General discussion

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #2257918

    Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

    Locked

    by why me worry? ·

    I’m sure we have all seen groups of college students, business people, teenagers, even senior citizens all using their laptops to surf the web using the wireless networks available in places like Starbucks, public libraries, shopping malls, and other retail stores. These wireless networks employ no encryption or security and are basically an open door for anyone smart enough to know how to steal personal information by using a simple sniffer program. This raises a legal issue and begs the questions “Should the provider of the unsecure Wi-Fi hotspot be held liable if someone has their identity stolen by using that hotspot?”. Yes, users are uneducated about wireless security and should not be expected to know what WEP or 3DES enryption is, but at the least, these places should display a warning to users of wireless laptops that they are wirelessly surfing the web at their own risk. I’m lobbying my state officials for such a bill to hold places like Starbucks and Atlanta Bread Company liable for what I deem as promoting unsafe computing habits. Do you agree or disagree on holding Wi-Fi hotspot providers liable if someone has his/her identity stolen?

All Comments

  • Author
    Replies
    • #3204480

      agree to a point

      by w2ktechman ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      They should recommend to use a vpn, and post that their wireless is insecure. With that in mind, they should not be held liable if someone gets their information, as even if they were secured, it can be busted. It is like getting a virus on your PC at home, and you try to sue your ISP.
      No network is totally safe, especially a hot spot and wireless. But, I think that these insecured hotspots should inform their users that it is insecure. And WEP is outdated, they should use WPA2 for enhanced security.
      Also, maybe they should keep flyers available which explain some things to secure themselves a bit more. This would be a win-win situation
      instruct that they are at risk and
      give out information to help secure themselves

      • #3204465

        Well, why don’t we

        by old guy ·

        In reply to agree to a point

        turn their machine on, connect it to the wireless, open their programs, browse the Internet for them and just do it all for them? There is absolutely no excuse at this point that even the most novice user has not heard that these hot spots are not protected. Let them take their own responsibility for their own laptops. If they are not sure how to secure their own PC let them take classes and learn. It is their responsibility. The word is out and on the streets these hot spots are not secure.

        • #3204460

          You’d be surprised at the ignorance of many users

          by why me worry? ·

          In reply to Well, why don’t we

          Not that I am claiming that all users who use Wi-Fi are dumb, but many know about the problems of Wi-Fi security (or lack thereof) and simply don’t take it seriously enough until something catastrophic happens to make them think otherwise, such as having their identities stolen. I’m advocating that providers of Wi-Fi hotspots place signs and/or circulate pamphlets informing users about the dangers of surfing the web over a wireless connection and the risks of having personal information compromised. I’m not saying that these providers need to be hit with frivolous lawsuits, the likes of what McDonalds had to deal with because a bunch of obese gluttons, backed by greedy ambulance chaser lawyers, decided to blame McD’s for their weight problem and not themselves, but the providers need to assume some responsbility and properly inform people of the risks and dangers of engaging in such activity.

        • #3204458

          No, I’m not surprised

          by old guy ·

          In reply to You’d be surprised at the ignorance of many users

          but I’m tired of coddling these id10ts. Those who know already have their computers secured and their networks as secure as possible against those who know but are too stupid to care or do anything about it and they deserve to blow up their laptops.

          It’s just a pet peeve of mine that we cater to these kinds of idiots instead of making them take their own responsibility. That’s why the ambulance chasing lawyers have an endless supply.

        • #3204443

          I agree

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to No, I’m not surprised

          that users need to take responsibility, but I do think that having a sign or pamphlet is a good idea.
          Because these are areas hit by identity theives, there should be warnings. Besides, I know people who use a computer rarely. These people are usually guided on how to do things by someone that they trust, just because that person knows a little bit. But, that person may just be ignorant as well, or too young to know better.
          I am sure that everyone has heard that 8 year olds at home, seem to be the ones who get the computers on-line for parents, etc. Are these kids really thinking of security, or connecting???
          having an informative pamphlet would not be a bad thing, however a sign stating that it is an unsecured network may drive some people away. But the sign would be important if the wireless network was not secured at all.

        • #2481994

          Wheres the Pamphlet at the garbage can???

          by mikeaaaaaaaaa3 ·

          In reply to I agree

          So, to protect myself as a business I should have my customers sign a pamphlet? Maybe we should have the trash collector come by once a month and agree to a “Terms Of Use” with the understanding that someone can go through your trash and they are not responsible for this.

