WIFI scary conditioning

[David Merrill]

Call me paranoid as some of you might; this came to my attention reading an article two months ago about a fellow arrested in Britain on a garden wall for accessing WIFI. Even in Britain, where they allegedly tax the airwaves (here we regulate them - FCC) I doubt anything became of the prosecution. Mainly because if somebody installs WIFI and fails to guard the WIFI with WEP, then that is basically consent for access through that point. There is no damage done.

What is more is that nobody can damage the WIFI owner's computer or even access it. And all criminal liability falls naturally on the address owner, not the owner of the access point - should there be any wrongdoing in cyberspace.

Naturally I looked closely at a clip designed to set up WIFI in the standard domain of revenue collections. This is one step closer to criminalizing people for accessing the Web and email on any available signal. View the attached video.

In the coffee shop scenario, as I understand it, the "hacker" is the coffee shop WIFI owner, able to access the internal workings of the WIFI settings, and the "victim" has signed onto a "work group network" so that the coffee shop owner can access his computer in the same manner as a supervisor at the workplace would.

Then they take this mock victim home to the viewer by saying that anybody accessing the Internet from outside your home can steal and delete files...

Especially with a Pocket PC, it is nice for the WIFI availablity to be so abundant that I no longer even need to look around for a signal when in an urban environment. I just hit Send/Receive and most times get my email. I never even know who provided the signal but thanks anyway.

The tendency to ingrain conditioning into the American TV viewer that WIFI is dangerous to your computer and identity security is disturbing to me. It seems a harbinger to legislation that will enable police to make arrests for accessing the Internet on any available signal - for of course, revenue purposes. It seems to me that we are being set up for more hidden taxation soon - WIFI Signal Jacking.

My posting is because if I am missing something in that video, about the dangers of WIFI, I would like to know. I can only hack into someone else's computer like in the News snippet, if I first get into the WIFI access point like the coffee shop owner's computer can? Otherwise, I do not have access to the other patrons' computers; right?


Regards,

David Merrill.


P.S. I am aware of sniffer programs that access through WEP by finding the security code. Most of these programs take hours to days, depending on how many people are accessing with the code legitemately. So for me, it is easier to try again later from a different location. No need to violate anyone's desire for security. Just the same; even this kind of hacking does not give access to the computers' files and peoples' identities. All that one achieves is as if the WEP was not enabled.

[fulltitle]

Without Prejudice.
I've come across quite a lot of folks who are indifferent to security in that they arent really worried too much about sharing their Wifi or whether or not someone can access their computer. They seem to reckon their downloaded music or chat logs to not be worth much to start with.

The idea of taxing Wifi is quite ridiculous. They didnt tax wired network access, why can they tax Wifi? Sounds like the cell phone companies are in on pushing that tax because its a whole lot cheaper to use a laptop or pocket PC in a Wifi zone than it is to use a Blackberry. The only way they would be able to tax it would be if State/City licensed establishments and ISPs were required to register their access points. You get the idea.

Wireless access is easily secure-able. If someone doesnt want others to acess their Wifi point:dont use wireless or simply learn to restrict access. One could easily limit access through one's Wifi connection point to certain ports (mail: POP3, SMTP) or even to certain sites (hotmail, hushmail, yahoo, msn, etc.) I dunno if there is a 'welcome message' setup for Wifi.

Sounds like they are more concerned with being able to force folks to register individually and use phone service (i.e. to aid in social surveillance).

This appears to be a related article: http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/...cle2310670.ece.

[Livefire]

All one needs is a decent firewall on the 'puter to keep anyone else accessing the network out of your system.

[Akira-]

Keep in mind, all these technologies were developed for military applications first... and when they become outdated, get passed down to the public.

You can bet there's a backdoor incorporated, and the military knows it.

-------

On a funnier note:

Recently, there was a pervert here in Maine, who lived on a major intersection, that decided to set up hidden wifi cameras in his daughters room, and in the bathroom, ect.

The guy was caught when people would pull up to the intersection, (next to the house) and their cars video screen would temporarily pick up the video shots of the bedroom or bathroom.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by fulltitle

Without Prejudice.


The idea of taxing Wifi is quite ridiculous. They didnt tax wired network access, why can they tax Wifi? Sounds like the cell phone companies are in on pushing that tax because its a whole lot cheaper to use a laptop or pocket PC in a Wifi zone than it is to use a Blackberry. The only way they would be able to tax it would be if State/City licensed establishments and ISPs were required to register their access points. You get the idea.

The taxation I was describing is to fine people when found like the fellow on the garden wall in England. I was not talking about a blatant tax - I meant hidden taxes.

Otherwise I am gathering my summary is correct. The scenario depicted in the news clip is a construction. I cannot get into people's computers from across the coffee shop and they cannot get into mine - under any typical circumstances anyway. [Excluding this mysterious military backdoor technology anyway.]

www.hamachi.cc [freeware]. http://www.grc.com/SecurityNow.htm#118 https://www.grc.com/passwords.htm

At first glance this is how to secure my WIFI system against hacking through my WEP. And of course I have already accepted that somebody might be monitoring, grabbing packets out of the air as I send and receive email...

