EFF Reminds Us That Open WiFi Isn't A Bad Thing... And Should Actually Be Encouraged
from the help-out dept
We've had plenty of stories concerning open WiFi, and there seems to be a general opinion among some that open WiFi is "a bad thing." Some have even tried (and failed) to argue that having an open WiFi network makes you negligent. In some areas, law enforcement has even gone around telling people to lock up their WiFi. Those who argue against open WiFi are generally conflating different issues. It is true that if you use an open WiFi network without securing yourself you do open up yourself to snooping from others. Similarly, if others are using your open WiFi, it it could lead to at least an investigation if your access point is used for nefarious purposes. But combining those to claim that open WiFi itself is bad or illegal is a mistake. It is entirely possible to secure your own activities, and to set up an open WiFi network in a reasonable manner that minimizes any such threat.The EFF and others have been trying to remind people that there are also tremendous benefits to open WiFi in increasing connectivity for everyone. As part of this, they've launched the Open Wireless Movement encouraging people to purposely leave their WiFi networks open (and to take appropriate security precautions). They're pointing out that especially in times of crisis, such open networks can be tremendously useful.
Hopefully we can finally get past the myth that open WiFi is automatically bad and get people moving towards a better understanding of how to use the internet safely while still offering up open access in a reasonable manner.The Open Wireless Movement envisions a world where people readily have access to open wireless Internet connections—a world where sharing one's network in a way that ensures security yet preserves quality is the norm. Much of this vision is attainable now. In fact, many people have routers that already feature "guest networking" capabilities. To make this even easier, we are working with a coalition of volunteer engineers to build technologies that would make it simple for Internet subscribers to portion off their wireless networks for guests and the public while maintaining security, protecting privacy, and preserving quality of access. And we're working with advocates to help change the way people and businesses think about Internet service.
We're also teaching the world about the many benefits of open wireless in order to help society move away from closed networks and to a world in which open access is the default. We are working to debunk myths (and confront truths) about open wireless while creating technologies and legal precedent to ensure it is safe, private, and legal to open your network.
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
Tough
My bandwidth is for ME.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tough
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Tough
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Tough
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Tough
I've just never had the energy/time to figure out what I needed to implement it.
It does seem that I would need a router that is supported by one of the alternate router software projects such as Tomato, dd-wrt, others I can't think of. And then I have to make sure that all the original features of the router that I need are still supported (in particular 1000Base-T routing).
If there were a site that walked through the various options to do this on different routers it would be great!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tough
http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Separate_WLANs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tough
My cell phone would not be able to connect to my WiFi if I had SSID turned off
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Tough
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tough
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tough
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Open here...
One DSL line is for work, and hsa a single (work-provisioned) router on it, and a single WPA2-encrypted SSID.
The other DSL line is for personal use, and since I have yet to wire up my new house, I had to deploy 4 separate wifi routers throughout the house to provide sufficient connectivity. I have a hidden WDS SSID to connect them, a visible encrypted SSID I use for all my devices, and a separate public open SSID for guest usage. All of the routers I use are dd-wrt capable, so this is rather easy to setup and configure.
If I run into any bandwidth issues down the road, I'll just setup some QoS throttling if I must - but where I live there aren't enough people that I'm worried about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
But gotta admire the "especially in times of crisis" line that they stole from ham radio geezers, when in fact, that's almost never been useful even with ham radio.
And Mike, "there seems to be a general opinion among some"? Whatever notion you had there is watered down twice: just shorten it to "SOME".
And "Some have even tried (and failed) to argue": what you appear to mean is "failed to convince", as even a dog or Dick_Helmet can argue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
Excellent! This is a typical response as part of my purpose is to elicit here to demonstrate Techdirt's quality.
Yes, just ignore me. That's all I ask. I put out my ideas and a bit of snark as occurs. And the ad hom just bursts out.