        • #2481983

          Read again!

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to Wheres the Pamphlet at the garbage can???

          did I say sign a pamphlet or a sign or a pamphlet???

          What it is too hard for you to put up a sign that tells people to beware when using your wifi hotspot because it is unsecure???

          As a business owner, you should already know about putting out signs for hazards like a mopped floor, etc.. These cause physical damage. Why do you think it is not important to warn people that they should be careful on WiFi???

        • #3205367

          Right.

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to No, I’m not surprised

          It’s perfectly legal to buy a car without having a driver’s license. Now if someone who doesn’t have a license buys one then chooses to drive it, not knowing how, and kills someone, who is responsible?

          Wwll, in this anology, since the highway is the ‘network’ on which the crime takes place, I suppose the state would be, right? ([sarcasm]I mean, surely the person who committed a crime by driving without a license wouldn’t be responsible, would he?[/sarcasm])

          Maybe the answer is to require proof of proficiency before allowing someone to operate a computer. That will generate howls of protest, and maybe spur com

        • #2473499

          Government Regulation Not the Answer

          by tomac ·

          In reply to No, I’m not surprised

          Trying to enact some kind of bill to require business to hand out pamphelet’s is just rediculous. First of all if any kind of bill like this passes, what you will see is business removing thier hotspot to avoid any kind of liability, or start charging customers for use in order to obtain liability insurance. That is what I will do. Maybe the trash collection company should post signs on dumpsters and hand out pamphelets warning people not to throw out bank statements too. Give me a break.

        • #2473459

          Should e-mail providers be fined too?

          by whannemann ·

          In reply to Government Regulation Not the Answer

          Now that’s great. And what about the e-mail providers that let spyware, trojans and all sorts of malware infect their user’s machines? Many thousands of users have given their banking data, including their passwords, unknowingly, to the bads guys… and they were NOT even using WiFi. Educate users – that’s the answer.

        • #2481987

          Here’s your sign…

          by mikeaaaaaaaaa3 ·

          In reply to You’d be surprised at the ignorance of many users

          Sign on potential Girlfriend: Sex with me may lead to pregnancy.
          this is so the guy can not claim in court that he had no idea she might get pregnant when being sued for child support…

          Sign on potential Boyfriend: warning, i have no intention of calling you in the morning.
          this will aide in the possible “truth in advertising” laws. He said he would call me your honor…

          Sign on pack of condoms: you must use product to realize full protection…
          this is to avoid potential lawsuit where the guy actually only thought he had to buy it, not actually use it…

          Sign on lighter: flame may be hot, do not touch flame… self explanatory…

          I could go on with potential signs but the bottom line is this, if you make it available they may come, if you have a lot of money and make it available then they will sue…

        • #2481976

          LOL

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to Here’s your sign…

          But looking at my lighter, it does have a sign… WARNING… starts it off.

          So what is the problem with putting a sign up specifying that it is not secure?

          Do you think that continuing the ignorance is the best thing to do???

          I actually like the idea of leaving a pamphlet stating some basic things to HELP protect.

        • #2481917

          Ok, if the business decides to leave a pamphlet…

          by mikeaaaaaaaaa3 ·

          In reply to LOL

          then great. here’s how I see it and maybe I’m being a little myopic. As soon as businesses start placing signs then they begin a tacit agreement that they have some sort of responsibility. Once they do this then you start the lawsuits.

          But I would rather see them start placing signs instead of the Feds mandating something… but personally, I say if you go to a WiFi hotspot then let the buyer beware…

    • #3204435

      This is tough

      by tig2 ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      Access to a hotspot for me is no big deal- my firewall will tell me if there is a problem. But I also know to use a firewall and I will be pretty guarded about what I do in a hotspot- checking a web enabled email account? Probably. Surf generally? Likely. Use a credit card? No way!

      But then again, I have a good feel for what I am doing. And while I think that others should be as savvy, the fact is that they aren’t.

      I’m more aware because I have been a victim of ID theft and not because I engaged in risky behaviour. Someone else did.

      I don’t see an easy answer to this. I would love to see signage and possibly a take away that tells an end user what the risks are. I don’t know that a legal liability statement would be enforcable.

