Is connecting to an unencrypted WIFI legal?

m16 elitest

I live in Ontario, Canada and I wanted to know if it is legal to do so?

fuzzyj

I very much doubt there is a law against it and if there is someone that leaves a open wifi connection will not know how to see who is using it. I type this form a open wifi connection at work in Ontario, so as long as you are not doing anything that would have the cops come visit the owner of the connection you should be fine.

Alan

"Ontario police have arrested a 25 year old man under Section 326 of the Criminal Code which covers theft of communications." - michaelgeist.ca

I would say yes due to this case in Ontario putting aside other arguments about whether its actually sealing or not.

lackofcheese

I would say yes due to this case in Ontario

Indeed, it seems so.

putting aside other arguments about whether its actually sealing or not.

Let's not put them aside. It's not a bad topic.

If your wireless is open, are you not effectively authorizing anyone and everyone to use it, so that there can be no "unauthorized access"?
"Unauthorized access" is the term often used in various laws, so it is central to the discussion.

Andrew

If you are broadcasting an insecure SSID, you essentially saying "Hey! Hey! Yeah, you! Come in my house!"

...

If you are broadcasting an insecure SSID, you essentially saying "Hey! Hey! Yeah, you! Come in my house!"

More like, "Hey, I have a network here. Want to join?"

jcc

I would say yes due to this case in Ontario

Indeed, it seems so.

putting aside other arguments about whether its actually sealing or not.

Let's not put them aside. It's not a bad topic.

If your wireless is open, are you not effectively authorizing anyone and everyone to use it, so that there can be no "unauthorized access"?
"Unauthorized access" is the term often used in various laws, so it is central to the discussion.

Depends. If you leave the door to your house unlocked, do you want people to come inside? Maybe, maybe not. This is why usually people try to make these things more obvious, like having an "open house" or "open for business" sign in the window. I suppose the internet equivalent would be a "free wi-fi" sign.

This will become more important if the whole "let's meter the internet" idea gets off the ground. I think most people would agree that plugging an extension cord into your neighbor's outdoor electric socket to run all your stuff off of would probably not be legal.

Alan

But is there really a "property" border on a wireless connection. If its wide open and you can sign into it you can look at it as advertising. If you don't want people on it is it considered pollution in a way?

CHOIS CHOIS CHOIS

Since my friend and I live kitty (kiddie?) corner from each other I'm able to get access to his network via wi-fi. Getting access to the net doesn't need a password but to get to his or his sister's computer it does. I know the password since I set up his network for him. . And often times I'll put things on his hard drive to mess with him. Like ghosty, or Two girls one cup. Or some Lol Cat. It freaks him out and is hilarious. Once he get's his mac, I'll be able to turn on the iSight camera when he opens a file or something.

YoshoKatana

I believe that the "unlocked door" metaphor is terrible, at best. Most computers nowadays automatically join any unencrypted network, which would cause that metaphor to break down. If a wifi network is open, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. On the other hand, if the network is wep encrypted, I think it is somewhat equivalent to an unlocked door, in that it is trivial to join a wep network BUT you need to make the conscious decision to do so. Cracking and using a wep network is, of course, illegal.

...

I believe that the "unlocked door" metaphor is terrible, at best. Most computers nowadays automatically join any unencrypted network, which would cause that metaphor to break down. If a wifi network is open, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. On the other hand, if the network is wep encrypted, I think it issomewhatequivalent to an unlocked door, in that it is trivial to join a wep network BUT you need to make the conscious decision to do so. Cracking and using a wep network is, of course, illegal.

In other words:
unencrypted = Open door.
WEP = closed door.
WPA = closed and locked door.

YoshoKatana

In other words:
unencrypted = Open door.

Well, it's more like unencrypted = quicksand (that you can get out of if you know how quicksand works) or something of the sort. My internal metaphor engine isn't working at full capacity tonight.

Sail

There was a heated debate about this here a while back. Somebody find the thread, I'm tired.

Rym

To use the house as a vehicle for metaphor, here is the best way I, in my professional opinion, would explain it.

Installing a wireless access point and not securing it is not at all like leaving your door unlocked and having people wander in. It's more akin to going to the store and willfully purchasing a machine which you do not understand and do not read the instruction manual for. This machine, once plugged in, unlocks your front door, opens it, places a sign that says "All Are Welcome" in the yard, and starts shouting as loud as it can that anyone is allowed in to do whatever they want. If someone asks it if they're allowed in, it not only gives an immediate an unambiguous "yes," but it hands them a small map of the house and a lemon cookie.

I very strongly believe that no one can and should ever be considered in the wrong in connecting to an open, unencrypted access point: any fault or blame lies solely and completely with the person installing it, and said person should have no possible recourse.

