"WaIIy" wrote in message
...

Ironic that you're posing this in Google Plus, considering the thousands
of wifi networks they stole info from via "Street View".

Did they steal info from them, or merely record their existence? I haven't
followed that story...

L8R

Skip

--

Morgan 461 #2
SV Flying Pig KI4MPC
See our galleries at www.justpickone.org/skip/gallery !
Follow us at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheFlyingPigLog
and/or http://groups.google.com/group/flyingpiglog

When a man comes to like a sea life, he is not fit to live on land.
- Dr. Samuel Johnson

On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 18:17:52 -0400, WaIIy wrote:

On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 10:35:20 -0400, "Flying Pig"
wrote:

"WaIIy" wrote in message
. ..

Ironic that you're posing this in Google Plus, considering the thousands
of wifi networks they stole info from via "Street View".

Did they steal info from them, or merely record their existence? I haven't
followed that story...

L8R

Skip

Steal

===

As always, it depends on who you talk to:

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...le-streetview/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1464047.html

http://blogs.computerworld.com/20106/google_engineer_at_center_of_street_view_wi_fi_con troversy_authored_the_groundbreaking_netstumbler_a pp

On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 09:15:00 -0400, WaIIy wrote:

On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 18:29:30 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 18:17:52 -0400, WaIIy wrote:

On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 10:35:20 -0400, "Flying Pig"
wrote:

"WaIIy" wrote in message
m...

Ironic that you're posing this in Google Plus, considering the thousands
of wifi networks they stole info from via "Street View".

Did they steal info from them, or merely record their existence? I haven't
followed that story...

L8R

Skip

Steal

===

As always, it depends on who you talk to:

They stole data. Period, no debate here.

One can't steal data via wifi snooping.
i.E. Take it, and deprive the intented user of that data..

You can copy it.. but not steal it..

In Google case... the data in question was being freely transmitted to the street at the
time they passed by.




http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...le-streetview/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1464047.html

http://blogs.computerworld.com/20106/google_engineer_at_center_of_street_view_wi_fi_con troversy_authored_the_groundbreaking_netstumbler_a pp

On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 09:15:00 -0400, WaIIy wrote:

As always, it depends on who you talk to:

They stole data. Period, no debate here.

===

I think stealing is probably the wrong word. As far as anyone knows
they did not use the data for any sort of criminal purpose. I agree
that it was wrong to collect it however, even though it was
unencrypted.

Suppose someone drives down your street and makes a log of your
address, house color, type of driveway and number of front facing
windows. Is that stealing data?

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 09:15:00 -0400, WaIIy wrote:

As always, it depends on who you talk to:

They stole data. Period, no debate here.

===

I think stealing is probably the wrong word. As far as anyone knows
they did not use the data for any sort of criminal purpose. I agree
that it was wrong to collect it however, even though it was
unencrypted.

Suppose someone drives down your street and makes a log of your
address, house color, type of driveway and number of front facing
windows. Is that stealing data?




Does one 'steal data' when one listens to an NFL football game on the AM or FM
radio?

NOT!

So if somebody's wi-fi router/transceiver is broadcasting a microwave signal
(wi-fi) and your computer's or phone's wi-fi transceiver logs onto that "open"
broadcast on the public airways is that stealing?

NOT!

An inanimate object like a computer or a cell phone that has a wi-fi
transceiver can and does 'automatically' log onto open wi-fi networks. All a
user has to do is turn the machine on. What the machine does after an owner
turns it on is not the owner intending to 'steal' data. In many cases an owner
might be completely unaware that a connection has been made.



Wilbur Hubbard

"Free Willy" wrote in message
...
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 09:15:00 -0400, WaIIy wrote:

As always, it depends on who you talk to:

They stole data. Period, no debate here.

===

I think stealing is probably the wrong word. As far as anyone knows
they did not use the data for any sort of criminal purpose. I agree
that it was wrong to collect it however, even though it was
unencrypted.

Suppose someone drives down your street and makes a log of your
address, house color, type of driveway and number of front facing
windows. Is that stealing data?




Does one 'steal data' when one listens to an NFL football game on the AM or
FM radio?

NOT!

So if somebody's wi-fi router/transceiver is broadcasting a microwave signal
(wi-fi) and your computer's or phone's wi-fi transceiver logs onto that
"open" broadcast on the public airways is that stealing?

NOT!

An inanimate object like a computer or a cell phone that has a wi-fi
transceiver can and does 'automatically' log onto open wi-fi networks. All a
user has to do is turn the machine on. What the machine does after an owner
turns it on is not the owner intending to 'steal' data. In many cases an
owner might be completely unaware that a connection has been made.



Wilbur Hubbard




Forgery!!!!

