right?) Your options are (a) pay a lot more than $3000 in legal fees to go to court and prove it wasn't you (and yes, the burden of proof would be on you), or (b) settle for $3000. Why would anybody risk this?
The situation is worse if somebody uses your connection to share child porn. The police will break down your door and confiscate all your computer equipment, cell phones, storage, etc, and not return it for months until they're convinced it wasn't you. And you might have to hang out in jail in the mean time.
This is spectacularly irresponsible advice from the EFF. I hope nobody listens to them.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 21:56 UTC (Thu) by merge (subscriber, #65339) [Link]
People run Tor exit nodes. They thankfully do. It should be easy to see how uncomparably little these issues are here. I think the question is only if you want to open up because if you do, you'd just have a little talk with a lawyer bout that stuff and see what you can do.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 22:29 UTC (Thu) by janfrode (subscriber, #244) [Link]
I ran a Tor exit node on my home network for a while -- until I started getting into problems accessing sites such as google.com (I think I had to go trough a capcha to search in the end), and started getting blocked from various sites. Running a Tor exit node isn´t without issues..
https://blog.torproject.org/blog/tips-running-exit-node-m...
But my wifi has always been completely open -- and will stay that way. Helpes me not get confused into thinking that the wifi network is secure, and run encrypted VPN solutions for what I want to keep private.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 23:06 UTC (Thu) by lutchann (subscriber, #8872) [Link]
Funny you should use that comparison. Some time ago one of my friends ran a Tor exit node. He promptly shut it down after he ran a packet sniffer and was horrified to find out that 99.9% of the traffic leaving his system was blog spam, vulnerability scanning, attempted credit card fraud, etc.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 17:43 UTC (Fri) by AndreE (subscriber, #60148) [Link]
You know what's really funny? How stupid your friend is for exposing himself to a host of potential legal complications by viewing the exiting data
Oh, and I guess spam and network abuse didn't exist before 2003.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 30, 2011 9:05 UTC (Sat) by niner (subscriber, #26151) [Link]
While this may be surprising at first, it really shouldn't be. Your friend just had a chance to glimpse into what's going over public networks. Ridiculous amounts of bandwith and server resources are wasted because of automated spam, break in attempts, fraud and others. According to your friend we should simply shut down the internet and write it off as a bad idea.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 30, 2011 15:56 UTC (Sat) by lutchann (subscriber, #8872) [Link]
No, my friend shut down his Tor node because he didn't want that traffic to be attributed to him. It was effectively lowering the reputation of his IP address, and he was worried that the police might come knocking on his door asking about stolen credit cards.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 22:39 UTC (Thu) by HenrikH (guest, #31152) [Link]
And then imagine all the troubles you are in if this happened on your "secure" WiFi.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 23:01 UTC (Thu) by lutchann (subscriber, #8872) [Link]
Or if you had no WLAN at all, but you happened to run a random .exe that promised dancing kittens. But that's irrelevant to my argument. My complaint is that the EFF is giving out advice that flies in the face of commonly-accepted security principles, while waving aside the well-known risks of doing so.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 28, 2011 23:59 UTC (Thu) by droundy (subscriber, #4559) [Link]
To quote the article:
"If you run an open wireless network, you may be able to receive significant legal protection from Section 230 of the CDA (against civil and state criminal liability for what others publish through the service) and Section 512 of the DMCA (against copyright claims based on what others use the service for). While these protections are not complete, EFF regularly engages in impact litigation to help ensure that these laws offer as strong protection to network operators as possible."
I'd say that the EFF makes it pretty clear that you aren't completely safe from legal harm due to opening your wireless network. But they are a political group, and one of the stated goals of the Open Wireless Movement they're aiming to create is to make it legally safe.
I happen to agree with EFF on this one. I grant that I could be attacked as a result of leaving my wireless network open, but am not sufficiently cynical as to believe that there is no hope for justice in my country. To live my life fearing to do things that are legal and generous for fear of unjust prosecution seems pretty cowardly to me. If the RIAA come after me, I'll get help from the EFF (or some other non-profit) and bring in the press and hope to make our country better.
(Sorry for the rant...)
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 0:29 UTC (Fri) by lutchann (subscriber, #8872) [Link]
> To live my life fearing to do things that are legal and generous for fear of unjust prosecution seems pretty cowardly to me.
I guess, having once been charged with a crime I didn't commit, that I'm more cynical than most. Regardless of whether you're on the right side of the law, your entire life changes when the cops show up with a warrant.
What do you think it would do to your career if every prospective employer could Google up news stories about how you were arrested for, say, possession and distribution of child pornography?
It's not fair, but this is the world we live in. Why would anyone go courting that kind of trouble? More importantly, why would the EFF tell their supporters to put themselves at that kind of risk?
