The NSA and CIA didn't like it?
On 11/4/2015 9:29 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
Whatever happened with 802.11w? Wouldn’t this prevent the deauth hack
by cryptographically protecting management frames?
*From:* That One Guy /sarcasm <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 04, 2015 12:46 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Has FCC "gone off the rails" with latest Wi-Fi
blockingfines? | ITworld
Technically, its not interfering with transmission, it is utilizing a
properly functional transmission to manipulate ones surroundings. Im
not defending it, when I was doing it with my fortigate to my
neighbors, it was a dick move. But at no point did it impact ones
ability to receive transmissions, it simply changes the transmitter.
The reason that concerns me is with the demand for free and open
internet and our litigious society, it creates a pathway for lawsuits
down the line against lawfully operating boundary control operators
to me, this would be more along the lines of "hacking" since
technically it is gaining unauthorized access to a system and altering
it with malicious intent. What government agency actually handles that?
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Doing anything to interfere is jamming. Seems simple to me.
*From:* Daniel White <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 04, 2015 6:15 AM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Has FCC "gone off the rails" with latest
Wi-Fi blockingfines? | ITworld
And I don’t think Commissioner Pai or O’Rielly disagree with you.
They want clear FCC regulations on the matter.
I agree with them. Jamming by definition is the increase of RF
energy to overcome the lawful transmission of someone else… and
even then… in Part 15… you have no recourse. I don’t think the
FCC is exceeding its authority, but I do think the FCC needs to
define the authority.
Section 47 U.S.C. § 333 of the Telecommunications Act of 1933 is
where the FCC gets its authority on the matter (according to the
FCC website)… here is the text:
/No person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause
interference to any radio communications of any station licensed
or authorized by or under this chapter or operated by the United
States Government./
Interference in regards to radio communications has always been
defined as RF energy. The code was written long before something
like de-auth was possible.
The FCC should make a clear definition of what jamming is… what is
there to argue with there?
Thank you,
Daniel White
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>__
Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590 <tel:%2B1%20%28303%29%20746-3590>
Skype: danieldwhite
Social: LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/danielwhite84>:
Twitter <https://twitter.com/DanielWhite84>
*From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Ty Featherling
*Sent:* Tuesday, November 3, 2015 8:35 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Has FCC "gone off the rails" with latest
Wi-Fi blocking fines? | ITworld
+1 that's what they are supposed to do.
-Ty
On Nov 3, 2015 8:32 PM, "Carl Peterson"
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
IMHO, the FCC is doing exactly what they should be doing in
these cases. The convention center APs would send spoofed
deauth to anything they heard, including devices well outside
the convention center. Deliberate malicious interference with
another's use of shared spectrum.
On Nov 3, 2015, at 8:13 PM, Jaime Solorza
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
http://www.itworld.com/article/3000979/mobile/has-fcc-gone-off-the-rails-with-latest-wi-fi-blocking-fines.html?google_editors_picks=true
Jaime Solorza
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Avast logo <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
--
If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your
team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