I'm going to address just one snippet - and hope that the google discussion goes off somewhere else, as, while it, too, is important, this discussion will get lost in the trash if it doesn't...


On Wednesday, September 19, 2012 1:09:12 PM UTC-4, Free Willy wrote:


An inanimate object like a computer or a cell phone that has a wi-fi

transceiver can and does 'automatically' log onto open wi-fi networks. All a

user has to do is turn the machine on. What the machine does after an owner

turns it on is not the owner intending to 'steal' data. In many cases an owner

might be completely unaware that a connection has been made.







Wilbur Hubbard

That premise was what I got out of one of my cited articles. Yet the learned Dave Skolnick says that's patently untrue - that, unlike a cell connection, WiFi enabled devices require specific input from the user before a connection will be made.

Those with a different experience could do me a favor by logging into either the G+ or the FB conversation thread on the subject and disabuse him of that notion, because, not owning such a device myself, I can't, at least with any authority. He asserts that Wired has its head up its ass and is mistaken. That would be surprising to me, given that it's a techie publication, BICBW...

The preceding, clipped, discussion about theft is left out here; as seen in my original, there's some conflict about it. However, Dave Skolnick is on a mighty charger, let alone a horse, to say that it's WRONG - JUST WRONG - to log onto any open signal to which you personally have not been specifically invited by the owner...

On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 04:26:27 -0700 (PDT), Flying Pig
wrote:

Dave Skolnick is on a mighty charger, let alone a horse, to say that it's WRONG - JUST WRONG - to log onto any open signal
to which you personally have not been specifically invited by the owner...

====

Perhaps so, but it can easily happen by accident/happenstance. Most
of my PCs are set up to automatically log onto my home or boat network
when they boot up, no specific action required. If my home network
had a SYSID of "linksys", "netgear" or one of the other popular
defaults, they would connect to any unencrypted network they found
with that same ID. People who choose to leave their router set to a
default SYSID for one reason or another will generally not use a
password or encryption either.

On Thursday, September 20, 2012 11:02:28 AM UTC-4, wayne.b wrote:
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 04:26:27 -0700 (PDT), Flying Pig

wrote:



Dave Skolnick is on a mighty charger, let alone a horse, to say that it's WRONG - JUST WRONG - to log onto any open signal

to which you personally have not been specifically invited by the owner....



====



Perhaps so, but it can easily happen by accident/happenstance. Most

of my PCs are set up to automatically log onto my home or boat network

when they boot up, no specific action required. If my home network

had a SYSID of "linksys", "netgear" or one of the other popular

defaults, they would connect to any unencrypted network they found

with that same ID. People who choose to leave their router set to a

default SYSID for one reason or another will generally not use a

password or encryption either.

I agree with you - but he would have you responsible for verifying, whether by mac address or any other means at your disposal, that you were not "intruding" where you'd not been specifically invited.

That you were walking across a park and entered into someone's private land adjacent, which looked like, and had the same features/address/everything else other than a different color mailbox (mac address), which you'd have to go looking for, would not cut it in his view. You would be trespassing, and whether or not the owner gave a rip, you were degrading his grass, and otherwise using resources for which he'd paid, and therefore, breaking, if not a chapter law, a moral law, to walk there...

"Flying Pig" wrote in message
...


That premise was what I got out of one of my cited articles.
Yet the learned Dave Skolnick says that's patently untrue - that,
unlike a cell connection, WiFi enabled devices require specific
input from the user before a connection will be made.

Not true. Mine connects when I turn on the computer. I push the computer's
"ON" button and a few minutes later I'm connected to an available wi-fi
hotspot. Some, like McDonald's require me to click an "accept" button for the
TOS and then I'm on but unsecured networks don't even need that.

Those with a different experience could do me a favor by
logging into either the G+ or the FB conversation thread on the
subject and disabuse him of that notion, because, not owning
such a device myself, I can't, at least with any authority. He
asserts that Wired has its head up its ass and is mistaken.
That would be surprising to me, given that it's a techie
publication, BICBW...

The preceding, clipped, discussion about theft is left out here;
as seen in my original, there's some conflict about it. However,
Dave Skolnick is on a mighty charger, let alone a horse, to say
that it's WRONG - JUST WRONG - to log onto any open signal
to which you personally have not been specifically invited by the
owner...

Duh, this Skolnick is a moron. The fact that the network in not secured
is, itself, an invite for any and all to join. If somebody doesn't want you
to join their network they will password protect it.

If I had a home network near a harbor I would install a nice amplified
antenna like this one on my router.

http://www.radiolabs.com/products/wireless/waverv.php

And not require a password so boaters could use it to connect to the
Internet. So this idiot Skolnick is trying to say neither I nor anybody else
can do so and that in doing so I'm creating criminals and thieves.

Nonsense! The man's a PUTZ!


Wilbur Hubbard