      • #3205144

        Users need to be responsible

        by bill_ca ·

        In reply to This is tough

        The wi-fi providers are not the ones who took the decision to put “personal” information on the laptop, so why should they be responsible if it is stolen? The legal system has gone the wrong route. The fat person is responsible if they eat too much at McDonald’s. The smoker is responsible if they try a cigarette and become addicted. People need to protect their own laptops. You don’t see people suing the city because they didn’t lock their house and the city failed to protect it. Get real. People need to learn to take responsiblity for their own actions, and not blame it on anyone they perceive to have money. It’s not T-mobile’s hard drive on that laptop computer, so why should they have to protect it?

      • #3205089

        Not tough

        by roger99a ·

        In reply to This is tough

        This isn’t tough at all. We’re talking about stolen goods. The criminal is the one who stole them, not the property owner. Making people responsible for other people’s ignorance and bad behavior should be illegal.

        • #3204332

          Roger that, Roger.

          by old guy ·

          In reply to Not tough

          Totally agree with you.

          Sorry, couldn’t resist the little play on words. 🙂

      • #3204274

        I would…

        by Anonymous ·

        In reply to This is tough

        I would use a credit card transaction over a public wifi connection, provided it’s an SSL site, which most if not all sites are nowadays anyways. What’s the problem using credit card transactions? It’s encrypted from your PC to their site!

        • #3204231

          I’ve heard of SSL spoofing, so don’t be too confident

          by why me worry? ·

          In reply to I would…

          For what it’s worth, SSL is a great technology, but it isn’t all that hard to setup your own Certificate Authority and mint your own phony X.509 certificate to impersonate the real deal. It’s been done before by phishers and is continuing to happen every so often.

        • #3203585

          That wasn’t my point

          by Anonymous ·

          In reply to I’ve heard of SSL spoofing, so don’t be too confident

          The only thing I care about is some form of mitigation to casual snooping; encryption, and not the myriads of ways to hack, phish, trojanize and whatever else can be used to get passwords and other private data. It’s a layer of protection that is good enough to thwart casual snooping.

        • #2481986

          Much like fences

          by jessie ·

          In reply to That wasn’t my point

          Fences are put up to keep honest people honest, not to keep criminals away… criminals are the reason you get a monitored security alarm.

          Pleading ignorance never works in the court of law, unless you’ve got a LOT of money.

        • #3204222

          No longer true

          by gralfus ·

          In reply to I would…

          I was able to successfully do a man-in-the-middle attack on my own network and from my other computer visit “secure” https sites with the padlock icon, and intercepted all logins and passwords. I could even remotely watch the websites being viewed.

          The padlock doesn’t mean a lot if the network itself is compromised.

      • #3204154

        I recently saw a warning

        by mdhealy ·

        In reply to This is tough

        In a hotel room recently, before it would let me access the internet I had to acknowledge a lawyer-written page that basically said, you’re about to access an inscure network, if you don’t take appropriate security precautions the hotel cannot be held responsible for the likely consequences. Of course many people *don’t* take appropriate precautions — from where I’m sitting right now I can see seven wireless routers including mine, and two of them don’t have security turned on. Actually, it’s an improvement that only two of my neighbors are wide-open, until recently four of them were.

    • #3204376

      A sign or table top warning

      by zlitocook ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      Would be fine, I agree with what every one has said to a point. ID theft, computers being stolen, wireless is not secure and tons of other stuff has been in news papers, magazines, TV it is every where. People have seen or heard about all of this, if they have not then they should not be using a computer. Because like any device when you buy it you assume reasonability for it.
      Like a car, can you sue the company that makes it if it is stolen? How about if you leave it running and the doors are unlocked? That is sort of like a wireless connection; you sit down and turn your computer on. You have no firewall, no encryption, no VPN and maybe no up to date anti virus software. So you started your car in an unprotected area, you leave it unprotected, you leave the doors open and leave your self open to people that can use your ID any way they want.
      Sorry rant coming on, almost all computers that you buy have tons of software on them ( I hate that but that?s for another rant) and most of them have a trial version of an antivirus and other things.
      With all the media attention on ID theft wouldn?t you thing that every one would buy the software already installed or at least get free programs to protect them?
      All they have to do is search, Google or call their ISP and ask. Shoot just walk in to CompUSA or a computer repair shop and ask. But no most people expect the computer they just bought to do every thing and they should not have to do any thing. As for as suing a company for not protecting me, well I could sue the ATM makers if my pin was used by someone other then me, or I could sue Dodge because my mileage is not what they say it should be or maybe Microsoft because I keep getting updates and don?t want to install them.
      Ok I wiped the sweat from my forehead and have composed my self now. What do you think?

    • #3205404

      It’s the same old argument.

      by tonythetiger ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      How can you hold one person responsible for the wrongdoings of another?

      If you’re going to hold hotspot operators responsible for identity theft (if you can even prove that the identity was stolen through that hotspot), then you’re also going to have to hold them responsible for other illegal acts that someone who connects through that network might do… like illegally downloading music… or emailing a bomb threat to a school, for a couple of examples. By logical extension, you would then have to hold any ISP responsible for anything illegal their users do.

      Sorry, the person who buys the technology is totally responsible for its use or misuse, deliberate or accidental.

    • #3205400

      User beware

      by jdclyde ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      You are still more likely to have a credit card stolen by using it when you go out to eat.

      Another threat is someone that sets up their own access point to phish. Had never even heard of it before today. You think it is starbucks access point, but it could really be someone with a wireless card that can switch to work as an access point. The things people will do.

      People should still have to be responsible for themselves. There is already too much of people refusing to take responsiblity for their own actins in this sick sue happy world.

    • #3205376

      No

      by techexec2 ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      I see this as a [i]potential[/i] problem, not a real one. I think it is very likely that there are more people who have become sick from eating tainted spinach in the past few weeks than people who have suffered an actual loss through using unencrypted Wi-Fi hotspots. [no stats, just an illustration for my point]

      Providers of unencrypted Wi-Fi hotspots should not be fined. And, I would not be in favor of some law governing how these hotspots are run. I don’t think there must be a law for every harm that might befall a member of our society, especialy when the hotspots are run by private companies and the users are private users.

      On the other hand, providers of unencrypted Wi-Fi hotspots should be admonished to admonish their users about best security practices and the risks of using the hotspot. This should come from within the industry and from people like us here on TR.

      There is a place for government regulation. But, the government does not have to regulate every corner of the landscape.

      P.S. Great thread, by the way!

    • #3205332

      The basic idea has merit but this method is wrong

      by deadly ernest ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      Plenty of people have and use computers without wireless capability, they learn how to use it, then they adda wireless card without knowing the issues. If you feel that someone MUST provide advice on these issues to the general user, then it should be the people making the wireless capability possible. Make the wireless card manufacturers responsible for including a small brochure about the dangers with their products. if a new computer has wireless then it is part of the paperwork shipped witht he computer.

      If the purchaser chooses not to read it, then that’s their problem.

      From a business perspective if you increase the cost of providing a service, and it becomes non-profitable, then I no longer provide it. Then someone provides a blackmarket service.

      At present when McDonalds provide a wifi access, they do some checks on the quality of the service and how often it’s used. If they suddenly stopped doing that, because you just upped their liability insurance, they will stop checking the area. Someone else can then set up a fake McDonalds access site, and start collecting personal info. In the current environment, they can’t do that as the McDonalds staff check the service quality on a regular basis and would detect the fake access.

      No law in the world can stop people being lazy or idiotic or criminal.

    • #3205195

      Take one example: Starbucks

      by Anonymous ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      Just taking one of your examples, Starbucks, there are a few mitigating provisions in place and already some encryption involved. I think you’ve seemed to have trivialized the mitigations, as in, not mentioned any at all.

      First, Starbucks uses T-Mobile. See T-Mobile’s security statement:

      http://selfcare.hotspot.t-mobile.com/security.htm

      Secondly, you have to be a T-Mobile customer to even beging to get on the network in order to snoop around. That’s the first mitigation..and the risks begin to fall more after that. The point is that I don’t hink the networks are less secure than any public wired LAN network, such as the library, the only difference is that they provide the machine.

      Smart people will not put confidential or even personal data onto a public network, period. Usernames and passwords are encrypted and the practice of ensuring smart Internet practices, such as ensuring SSL is on when submitting credentials should apply.

      But even though there is mitigation and people should browse intelligently, they should still provide full-time encryption, it can’t be that difficult. The average user there should be able to compensate.

    • #3204124

      I don’t want a fine

      by nz_justice ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      and I have a personal unsecure wifi internet connection. and I’m pretty sure every one else that owns there own personal unsecure internet connection doesn’t want to be finded either. leave it the the goverment, normal gov types want to impose useless fines and taxes on people, becuase of “saftey” so eventualy if they can make money screwing there constiuantes they will do it.

      • #3203617

        finded???– lol

        by w2ktechman ·

        In reply to I don’t want a fine

        ok, I dont think that anything will pass (law) to fine people or institutions if someone does not protect their systems. This would lead to another 80’s frivilous lawsuit era, and would not be tolerated, especially because city governance (some cities, more all the time) are providing wireless services for the Internet.

        However, I do think that many people are oblivious to security while using these networks.
        My suggestions would be to do one or more of these.
        1. provide pamphlets with tips and information.
        2. when connecting, have an “I Agree” button (often will be disregarded) after an info page.
        3. the first 2 can be avoided if a signup is required. Have the information pages and then have a button to “save this page” on the security page, so it can be referenced later, then have the “I Agree” button. to continue.
        The security info page should be the first page of the account signup.

    • #3203621

      Users’ fault

      by charliespencer ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      Do you expect every free public access provider to issue an SSID and a WEP key to everyone who walks in the door? If they give it to everyone, how is that better than not having it all? How are you going to prove the lost data was due to the hot spot insecurity?

      “Yes, users are uneducated about wireless security and should not be expected to know what WEP or 3DES enryption is …”

      NO, users should be expected to know what encryption is! This is another sign of a U.S. culture that refuses to read the damn manual for ANY product. They should be prepared to accept the responisbility of learning what they’re doing or they shouldn’t be doing it. Why not a law assigning responsibility for the security of data on transmitted over public networks to the data owner, and exempt providers of free services? Put the responisibility back where it belongs. I don’t know what your motive is, but it sounds like an attempt to hit on a few deep-pocketed companies.

    • #2501350

      It’s always someone else’s fault…

      by mgp2 ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      If people are taught that “Ignorance of the law is no excuse”, why shouldn’t they be taught that “Ignorance of the proper use and also of the dangers is no excuse” as well? I mean, if someone uses an ATM and they let the person behind them see their pin, should the bank be fined?

      I have a feeling that the same people who get hijacked at wi-fi hotspots are also the same ones that’ll click on any link in an email promising “Instant Wealth/Larger Endowment/Beauty in a Pill”, if they haven’t already.

      Wow, I feel ten pounds lighter already. 😉

      MGP

    • #2498030

      Fined?

      by now left tr ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      No Way – they give us all free broadband. Ok you never do anything important on an usecured Wi-Fi spot, but hey – if the are stupid enough to leave the thing open in the public domain!

      Not sure how such things stand up in Law however.

    • #2528135

      Offer them a choice!

      by pletizia ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      Since there is no way to protect each individual user at every wireless hotspot you should load an encrytption software like http://www.protexx.com.

    • #2527737

      More work for lawyers and bigger govenment, no thanks.

      by it research ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      If you surf the web, you put yourself at risk. Firewalls, AntiVirus tools, Spyware blockers, Phishing Filters, Pop-up blockers help, but nothing is fool proof. A law of this nature would not make Starbucks, Atlanta Bread Company, etc…, require encryption, they would just shut down the service. The cost of litigation would be too high. I for one do not want more government and less features. However, I agree these locations should be required to post a warning along with the advertisement for free WiFi Internet access.

    • #2520945

      OH HELLLL NO!!

      by copisetic ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      You talk about biting the hand that feeds you? ( not that they are feeding you much )

      Just like when you walk outside every day your identity can be stolen, now who should be held accountable til the crook is caught?

      These places that provide free WiFi are doing you a favor in addition to the shameles advertising. Your identity can be stolen in your own home so whose accountable then? You own a laptop you know whats out there and whose out there, so protect yourself accordingly.

      But if I’m going to be held accountable for something some crook did, guess what… I’ll up the security on my WiFi network and charge you lemmings. And Oh yes!! I’m just one place, in a remote little corner of my town.

      But when the lawsuits start rolling in, it won’t be profitable and places start going out of business. More businesses will follow suit. Then you will see terms like; “Prepaid WiFi cards”, Sorry no WiFi here, and at the local McDonald would you like to WiFi your meal at the additional cost of $$$ (you fill that in).

      I’m a just a waiting for you lemmings.

      sheesh….

      • #2481575

        indeed

        by laurent.dujols ·

        In reply to OH HELLLL NO!!

        WiFi will be free soon. new ways of ensuring security will be found. WiFi will soon replace TVwaves [the frequency is already up for sale since HERTZian TV has moved digital and borrows other channels]. The infrastructure is already out there.
        Have you realized how much spam, spy, ads and popups we are already dealing with? Well this is a huge market and no-one will prevent it from growing, even those deep pockets who are trying to steal hotel and cafe customers right now. This is already shifting…

    • #2520941

      so is your dedicated phone line

      by dr dij ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      since anyone could put a tap outside your home and you’d not be likely to notice. ISPs have been known to tap and read communications also. famous case of ISP promoting a book site based on comm. they intercepted to subscribers.

      Wireless spots are not inherently unsecure based on lack of encryption since any users should be using SSL to secure sites. hacker did setup rogue wireless connect in a starbucks with almost identical name, hoping users would connect to him instead, and they did. he collected passwords, cc#s by passing thru the traffic to the legitimate network.

      I think basically you’d have to be doing something wrong to get hacked so not starbies fault.

      Still if you hold starbies accountable it will hinder biz, they may be likely to shut down the hotspots.

    • #2519552

      Common Sense

      by yourdatakeeper ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      I don’t access the bank or make purchases on an unsecured network. I don’t even keep that type of info saved on my pc. Personally I appreciate the convenience people provide for me by making these networks available, but I do exercise reasonable precautions when I use them. It should be the responsibility of each user to do the same. People who use “unsecured” hotspots should know from the nature of the connection (“unsecured”) that it means that what you send may be exposed. Those who want to offer connectivity to the public should not be penalized for trying to make the individual using a laptop able to be more mobile. Let’s not make this another case of “No good deed shall go unpunished!”

    • #2519551

      Common Sense

      by yourdatakeeper ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      I don’t access the bank or make purchases on an unsecured network. I don’t even keep that type of info saved on my pc. Personally I appreciate the convenience people provide for me by making these networks available, but I do exercise reasonable precautions when I use them. It should be the responsibility of each user to do the same. People who use “unsecured” hotspots should know from the nature of the connection (“unsecured”) that it means that what you send may be exposed. Those who want to offer connectivity to the public should not be penalized for trying to make the individual using a laptop able to be more mobile. Let’s not make this another case of “No good deed shall go unpunished!”

    • #2595205

      Who is Dumb and Who is Dumber

      by gjsterner9 ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      Holding HotSpot providers liable for the stolen identity of a user is moving in the wrong direction.

      I recently did an on-site survey of a Food Court where I?m in the process of setting up a HotSpot for the patrons to use.

      I asked over 100 people if they knew how to setup WEP security for a wireless connection. In every case, I got a blank stare then they asked what it was. I also showed them my laptop and displayed the list of available wireless networks in the area. When I attempted to connect to a secure link and the ?enter the security key? window opened they were dumbfounded to explain what it meant.

      If a Food Court were to implement either WEP or WPA encryption, how would the user be informed of the encryption key to be used? Do you put it on a display card on the table for everyone to see and walk away with.

      At present, I don?t know of any way to programmatically and automatically add an encryption key to a wireless connection, on the fly from a introduction web page.

      Until such time as technology provides a means to automatically add an encryption key to a user?s laptop or PDA for the appropriate SSID, the HotSpot provider cannot reasonably be held liable.

    • #2473527

      No

      by thegooch1 ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      Nope.

    • #2473517

      Nose Job!

      by wayne ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      In my opinion, and we all know what they say about opinions. I feel that we have to many people that don’t have any thing better to do with their lives than stick their nose in everyone else’s business. If ANY company or person wants to setup an open Wi-Fi spot then I think that any one that wants to use it should be allowed without someone else having to stick their nose in. If someones ID is stolen due to a Wi-Fi hot spot then it is up to our legal system to handle that situation and NOT someone off the street with NO legal back ground. If a company like Starbucks wants to put an open Wi-Fi system up for their customers then so be it, but they should have a sign up to at least protect their company from some sue happy idiot.

      • #2481992

        That’s the problem…

        by mikeaaaaaaaaa3 ·

        In reply to Nose Job!

        Even signs do not protect you from Sue Happy Idiots. No matter where you go you will find someone who will sue and someone who will accept the case. What we really need are lawyers ready to sue the sue happy idiots for frivolous law suits or better yet, change our legal system so that if you sue and YOU LOOSE YOU HAVE TO PAY ALL COURT COSTS AND LAWYER FEES… but that will never happen…

    • #2473515

      The question is should providers of an insecure web site be fined

      by pjboyles ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      Securing the wi-fi connection is not the solution. Web sites that contain sensitive information should be using secure protocols. A bank site should have no insecure content and neither should your e-mail provider. They should use “https” for all of their web traffic.

      Securing the Wi-Fi point with encription only provides a failse sense of some security.

      • #2481971

        That is why

        by w2ktechman ·

        In reply to The question is should providers of an insecure web site be fined

        I say the best thing to do would be to put out pamphlets at hot spots. These pamphlets can make suggestions about ‘best practices’ for using hot spots. They should also bring up the real threat of Identity Theft.

        At minimum I think that hot spots should have a sign up, easily seen, that state that the network is unsecured.

    • #2473513

      Agree to a point also

      by mtwallet ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      Providers and users should have some kind of mini firewall in place already if not, users beware. Like the old saying ” there is nothing free in this world today there is always someone out to screw with you.

    • #2473512

      The super-highway or the highway

      by kim.kendall ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      Equally, should the county council be liable for providing the tarmac for lunatic drivers to commit acts of death on?

      Of course not, and by the same token it would be idiotic to suggest that free WiFi providers should be held responsible for idiot users.

      It’s up to us all to protect ourselves against the badies of the internet. Take responsibility for yourself and stop looking to blame others – particularly an easy target rather than the perpetrator.

      • #2481969

        But to drive on the HWY

        by w2ktechman ·

        In reply to The super-highway or the highway

        you are supposed to have a drivers license right? Which basically means that you understand that there are rules of the road. Many hot spot users are ignorant of the ‘rules’ for an unsecure network. Having a pamphlet handy is not a bad idea.
        it should help those that do not know, how better to help themselves.

        If someone is too stupid to pick up the pamphlet, then that is their choice. But operating an unsecure network, and not doing anything is just as stupid.
        Raise awareness, and I think customers may be happier with your efforts, and may just change some of their habits!

    • #2473507

      disagree

      by robert j. ribaudo ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      Anyone that owns or uses a computer should be responsible for themselfs or dont use it.

    • #2473506

      Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      by adrian ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      In my opinion (for what it’s worth) absolutley not. If people want to use their kit in a public place they should have the common sense to protect themselves. After all, you wouldn’t walk around wearing you National Insurance or Driving Licence details on display along with your date of birth and current address, would you… Nah, if stupidity be the rule of the day then let them pay the price.

    • #2473497

      Just what we need–more government regulation!!

      by tomac ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      Trying to enact some kind of bill to require business to hand out pamphelet’s is just rediculous. First of all if any kind of bill like this passes, what you will see is business removing thier hotspot to avoid any kind of liability, or start charging customers for use in order to obtain liability insurance. That is what I will do. Maybe the trash collection company should post signs on dumpsters and hand out pamphelets warning people not to throw out bank statements too. Give me a break.

    • #2473434

      “Why Me Worry?” you are the problem with this nation.

      by prime12357 ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      I have never had a lower opinion of any post on this Web site. This type of reaction, thought, lack of understanding freedom, rights and justice truly scares me.

      All self-aware beings have the right to Life, Liberty and THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.

      I assume you have some awareness of what Life is, and while you obviously have no idea what Liberty is, I think someone needs to explain the “Pursuit of Happiness” to you.
      It means that I or Starbucks or anyone else can do anything that makes us happy so long as we do not interfere with rights of others (other peoples Life, Liberty or Pursuit of Happiness).

      You have no right to lobby your state officials to fine anyone for providing a free service and not providing every legal disclaimer humanly possible.

      I hope you and your kind rot in a very warm place. Don’t bother replying, I’m sure I’ll never vist this thread again and I will most likely unsubscribe from this Web site which has changed from good technical data to insane rantings like this.

      I can’t believe you would have the belief that…

      ” …the provider of the unsecure Wi-Fi hotspot be held liable if someone has their identity stolen by using that hotspot?”

      But you should be punished for…

      “I’m lobbying my state officials for such a bill to hold places like Starbucks and Atlanta Bread Company liable for what I deem as promoting unsafe computing habits.”

      Good Day Sir

      • #2481993

        Even though I don’t agree…

        by mikeaaaaaaaaa3 ·

        In reply to “Why Me Worry?” you are the problem with this nation.

        The person has every right to lobby their state official… no matter how stupid it may be. And by stating that they have no right you’re putting yourself in the same ball park… Maybe not on the same playing field but assuredly the same ball park…

      • #2481950

        Why, because he was trying to make a point?

        by w2ktechman ·

        In reply to “Why Me Worry?” you are the problem with this nation.

        so he is ‘the problem’?

        Just because you do not agree does not mean that you need to trash him…
        I didnt agree with him on many items, but he has his ideas. He brought it up to discuss as well, to gather information from others.
        If he was ‘the problem’ he would have only told us what we thought, got a bunch of signatures, and pretty much forced it down the state officials.

        I partially agreed with his comments here, but only to the point of having pamphlets and signs.
        But I do not think that it should be regulated by the state(s), I think that it should be something for businesses to offer.

        But by some of the comments here, it would seem that they do not care to inform their users that they may be at risk. To me this seems more like incompetence on the business side. What a shame. They would better serve their customers by offering pamphlets on how to help avoid ID theft, instead they bash at anyone bringing up the idea….

        • #2482650

          Bash pass

          by thegooch1 ·

          In reply to Why, because he was trying to make a point?

          Its open season on this guy. Fire at will.

        • #2482524

          on who? Me??

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to Bash pass

          what did I say here that would be so offensive? I stated my opinion, as I see it. I was not getting rude, just explaining. So what is the problem here?

    • #2481953

      Too bad Why Me Worry is no longer a member of TR to respond anymore

      by big ole jack ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      He got way too passionate about the whole H1-B thing and resorted to insulting Indians with duragatory and racist comments about their culture and whatnot. It’s a shame because he seemed like an intelligent fellow and always had interesting discussions which provoked thought and were sometimes contraversial as you see here. The guy got carried away, most likely because he had personal issues with Indians, and was thus thrown off TR. I hope he got help for his issues and can someday comeback to TR as a contributing member, as I have seen him to be quite helpful and knowledgeable with many technical matters.

    • #2481947

      No Providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined.

      by pukhraj.prajapat007 ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      Yes i am totaly agreed with the point what you explained here and also what i think is that there must be layer in the client side which provides the proper encryption or decryption. if it does happen than security issues can be improved. So basically we need a architecture in the os which will check that is it working on the wireless network area and if it is then it should on the inbuilt encryption and decryption technology.

      Thanks.

      • #2481946

        You obviously do not understand 802.11 very well

        by w2ktechman ·

        In reply to No Providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined.

        Even if you add encryption to the wireless net, the computers will see each other, and data travelling between your system can be captured in transit to the AP (access point).
        If your wireless card had a highly directional antenne, you would have to sit there playing with it to find the AP, and then you wouldnt be able to move far at all. Your network card and the AP both send signals in all directions (well almost all at least). Using a standard encryption on a public wi-fi network will do little to nothing, because all of the client computers connected have the encryption key.

        Best bet woul dbe to use a VPN in this issue, which encrypts further.

        Also, if at a hot spot, you should be careful about the sites you visit, dont do banking or purchasing items online from it.

        Being careful is the main thing, but having a firewall on your local system is also another big +.

        Its not so much that using the Internet at a hot spot will get you, its more the problem of someone near you, capturing your data

    • #2481754

      Survival of the fittest

      by adrianfoot ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      Businesses providing the public with a free service should be commended and can’t be held responsible for its missuse by criminals. Unfortunately the best way to catch these people would be with some kind of “honeypot” arrangements and some do-gooders would want to protect them against “entrapment”, and tell us the criminals also have rights.
      The use of computers is unlicensed and nature will take its toll of those who don’t have care for security first and those who do have a care but their protection is eventually cracked. However we must not lose sight of the fact that it is the criminal who is the only one causing the problem and the detection, identification and prosecution of the criminals is the only real solution. Anything else is tinkering round the edges.

    • #2481532

      Caveat emptor

      by wwachob ·

      In reply to Should providers of unsecure Wi-Fi hotspots be fined?

      While I generally agree that most users are not as sensative to network security issues as they should be, I believe that fining businesses for providing “free” wireless is absurd.

      My business provides free, open, unencrypted wireless to several thousand users each day. It is their responsibility to use that service intelligently. Intelligently means that they are discouraged from using it for Internet commerce, they are regularily cautioned about sharing personal information over the net. This capability has been in place for nearly 8 years (we were an early adopter of wireless) without incident. When we first deployed our service, it became an attraction element for our business.

      Now sadly, we are finding it necessary to close off the open service due to misuse of our network tools. The misuse hwever was not from outsiders and I do not believe that we will make a dent in the problem.

Viewing 31 reply threads