You're obviously compelled to comment because you don't trust readers, and yet only point out my posts -- and the automatic "reporting" is just childish.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
You come here, troll, and then call community members sock puppets and childish when they react to your own childish outbursts and self-important, attention-begging trolling. There has to be some inherent deficiency in your psychological or emotional life for which I would recommend you seek help.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
So you are trying to prove that Techdirt's "quality" is somehow lacking by posting incoherent rants? That only demonstrates the (low) quality of your comments, really.
Yes, just ignore me. That's all I ask. I put out my ideas and a bit of snark as occurs. And the ad hom just bursts out.
I usually do ignore you. I respond to you only when you post something so blatantly wrong that it needs to be corrected. You know - fighting incorrect speech with more speech. And you are one to talk when it comes to ad homs - you toss those out on a regular basis, which is just another reason to not take anything you say very seriously.
@"Anonymous Coward" = Mike's sock puppet.
You're obviously compelled to comment because you don't trust readers, and yet only point out my posts -- and the automatic "reporting" is just childish.
Careful there Blue - your paranoia is showing. Are one of those guys who think Obama created Sandy to win the election?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
It would help if your ideas weren't a) wrong from a technical standpoint, b) phrased in the obnoxious way possible and c) littered with attacks on Mike and other regular posters. Seriously, 50% of those paragraphs contained attacks, and then you complain about being attacked in response?
About the only thing correct about your initial post is "doesn't at all solve actual problems with those who might use your connection for illegal activity". That's correct because it's not even a consideration in the original point. Virtually every router can be used for illegal activity if someone with the desire and knowledge lives within sniffing distance - even if you're using WPA2 with a hidden SSID (are you the same AC who was convinced that WEP was secure a few years back?). That doesn't mean that those deliberately leaving it open are doing anything wrong, nor that it's not possible to filter traffic on an open network (e.g. blocking torrent traffic while allowing email) .
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
Bull.
There is no known attack against WPA-Personal/CCMP with a long random passphrase.
And your SSID is NOT "hidden", ever.
Unless you are NOT using Wifi.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
Well, thanks I guess for being brutally honest. From now on, whenever I see you comment, I'll just re-quote you here as to why you don't want intelligent discourse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
Never useful? Do you live under a rock?
Tons of places in and around New York are offering open WiFi right now - so victims can let family in other parts of the world know they are OK:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/01/internet-service-new-york-hurricane-sandy_n_2057934. html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
Trolls find evidence to be indigestible, you're wasting your time attempting to feed that to it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
It certainly does happen. Off the top of my head, I can remember at least one publicly reported instance in the last couple years in my area:
http://www.saresrg.org/activations/gilroy_fiber.html
Int he past, I've also been thankful to locate an open wifi router when I'm in need of looking something up on google maps in a remote location. I suppose "crisis" comes in all forms.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This just redefines "open" to mean "firewalled".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tugboat
If things went Marc "Tugboat" Randazza's way, an irreparable harm to society would ensue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Open WIFI would work except ISP bandwidth and use restrictions
Open WiFi is a great idea but will not work within the current regulatory environment as all that would do is open up the person be helpful to possible legal action.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Open WIFI would work except ISP bandwidth and use restrictions
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Open WIFI would work except ISP bandwidth and use restrictions
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Open WIFI would work except ISP bandwidth and use restrictions
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Open WIFI would work except ISP bandwidth and use restrictions
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I also have those blocked, becuase I also run a free proxy server so that "office drones" can bypass corporate firewalls and get internet radio at their desks, which is why I block those categories I mentioned. I block content that would be inappropriate for any office. I do this because I see nothing wrong with internet radio at work as long as your work is getting done.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Chilly8 on Nov 2nd, 2013 @ 12:19pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I need immunity from the MafIAA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I need immunity from the MafIAA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Open what?
However, I'm not going to open my access point for everyone and his brother to surf the porn sites and link to them through my router, nor am I going to have the privilege of having hackers constantly attack my router (as they tend to do just for fun).
When you pay for it every month, you don't want to share it with everyone who doesn't have the same viewpoint: paying for access.
There is no such thing as a free lunch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Strike six for your IP address!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bad idea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You can't have cleartext Wifi and security at the time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]