Wi-Fi Hotspots and anti-terror security

The U.S. government is ussually pretty fast (compared to other nations in
the world) coming up with legislation to regulate technological advances.
But to my amazement there aren't any laws to regulate Wi-Fi Hotspots at this
time,even though public Hotspots can be easily used to spread viruses,
attack critical IT infrastructure and allow terrorists to communicate
without fear of detection.

What do you guys think?

In article <3f49d0f1$0$45384$(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
> The U.S. government is ussually pretty fast (compared to other nations in
> the world) coming up with legislation to regulate technological advances.
> But to my amazement there aren't any laws to regulate Wi-Fi Hotspots at this
> time,even though public Hotspots can be easily used to spread viruses,
> attack critical IT infrastructure and allow terrorists to communicate
> without fear of detection.
>
> What do you guys think?
>

I'm on record as being against wide-open hotspots. I do like the idea
that people are ready to share their bandwidth with the world. Sadly
though, the world contains a few people who will exploint that
generosity for purposes far less civil. If you feel like you simply must
operate a free hot-spot, do it with some form of identification and
validation.

Yes, this opens up the whole can of privacy debate worms, but I just
don't see a way around this.

Well, the same could be done from the public library... or even war-driving
and using someone's unsecured network...



"Ultimate Buu" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:3f49d0f1$0$45384$(E-Mail Removed)...
> The U.S. government is ussually pretty fast (compared to other nations in
> the world) coming up with legislation to regulate technological advances.
> But to my amazement there aren't any laws to regulate Wi-Fi Hotspots at
this
> time,even though public Hotspots can be easily used to spread viruses,
> attack critical IT infrastructure and allow terrorists to communicate
> without fear of detection.
>
> What do you guys think?
>
>

In article <pFm2b.7248$(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
> Well, the same could be done from the public library... or even war-driving
> and using someone's unsecured network...

You are right, of course, which is why the library SHOULD be making sure
that users are authenticated, and clueless twits SHOULD be reading the
manual and securing their WLAN's.

privacy <> anonymity.

Ultimate Buu <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> The U.S. government is ussually pretty fast (compared to other nations in
> the world) coming up with legislation to regulate technological advances.
> But to my amazement there aren't any laws to regulate Wi-Fi Hotspots at this
> time,even though public Hotspots can be easily used to spread viruses,
> attack critical IT infrastructure and allow terrorists to communicate
> without fear of detection.

> What do you guys think?

And that's different from AOL free dialup?
Or anyone else's dialup for that matter.


--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
> > You are right, of course, which is why the library SHOULD be making sure
> > that users are authenticated, and clueless twits SHOULD be reading the
> > manual and securing their WLAN's.
>
> Library issue aside, clueless twits accounts for a very many IT
> departments. A study in the City of London discovered that 90% of
> corporate WiFi networks were without WEP. (I won't suggest that all
> were insecure as ours run without WEP but rely on other forms of
> encryption).
>
> The main point is that to isolate WiFi and suggest that open hotspots
> are bad because they can be used by terrorists is a pretty naive stance
> to take given that there are thousands of other things that are used by
> such people and are also very public.
>
> Mainland Britain was being bombed by the IRA long before WiFi hotspots
> were even a concept.

Comparing IRA bombs and WiFi hotspots is a bit of stretch, but if you
insist...

U.S. law still classifies certain forms of encryption technology as
"munitions" and restricts their distribution as such. Ironically, the
source code, in _printed_ form, is free from such restrictions. My point
is that anonymous access to Internet connectivity is a powerful enabling
technology for "bad guys".

Good citizens don't make it easy for the bad guys to have their way.
Let's say that you and I each have an apartment (flat) in a secured
building. Theroetically, no one gets into the building without a key, or
without being identified by a resident and "buzzed-in". But now, Willie
Wifi at the end of the hall installs an open door from the street
through his apartment, because he believes that everyone should be free
to knock on any door they want without having to first identify
themselves to a resident. I think its safe to say that the rest of the
residents would be unappy with Mr. Wifi.

Law enforcement and ISP's take a dim view of this kind of
irresponsibility. Many's the ISP that has shut off the service of a
customer who carelessly allowed their connection to be used for
nefarious activity.

Now, is sending 2 million spam mails from a wide open hotspot as bad as
a terrorists bomb? Of course not, but the fact remains that neither is
something that any of us want. The relative evil of one does in no way
justify the other.

In article <bidmi2$lvs$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)
says...
>
> And that's different from AOL free dialup?
> Or anyone else's dialup for that matter.

For all practical purposes, it isn't. Which is these accounts are such a
great tool for spammers. They're disposable.

>The U.S. government is ussually pretty fast (compared to other nations in
>the world) coming up with legislation to regulate technological advances.
>But to my amazement there aren't any laws to regulate Wi-Fi Hotspots at this
>time,even though public Hotspots can be easily used to spread viruses,
>attack critical IT infrastructure and allow terrorists to communicate
>without fear of detection.
>
>What do you guys think?
>
I'm not going to worry very much. One terrotist in NY was mad at the
driver next to him so he shot at him. Only he didn't roll down his
rental car window before shooting. The rental place called the cops
and they caught the guy. The Iraqi KGB would harrass Iragis over the
phone and make prank phone calls. Only even people in Bagdad had
Caller ID in recent years. They would then call the agents boss and
complain. Few of these geniuses are going to connect to anything using
WiFi.
------------
When your PC gives a little they give a lot.
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/disco

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bidmi2$lvs$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Ultimate Buu <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > The U.S. government is ussually pretty fast (compared to other nations
in
> > the world) coming up with legislation to regulate technological
advances.
> > But to my amazement there aren't any laws to regulate Wi-Fi Hotspots at
this
> > time,even though public Hotspots can be easily used to spread viruses,
> > attack critical IT infrastructure and allow terrorists to communicate
> > without fear of detection.
>
> > What do you guys think?
>
> And that's different from AOL free dialup?
> Or anyone else's dialup for that matter.
>

These can be traced. If you connect to a Hotspot anonymously there's not way
to find the culprit.

"Hiram Hackenbacker" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 11:00:37 +0200, "Ultimate Buu"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >The U.S. government is ussually pretty fast (compared to other nations in
> >the world) coming up with legislation to regulate technological advances.
> >But to my amazement there aren't any laws to regulate Wi-Fi Hotspots at
this
> >time,even though public Hotspots can be easily used to spread viruses,
> >attack critical IT infrastructure and allow terrorists to communicate
> >without fear of detection.
> >
> >What do you guys think?
>
> Put it another way - how would you suggest these hotspots are policed
> then?
>

I'm convinced that, after some incident such as a mail virus being spread by
way of a Hotspot, that the government will put legislation in place to
prohibit the anonymous use of Wi-Fi Hotspots. It's only a matter of time.