Even The Police Are Making A Bigger Deal Of WiFi Used In Crime
from the that's-not-the-issue dept
Earlier this week, we wrote about how the press was focusing on open WiFi used in crimes when the actual crimes had very, very little to with open WiFi. Of course, it's not just the press -- the police are doing the same thing. In an article about some guy who got caught forging prescriptions, the story notes that the guy would use open WiFi networks to download prescriptions to other drugs, which he'd later bring back to the motel he was staying at and modify. The police then say: "a warning shot for all wireless Internet users" and note that the guy "could have stolen all sorts of personal information from people, but only wanted drugs." This implies that he was somehow actually stealing the prescriptions from the owners of the WiFi he was using. That seems unlikely. In order to do that, he'd had have to know (1) people who have open WiFi (2) who also use some sort of online prescription system that (3) is incredibly insecure and (4) be aware of the exact time when those people are accessing the online prescription system. What's much more likely, is he simply went online and found scans of prescriptions that were freely available online. He wasn't using the open WiFi to take any info from the access point owners, but just to get some form of internet access. It's not a warning shot to WiFi owners at all. If he did actually take data from an online prescription system, then it's a warning to whoever makes this incredibly insecure online prescription system. Much more likely is that it's a situation where the police don't seem to understand what happened.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
WiFinicky
Patrol cops have little to no idea about many of the technologies they interact with (an observation, not a condemnation). Most police cruisers (at least here in CA) have wireless network access (it's a closed system for the computers in the cruisers), but I doubt the officers themselves understand that it's basically the same concept.
IMHO, it's our collective geek responsibility to instill good behavioral instincts in those people to whom we are wizards.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: WiFinicky
Stated more broadly, it is our duty, as wizards, techs, users, citizens, etc. to remind all users that good citizenship is appropriate in the network world, as it is in any other situation. For example, it is not good citizenship to break into a residence. However, people who would never think of breaking into a residence think it is perfectly ok to break into a computer.
I think it is incumbent upon all of us who are perceived as geeks to impress upon users that stealing info from or breaking into a 'puter is essentially the same as stealing physical files from or breaking into a building. It follows that there is no fundamental difference in ordering, say, porn for delivery to one's neighbor's US mailbox and ordering it to his network.
Somehow, we self-appointed geeks, dweebs, and hackers have not done a good job of explaing that to users.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: WiFinicky
Interesting analogy. I gotta ponder on that one.
/ponder
*Good* analogy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: WiFinicky
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: WiFinicky
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: WiFinicky
when i first started at my new job i said i was bringing my own computer and they said, oh, you can't do that -- this is confidential information! i said, really? because anyone within about 500 feet of us with a wireless device and the cleverness to guess we call our workgroup "workgroup" could be all up in our shared documents folders (which is how they share these confidential documents). so i said, "oh, i'll only use my computer for non-confidential stuff" and they said, "ooooh, okay".
i'm not sure whether to make a big fuss about how stupid this is or just encrypt the network all quiet-like when no one is looking.
the bad part about being the alpha geek is that it so often translates to "bearer of really bad news" (like, "hey, guess what, your network has been having unprotected intimacy with every computer that gets near it, and it's caught some nasty things" for instance). i hate that part.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nigga Puhlease
______
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nigga Puhlease
Ditto back on you. And shame on you for thinking this makes you cooler than us. I hope you are only 12 years old or something. If you're not, I feel sad for you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Another analogy
The analogy is: having an open access point is like letting anyone walking by use your home phone without your knowledge. Maybe they'll just order a prank pizza, or perhaps they'll do something serious. It gets traced to YOU. Who do ya trust, right?
Now. when I walk downtown and use an open AP at a cafe or whatever, that's somehow different. The business provides access as an additional service to their customers. The Wifi users going through them are more numerous and transient than someone piggybacking off of my home AP. The business INVITES people to patronize them and use their access. How many home users do that explicitly?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
Turn on WEP now!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
....next
NoMorePoints.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]