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 0:54 UTC (Fri) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link]
42 USC 1983.
Look it up.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 0:56 UTC (Fri) by lutchann (subscriber, #8872) [Link]
Wow, you have no idea how the real world works, do you?
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 6:55 UTC (Fri) by ekj (guest, #1524) [Link]
I'm not sure what you're advocating really.
It sure sounds as if you're saying the best thing to do is to live your life in fear, not merely of what happens to you, but additionally of what *might* happen to you.
Should I also give up contributing to OSS since doing so -may- subject me to patent-litigations ?
Should we refrain from publicly stating unpopular opinions ?
How much should we let fear dictate our lives - rather than trying to do what it *right* ?
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 14:38 UTC (Fri) by lutchann (subscriber, #8872) [Link]
> It sure sounds as if you're saying the best thing to do is to live your life in fear, not merely of what happens to you, but additionally of what *might* happen to you.
We make risk/reward trade-offs every day. In this case, the small risk that I might get arrested for, say, credit card fraud outweighs the basically non-existent reward for running a public WiFi network.
> Should I also give up contributing to OSS since doing so -may- subject me to patent-litigations ?
If it starts to become common for deep-pocketed patent holders to bring patent infringement lawsuits against individual OSS contributors, then yeah, it might be time to find a new hobby. Thankfully such lawsuits are extremely unusual and limited to specific applications (MPEG, for example), so the risk is virtually nil.
> Should we refrain from publicly stating unpopular opinions ?
It depends on how important it is to you to air those opinions, and the consequences for having those opinions be known. Again, risk versus reward. In China, you might not be too outspoken about your true feelings for the government if you're a young professional working your way up the corporate ladder.
> How much should we let fear dictate our lives - rather than trying to do what it *right* ?
Maybe our disconnect here is that I don't see public WiFi access as an inalienable human right.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 15:27 UTC (Fri) by droundy (subscriber, #4559) [Link]
>> It sure sounds as if you're saying the best thing to do is to live your life in fear, not merely of what happens to you, but additionally of what *might* happen to you.
> We make risk/reward trade-offs every day. In this case, the small risk that I might get arrested for, say, credit card fraud outweighs the basically non-existent reward for running a public WiFi network.
I guess it comes down to whether you believe in altruism. If you don't, then you don't want to be generous to others with no expectation of return. Many of us do want to consider the common good, and for us, there is some reward for being generous to others. And it certainly makes sense for non-profit organizations to lobby for altruism.
>> How much should we let fear dictate our lives - rather than trying to do what it *right* ?
> Maybe our disconnect here is that I don't see public WiFi access as an inalienable human right.
The right involved here isn't the right of other people to use my network. They certainly have no such right. It's my right to allow other people to use my network that is at issue. And my belief that it is right to be generous to others, and my gratitude when others are generous.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 2:48 UTC (Fri) by bdw (guest, #16047) [Link]
§ 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officers judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 3:01 UTC (Fri) by bdw (guest, #16047) [Link] And to make matters even worse, the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision in Connick v Thompson confirmed and even strengthened prosecutorial immunity, so it's going to be impossible to go after them for wrongful arrest. I have to agree, I don't think the EFF really thought this through.
He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither - it's simple as that. Posted Apr 29, 2011 8:02 UTC (Fri) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] More importantly, why would the EFF tell their supporters to put themselves at that kind of risk? Without risk there are no gain. And the situation here is kind-of-symmetric: if RIAA sues you and demands $3000 to settle then it's one thing (and indeed it may be ruinous for you career), but if it'll sue dozens of people who are opening EFF-public WiFi access points - there will be sizable backlash and reaction will be quite different. The probability that you'll open WiFi and then RIAA will sue you and you alone (so EFF will not be able to raise very loud and public stink in press) is so low it's basically not worth contemplating. In fact open WiFi may even protect you medium-term: RIAA regularly does mistakes anyway, but if it'll be widely-known fact that there are thousands (and hopefully in time millions) of free access points then this defence will be considered more and more valid in court. At some point RIAA will need to change tactic. If number of EFF supporters will grow fast enough this point can be reached very soon.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 5:57 UTC (Fri) by job (guest, #670) [Link]
"Commonly accepted security practices?". Is the debate really that dead, or are you just being trollish? (And what would this have to do with "security"?)
RIAA-related organizations has spent quite a lot of money to encourage exactly this sort of thinking. It is a major part of their global lobbyist effort to make everyone legally responsible for the traffic on their Internet connections.
So far they haven't had as much luck as they've hoped, mainly because it flies in the face of commonly accepted judicial policies. That's why it saddens me whne people want to let them win on walk over and move on.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 14:14 UTC (Fri) by lutchann (subscriber, #8872) [Link]
> RIAA-related organizations has spent quite a lot of money to encourage exactly this sort of thinking. It is a major part of their global lobbyist effort to make everyone legally responsible for the traffic on their Internet connections.
