Comsearch.
Daniel White (303) 746-3590 From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby via Af Sent: Monday, October 6, 2014 9:47 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] MARRIOTT TO PAY $600, 000 TO RESOLVE WIFI-BLOCKING INVESTIGATION Tim, The lists doesn't show sender email addresses. Are you with the FCC? Randy On 10/3/2014 11:45 AM, Hardy, Tim via Af wrote: More information about impermissible Wi-Fi blocking or jamming practices is available at www.fcc.gov/jammers <http://www.fcc.gov/jammers> . If you would like additional information about Wi-Fi blocking, you may email us at [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> . From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett via Af Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 1:42 PM To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] MARRIOTT TO PAY $600, 000 TO RESOLVE WIFI-BLOCKING INVESTIGATION being a hotel might be the thing that made it a problem. If an enterprise or hospital does it as a security measure, I have trouble believing that's illegal. Marriott are dicks, but here's an interesting question... broad spectrum 2.4 or 5 GHz jammers are illegal, yeah. But is an 802.11-compliant device issuing deauth requests illegal, if part-15 devices are supposed to accept any unwanted interference and there's no recourse? Provided that the device issuing deauth requests is operating within spec for EIRP, channel plan, etc. On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Hardy, Tim via Af <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-329743A1.docx