That is not what I see depicted in the news clip. This reporter set up a fabrication to frighten people into thinking that there is an easy way to get into a computer through the WIFI and operate silently like you are operating an authorized Windows Explorer - freely accessing, copying and deleting private files on other peoples' computers from across the coffee shop!


I am willing to accept the idea that there may be software out there but I have to see that for myself instead of a speculation that the military must have built a backdoor. At any rate, that is not the scenario in the news clip. I will try to catch that particular click and attach it so you can see Work Group Network or whatever that is. The reporter utilized supervisor privileges in a work environment network and made that look like malicious hacking and victimizing.


Regards,

David Merrill.


P.S. There it is - "View Workgroup Computers". The alleged and overweight victim was part of a Workgroup and the alleged Hacker, snickering at his diet plan was in the position of administrator over the Workgroup. That is not a typical coffee shop scenario.

I have been in the IT field for a long time and the wifi age has been fun if you want to secure your wireless network dont use one most wep keys can be broke very fast the FBI i think was around 7 sec and if you dont secure your WIFI I can log on to your router and route all the packets to me in other words I see what you do EVERYTHING I can do that what can the Gov do or already done, but most people just want to check there email so i leave mine open, the gov is using scare tatics to get people arrested

just my 2 cents

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by FBIman

I have been in the IT field for a long time and the wifi age has been fun if you want to secure your wireless network dont use one most wep keys can be broke very fast the FBI i think was around 7 sec and if you dont secure your WIFI I can log on to your router and route all the packets to me in other words I see what you do EVERYTHING I can do that what can the Gov do or already done, but most people just want to check there email so i leave mine open, the gov is using scare tatics to get people arrested

just my 2 cents

Thanks FBIMan;


So anything going over the air, like WIFI can be monitored almost as easily as if you are the operating computer. Agreed. And the consumer software for "sniffing" fairly recently can only decrypt the WEP code while people are getting on. So it may not be a long wait in the morning at an office with people arriving and turning on their computers...

But one fellow hacking another's computer like Windows Explorer in the news clip is unrealistic - from what I am gathering here. At best, somebody can grab and view emails and surfing activity.

...the gov is using scare tatics to get people arrested

Correction, "...the gov is using the media to write scare tactics..."



Regards,

David Merrill.

good Correction.

there is no privacy on a computer if its online thanks to the carnivor program that started in the mid 90s buy the FBI i beleive to read every email it has grown to watching every thing what we bo here. I personaly dont care if they see me looking at bomb plans and home grown nukes, and anti gov sites, they only need to worry it I buy the stuff to build it lol oh wait............. I have done some stupid stuff and I have had the silent phone calls and people watching the house or maybe im just crazy.......oh they can veiw anything on your computer it not easy but they can have the money printed to pay for it

[David Merrill]

Maybe so. One day when I entered the CAFR into a traffic prosecution, the Police Helicopter buzzed me for fifteen minutes. There were plenty of witnesses too. One fellow was a little amazed, "They are doing that for YOU!" [Pointing at me in the gathering crowd like Sutherland in the Invasion of the Body Snatchers.]

Otherwise as far as the cyberspace, they tend to validate somebody's theories about things like the CAFR when they behave that way and with me perfecting remedy for so many Americans over the years, I am convinced they have decided not to throw any money at me. After all, these people are saying it all in process right there in the US Courthouses and the attorneys are smart enough to just let people have remedy.

I hope my posts make it clear that my objection is to conditioning - which control of how people think is as dangerous as any bullet or explosive. I would have missed it had I not recorded it - but the news reporter has set up a false scenario and created a phoney victim of a phony hacker - who used typical supervisory software over a working group to make things look like anybody with a simple Windows program can access and delete files in your computer!

Big Brother is one thing; and by understanding history and law, one can relieve the stress about that junk. But something about this reporter and what she is doing to the conscious of the masses really rubs me the wrong way...


Regards,

David Merrill.

[fulltitle]

Without Prejudice.
On top of securing a Wifi connection, using SSH or tunnel or stronger encryption to tunnel over one's wireless network is an added layer of protecting against snooping. Using any web-based email system that doesnt offer SSH or encryption allows the communications to be more easily intercepted. ISPs staff all too willing to go for that gung-ho nostalgic feeling and serve cops or those pretending to be cops at will--whether the cops or pretenders lie or not. Governments, ex-wives, ex-husbands, wives, husbands, friends, ex-friends, business competition might all have a vested interest in snooping your network. I've seen men offer their daughters for marriage just to be able to use her snoop out details of research someone was working on (old fashioned espionage).

See: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/wire...02/23/wep.html .

Even on wired networks, its not a bad idea to use SSH or encryption because a typical computer (i.e. one not hardened against Van Eck style snooping) along with the various wires and cables and outlets its connected to basically broadcast electromagnetically when on. Using encryption or SSH on one's own network makes it tougher to decipher the radiated communications between stations even in your own home on a wired network.

If your ISP doesnt have https/SSH enabled web-based mail demand that they stop being cheap, lazy and slack--there is little excuse for them not to unless they simply are snooping operation (public or private) posing as an ISP. Also get those in your chat buddy list to use encryption.

Restricting access to certain MAC Address is another Wifi security tactic.

http://www.dailycupoftech.com/2007/0...e-wifi-design/

I avoid using Wifi for the most part.