I didn't say you would be held legally reponsible--I said you would be presumed responsible, and the burden would be on you to prove it wasn't.
The EFF is saying you can hide behind section 512, and they're probably right. But how many tens of thousands of dollars in legal expenses would it take to win a civil copyright lawsuit with that argument?
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 18:16 UTC (Fri) by martinfick (subscriber, #4455) [Link]
> The EFF is saying you can hide behind section 512, and they're probably right. But how many tens of thousands of dollars in legal expenses would it take to win a civil copyright lawsuit with that argument?
After a few cases, it won't take much. The first few cases will likely gladly be funded by the EFF. Judges will eventually throw such cases out of court on sight, and law enforcement will leave your front stoop on uttering the words "open-wifi". Perhaps we need a clear "open-wifi" logo sticker we can paste on our front doors? :)
There is a reason that this issue is coming to the forefront, the media is brining to your attention the obvious case where law enforcement has made the IP == person assumption incorrectly.
Now many are proposing that you therefor should lock dock your wifi, but the reality is that you are likely safer now with your wifi open than before! Every law enforcement officer is likely more aware of the public attention these cases are getting. They are now aware of how they clearly can no longer make the IP == person assumption. I suspect that even a good deal of prosecutors and judges are paying attention.
I certainly am less concerned now then ever, and may even decide to figure out the BW/CPU(old slow hardware) issues which stopped me from running a tor node. I may even figure out how to better isolate an openwifi from my internal network to open mine up (I have always wanted it to be open).
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 30, 2011 16:14 UTC (Sat) by lutchann (subscriber, #8872) [Link]
> Judges will eventually throw such cases out of court on sight, and law enforcement will leave your front stoop on uttering the words "open-wifi". Perhaps we need a clear "open-wifi" logo sticker we can paste on our front doors?
Cool, if I ever decide to get into credit card fraud or child porn, the first thing I'll do is slap an "open wifi" sticker on my front door.
It's a pipe dream to think that having open wifi will give residential customers a "get out of court free" card. In fact, I'm worried that testing this theory could result in legal precedent that effectively extends CALEA intercept requirements to WiFi networks in public areas like coffee shops.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 22:32 UTC (Fri) by linuxrocks123 (guest, #34648) [Link]
> and yes, the burden of proof would be on you
I believe that is incorrect. As the RIAA is suing you, that organization would bear the burden of proving that you committed an infringement. They would have to prove there was a 50%+epsilon chance that you committed the alleged infringement. Only if you raise an affirmative defense such as fair use would you bear a burden of proving a 50%+epsilon chance your activity was (for instance) fair use. I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
---linuxrocks123
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 8:08 UTC (Fri) by stigge (subscriber, #14682) [Link]
The Movement in Germany and other countries is "Freifunk", see http://start.freifunk.net/ - including Free firmware based on OpenWRT to be deployed in compatible devices, and meshing protocols etc.
Have fun!
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 15:31 UTC (Fri) by metamorf (guest, #74608) [Link]
I think the big problem in WiFi security actually lies on the other end. How can I as a user be sure that the open AP I'm using isn't malicious? It is technically trivial to create a honeypot WiFi AP where you can mess with the data passing through any way you like. From just playing with the DNS to redirect traffic trying to trick casual users unaware of security into divulging login credentials, to setting up sophisticated SSL man-in-the-middle attacks that few could detect.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted Apr 29, 2011 16:46 UTC (Fri) by dkg (subscriber, #55359) [Link] Indeed, this is true of any network, including your own connection through your ISP.The network is potentially hostile. You need to make sure your software assumes that, whether you're using open WiFi or not. If we can successfully foster a culture of permissive wireless network access (as the EFF is advocating), this will not change the fact that people need to "drive defensively" on the public network.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted May 2, 2011 4:33 UTC (Mon) by njs (guest, #40338) [Link]
> How can I as a user be sure that the open AP I'm using isn't malicious?
The answer is that when you connect to an unencrypted wifi, the first thing you do is use it to connect to a VPN hosted somewhere you trust.
It'd be really nice if NetworkManager could do this automatically.
EFF: Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement Posted May 1, 2011 11:55 UTC (Sun) by dps (subscriber, #5725) [Link]
I think I can see both sides of this:
1. You password protected your WiFi therefore you presumably at very least actively allowed downloading that kiddie porn.
2. You failed to protect your AP and are not a commercial carrier, so the laws that protect them don't apply to you. Even if this not true it would probably cost you time and money to prove that.
Disclaimer: I personally have no interest in kiddie porn and would not seek to defend anybody else's illegal downloading of it.
I personally prefer wired networking because it is more secure, more reliable and faster. I would turn off the wireless feature of my ADSL modem if there was an easy way of doing that.
|
|||||||||||||