Skip to main content

A Down Side to Open Wireless

An interesting byproduct of maintaining an open wireless network? Apparently a man in Mumbai had his life disrupted by a raid on his property when authorities suspected his open wireless as being the source for messages relating to a recent bombing.

So what happens when a crime is alleged to have been committed using your open network?

For individuals who happen to get caught up in a crime involving something like what happened in Mumbai, and who don't have the backing of corporate legal departments, I suspect that the process wouldn't be much fun.

A person has open wireless because:
  • They don't know it is open.
  • They know it is open but don't know how to secure it.
  • They know how, but are to lazy to bother securing it.
  • They know how to secure it, but they don't really care.
  • They know how, and they are leaving it unsecured on principle.
If someone gets caught up in something like this, I hope they are in one of the latter categories, rather than in one of the first couple categories.

Comments

  1. I'd probably play the "i'm an idiot" card and try to avoid becoming an accessory to the crime. Ideology & principles sound like something criminals have, after all.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob - I tried that once.

    A cop stopped me for not having a front license plate. In Minnesota, that's a pretty big deal. I plead incompetence. The screws that held the plate were badly rusted and twisted off, so mounting the plate would have required drilling out the screws.

    I was about to get away with a warning, when the cop casually asked were I was going (to work).

    "Where so you work?"

    "I'm an instructor at the tech college'

    "What do you teach?"

    "Machine Shop"

    Tho cop scowls. "You teach machine shop and you can't drill out a screw?"

    I grin.

    He hands me a $60 ticket.

    Busted. :)

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cargo Cult System Administration

“imitate the superficial exterior of a process or system without having any understanding of the underlying substance” --Wikipedia During and after WWII, some native south pacific islanders erroneously associated the presence of war related technology with the delivery of highly desirable cargo. When the war ended and the cargo stopped showing up, they built crude facsimiles of runways, control towers, and airplanes in the belief that the presence of war technology caused the delivery of desirable cargo. From our point of view, it looks pretty amusing to see people build fake airplanes, runways and control towers  and wait for cargo to fall from the sky.The question is, how amusing are we?We have cargo cult science[1], cargo cult management[2], cargo cult programming[3], how about cargo cult system management?Here’s some common system administration failures that might be ‘cargo cult’:Failing to understand the difference between necessary and sufficient. A daily backup is necessary, b…

Ad-Hoc Verses Structured System Management

Structured system management is a concept that covers the fundamentals of building, securing, deploying, monitoring, logging, alerting, and documenting networks, servers and applications. Structured system management implies that you have those fundamentals in place, you execute them consistently, and you know all cases where you are inconsistent. The converse of structured system management is what I call ad hoc system management, where every system has it own plan, undocumented and inconsistent, and you don't know how inconsistent they are, because you've never looked.

In previous posts (here and here) I implied that structured system management was an integral part of improving system availability. Having inherited several platforms that had, at best, ad hoc system management, and having moved the platforms to something resembling structured system management, I've concluded that implementing basic structure around system management will be the best and fastest path to …

The Cloud – Provider Failure Modes

In The Cloud - Outsourcing Moved up the Stack[1] I compared the outsourcing that we do routinely (wide area networks) with the outsourcing of the higher layers of the application stack (processor, memory, storage). Conceptually they are similar:
In both cases you’ve entrusted your bits to someone else, you’ve shared physical and logical resources with others, you’ve disassociated physical devices (circuits or servers) from logical devices (virtual circuits, virtual severs), and in exchange for what is hopefully better, faster, cheaper service, you give up visibility, manageability and control to a provider. There are differences though. In the case of networking, your cloud provider is only entrusted with your bits for the time it takes for those bits to cross the providers network, and the loss of a few bits is not catastrophic. For providers of higher layer services, the bits are entrusted to the provider for the life of the bits, and the loss of a few bits is a major problem. The…