A wireless access point functions in a very specific, documented way. If someone chooses to buy one, and chooses not to read and understand this documentation, then they've basically bought and installed the "let everyone into by stuff" box and set it up.

HMTKSteve

For someone to be charged with "stealing wi-fi" wouldn't the owner of the wi-fi device have to be aware that someone was accessing it? Wouldn't that sudden spark of awareness lead them to lock down their otherwise open access point?

My neighbor has an open wi-fi device in their house and my laptop will (on occasion) latch onto it rather than my WEPed wi-fi (blame Nintendo). I don't always notice right away that I am on the wrong network but once I do I always switch to my home network. Has a case such as that come up in any of these "stealing wi-fi" cases?

Apreche

I think I made my point in the last thread on this topic, but I'm still torn on the issue. I don't want to reiterate what I have said before, but I do have something new to say.

Part of the reason we don't think of using someone's open wifi as stealing, at least not in the US, is because people here pay flat "unlimited" fees for service. Let's imagine for a second that you are in Australia and you see an open wifi access point named "linksys123". You know in all likelihood this was setup by someone who does not realize that they have left their access point open. You do not have explicit permission to connect to their network, and use their network resources. You also know that they likely only have a limited amount of bandwidth they are allowed per month. By using their Internet connection, you are depriving them of some of what they pay for.

In the United States, where we have unlimited plans, it feels less like stealing. If people only get 5 buckets of water per month, you feel bad taking a cup or two from them. If people have water on tap, you don't feel bad taking some, even though they pay a water bill. You feel even less bad if the water bill is a flat fee as opposed to being proportional to the amount of water used. When you use an open wifi in Australia you are taking orders of magnitude more than when you use open wifi in the US, but you are still taking something either way. Even if you take water from someone who pays a flat fee for it on tap, you are still depriving them of a portion of their water throughput during the time you are taking the water. Using an open wifi in the US is very much like a homeless bum drinking from your garden hose in the middle of the night, and then leaving. It will have no effect on you whatsoever, but you would call the police if you did notice it.

There are all sorts of other things to discuss surrounding the issue of open wireless access points. You've got the issue of what constitutes permission. You've got the issue of someone engaging in illegal activities while using your IP address. You've got issues of technological ignorance. It's a very hot topic in general. All I'm saying, that I haven't said before, is that even in the US, when you use a public access point, you are indeed taking something, however small. The ethical and legal implications that follow from that are debatable.

m16 elitest

I think I made my point in the last thread on this topic, but I'm still torn on the issue. I don't want to reiterate what I have said before, but I do have something new to say.

Part of the reason we don't think of using someone's open wifi as stealing, at least not in the US, is because people here pay flat "unlimited" fees for service. Let's imagine for a second that you are in Australia and you see an open wifi access point named "linksys123". You know in all likelihood this was setup by someone who does not realize that they have left their access point open. You do not have explicit permission to connect to their network, and use their network resources. You also know that they likely only have a limited amount of bandwidth they are allowed per month. By using their Internet connection, you are depriving them of some of what they pay for.

In the United States, where we have unlimited plans, it feels less like stealing. If people only get 5 buckets of water per month, you feel bad taking a cup or two from them. If people have water on tap, you don't feel bad taking some, even though they pay a water bill. You feel even less bad if the water bill is a flat fee as opposed to being proportional to the amount of water used. When you use an open wifi in Australia you are taking orders of magnitude more than when you use open wifi in the US, but you are still taking something either way. Even if you take water from someone who pays a flat fee for it on tap, you are still depriving them of a portion of their water throughput during the time you are taking the water. Using an open wifi in the US is very much like a homeless bum drinking from your garden hose in the middle of the night, and then leaving. It will have no effect on you whatsoever, but you would call the police if you did notice it.

There are all sorts of other things to discuss surrounding the issue of open wireless access points. You've got the issue of what constitutes permission. You've got the issue of someone engaging in illegal activities while using your IP address. You've got issues of technological ignorance. It's a very hot topic in general. All I'm saying, that I haven't said before, is that even in the US, when you use a public access point, you are indeed taking something, however small. The ethical and legal implications that follow from that are debatable.

Those are all pretty good analogies, but where I live, we have some ISPs that give you limited bandwidth. With that said, I'll probably only do this if say I was stuck somewhere and needed a way of getting help.

CHOIS CHOIS CHOIS

Speak of the devil, my neighbor, just put in a N network and it is fast. The nice thing is now I don't have to worry Trying and praying that I catch my G signal from the back of the house. Plus I can access his huge Music collection! All the rock classics and then some. Wow, having an audiophile for a neighbor is great.