Two arrested for wifi 'leeching'
Posted 23 April 2007 at 9:07AM by Simon Dickson in Internet security
Ever been tempted to borrow someone else's wifi signal? No, of course you haven't, because that would be illegal... as two people in Worcestershire discovered recently. IT law website OUT-LAW reports that a man and a woman were arrested in two separate incidents in Redditch, receiving cautions for dishonestly obtaining electronic communications services with intent to avoid payment. The 2003 Communications Act allows for a possible five year prison term in the worst cases.
'Without the necessary protection, your neighbours or people in the road outside may be able to connect to your network,' Officer Tony Humphreys of West Mercia Police reminds OUT-LAW readers. 'This might slow down your internet service, or more importantly, your internet connection could be used for unlawful purposes.'
For a lot of small businesses, a wifi computer network is a very smart move: £100 will buy you a base station able to operate at a blazingly fast speed, many times faster than your broadband connection, with the necessary aerials for each PC costing maybe £20. (And of course, most new laptops will have these built-in.) In fact, there aren't many situations these days where it's really worth laying down cables: too costly, too time-consuming, too inflexible.
But always remember to ensure you apply at least a basic level of security. Sadly it isn't something you can take for granted: some manufacturers are so keen for their kit to work 'out of the box', that they don't enable any protection by default. Look for an option labelled 'WPA-PSK' on your hardware configuration screen: it's basically just a password-based encryption system, but it should be good enough for most small-scale situations.
Tags: office network, security, wifi, wireless, wpa-psk
New feature: Rate this post!
Average rating: 3.7/5
Comments
2. At April 24, 2007 11:40 AM, Ian Wallace wrote:
Even basic encryption is a requirement these days, not only to protect your data but also your infrastructure bandwidth. Manufactures should at least have a page that, the first time you login to your router, requires you to enter a password of your choosing which it assigns to wifi - but thats a direction the industry has to take as a whole.
What else is worrying these days is more and more portable and personal mobile devices are wifi enabled and auto-search for accessible wifi points - which opens up the scope that the consumer might not even know they are using an illegal connection, especially when many pubs and cafes offer free wifi access, most often not encrypted.
Maybe its time for a common name and identifier to be given to all free wifi spots along the lines of freeconnect (identifier) thereby setting guide lines for mobile devices that auto-search.
3. At April 24, 2007 3:49 PM, Liam O'Reilly wrote:
Basic encryption out of the box would make a lot of sense, a lot of new users are unaware of the dangers of an open wireless link.
4. At April 24, 2007 9:04 PM, Ruud van Zundert wrote:
I do not agree that these 2 individuals should have been arrested. If people have not bothered to deny access to their system, then that is their fault, not the surfers making use of the airways. Ignorance of security is, however, not bliss, and I totally agree with all respondents that WEP/WPA security should be set up.
Getting back to the arrest, to suggest that these people tried to 'get away without paying' is a weak argument - what about these places that do offer free access? Terrible! - these free-loaders should be locked up - and there's provision for a 5 year jail term.
Post a comment
As 14 days have passed, comments are now closed for this entry.
1. At April 23, 2007 10:19 AM, Gill Mackie wrote: