Bill Knight wrote:
> True "Wardriving" is not illegal as long as you do not log on to the
> network. "Packet sniffing" is illegal if you do not have permission to be
> on the network. I may be wrong but in order to "sniff packets you have to
> log on to the network. If using at work, you have permission to be on the
Not necessary to log into the network. You can sniff packets with a
wireless card in "RF monitor mode." All this does is allow the card to
pick up all of the RF that it sees (like using a radio scanner). It
can't be detected because there is absolutely no transmission of any
type from the radio that is in monitor mode (hence the name "monitor mode").
What's more, the monitor mode tools (like Kismet) work better than tools
that actually have to probe for networks because they detect "cloaked"
networks and networks with SSID broadcast turned off like there is
nothing to it.
> network. Packet sniffing at college campuses is used to find illegal use is
> used by people that have permission on the network. The reason I believe
> this to be illegal is if a person has "WEP" turned on enough packets can be
> sniffed to break the "WEP" encryption. This is why WEP is not considered to
> be secure. Yet at the same time unless you have a lot of info traveling it
> has been said that it could take up to 3 days to get enough packets to break
> 128 bit encryption WEP. As for proving somebody is on the network illegally
> "IP Scanner" will check for all IP addresses on the network. It will also
> show the unique MAC address/encoded number of the NIC card along with the
> computer name. Granted as stated it does take a little "Tech Savy" to get
I could set the "computer name" to be anything I want, as well as
forging the MAC address to be something else. Neither of those are
sufficient ways to identify the person.
I'm not trying to say this is not illegal -- just trying to prove the
point that it is very difficult to obtain adequate proof if the person
breaking the law is careful about what they are doing.
> this info. The software is free and easy to use, but alot of people do not
> know about it. But I prefer the European way of thinking and the New
> Hampshire way. If you have a wireless network and it is not secured and
> somebody uses it. Your fault. If secured and you catch them you can sue
> the pants off of them.
That's the point I was trying to make, yes. More people are going to
start thinking that way as time progresses.
-Bill
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jan 01 2005 - 11:48:08 EST