This happened to me once, but with an entirely different conclusion. I was using an unsecured wifi access point in a very nice area of San Marino late into the night (more like the wee morning hours). I also drive an SUV (ominously black, with the back cleared out so I can use it as my mobile "office"). Apparently, the local Neighborhood Watch got creeped out that an unfamiliar vehicle was camped out on the curbside, possibly scoping out one of the many multi-million-dollar homes on the block, because after a few hours, a police officer knocked on my window. I exited out the back of my vehicle, instead of the driver's side, which made him suspicious. The conversation went something like this:
ME: Hi, Officer, what can I help you with this evening? OFFICER: Is this your vehicle? ME: (Registration and DL in hand, and in my most annoyingly cheerful Nelson Flanders impression) Abso-Diddly-Lutely. (Hands over License and Registration) OFFICER: Hold on. (Returns to his vehicle, probably to make sure my car isn't stolen, or I'm not a registered sex offender, or something like that. Comes back.) What are you doing here? ME: Work. OFFICER: Work? At 2:30 AM? ME: Work. OFFICER: (Looks at my laptop screen and sees Mapquest open in a browser.) Are you stealing someone else's internet connection? ME: Actually, Officer, I'm *using* it, although in the strictest sense, it's not stealing: if the owner did not want other people using it, he could have set a WEP key, which is a password required to use the access point. Every broadband router you can buy at Fry's or Walmart has this feature, and the instructions suggest you turn it on. He's probably already sharing his internet connection with his neighbors already. OFFICER: But he hasn't expressly given you permission. (Turns dark) That puts you in violation of Breaking and Entering. ME: Well, that's why he would give the WEP password to your neighbors, the ones whom you *want* to use the connection. Look, Officer, you have my driver's license, you know where I live. I run an open access point from my house - I don't advertise it, and I don't put any signs out, but it's free and open and I let anyone who finds it do whatever they want on the internet. I live next to a highschool, and I see plenty of kids sit on my lawn with their laptops before and after school. The parents who come with them sometimes use my connection as well. OFFICER: One of the homeowners is getting nervous with you sitting out here, tapping away at your computer. That's why I was called out. ME: I'm the homeowner of the property on my Driver's License, too, Sir. If you like, ticket me, or take me the station to have me booked on whatever charge you see fit... because I will use that as a precedent to do the same to the children and parents that use my open connection on a daily basis. I will also include your name and badge number when I follow after your example. The Pasadena Star and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune will probably have a field day when I attempt to get three dozen parents and kids in trouble for using *my* open wireless connection, but I'll be sure to apply proper credit to the San Marino Police Department when I do. OFFICER: (Steps back, and has a quick conversation over his radio.) ME: (Shouting over to Officer's direction.) Tell them that I'm lost and I've stopped to consult Mapquest before I go on my merry way! Tell them that you've told me how to get back onto the freeway! OFFICER: (scowls.) Are you leaving? ME: Yesiree. OFFICER: (Hands back DL and registration.) Go. Unfortunately, this conversation did not set a precedent as to whether an open access point may be cause for "Theft of Services". If SOCALWUG is willing to vouch for me and go to press for me, I will repeat this process again, in the same spot, and escalate the issue with the next police officer until I am either sitting in a jail cell or safely back home, in order to prove a point: establishing the legality of using an open access point. I doubt the next incident, although deliberately arranged, will escalate very far. The main differences between me and the gentleman in Mike's example is: 1) I am generally unafraid of police. In fact, I occasionally look over municipally available Police and Fire Department budgets because I am concerned how my property tax dollars are being spent. 2) I do not believe that I am doing anything immoral or illegal. Benjamin Smith was "furtive", immediately impressionable as a guilty demeanor, as if he was worried that someone might notice. 3) I'm articulate and know the law. I have to be - my wife teaches Psychology and English Literature, and she constantly corrects me. Police generally don't seem to want to start a verbal argument with someone who's genuinely interested in a lengthy debate. Even at 3:00 in the morning. Solomon Kevin Chang --- Mike Outmesguine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Story on a whacked out Wi-Fi "theft of services" > arrest. We don't know the > whole story, but jeez... A felony arrest for > surfing in front of an open > network? The WLAN owner even said he left it open > on purpose, "because his > neighbors are older." > > "Police say Benjamin Smith III, 41, used his Acer > brand laptop to hack into > Dinon's wireless Internet network. The April 20 > arrest is considered the > first of its kind in Tampa Bay and among only a few > so far nationwide." > > Which begs the question: Is clicking "Connect" in > Windows XP hacking? > > Now this person using an open network while parked > in the street is being > compared to a terrorist and pedophile before we have > *any* facts. > > I'm going to keep paying $80 a month for Verizon > EVDO. Maybe I can avoid a > felony arrest for hacking an open hotspot. > > - Mike > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wi-Fi Networking News > Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 9:33 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Wi-Fi Net News] Yikes, That Guy Might Be > Using Your Wi-Fi! > > By Glenn Fleishman > Special to Wi-Fi Networking News > Permanently archived item > <http://wifinetnews.com/archives/005481.html> > > > [1] Sort of hilarious over the top article about a > fellow caught using > someone else's Wi-Fi network furtively: The SUV > driver apparently can afford > a big old car but not a DSL or cable connection, > which suggests nefarious > activity. He was arrested under a law for > unauthorized access to a computer > network, a third-degree felony. Because the fellow > was a) parked outside > someone's home not just using a neighbor's leaky > service, b) did it at 11 pm > and c) was furtive, it's possible that he was > engaged in untoward activity, > but neither he nor prosecutors are talking. > > The problem with an arrest like this, of course, is > that what is the value > of the theft? 15 cents? Who is the victim--the ISP > or the subscriber? It's a > lot of money spent to prosecute a problem that can > be dealt with by turning > on security. If someone bothers to break through WEP > for a home network, > well, that crosses the line for sure. But this is > just a strange case, > reminiscent of the wrong-way driving, pantless > Canadian, early morning > kiddie-porn Wi-Fi signal thief. > > And one point of view was missing: for ISPs that > don't care if you share, > this isn't a crime or a problem. The monolithic ISP > view is always > represented by companies that think sharing is > stealing. Speakeasy Networks > is apparently by my research the only ISP of any > scale that encourages > sharing. I asked the CEO about this the other day at > their pre-WiMax launch, > and he confirmed it: they don't monitor, they don't > care. They're selling > you a pipe and you can make lemonade for the > neighbors with the signal that > comes out. > > > URLs referenced: > [1] > <http://www.sptimes.com/2005/07/04/State/Wi_Fi_cloaks_a_new_br.shtml> > > > -- > You can reach Wi-Fi Networking News at > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Our postal > address: 115 N. 85th St., Suite 205, Seattle WA > 98103 > > >
