Hotspot leeching a sin?

[Reynardus]

I wonder if I’m being too scrupulous…

In a public mall, I was fiddling with my Playstation Portable’s capabilities and activated the Scan for Internet hotspots. Sure enough, there were one or two that didn’t have any security. So I activated the browser and voila, got in. I surfed the net for 15 minutes (and it was Catholic answers mostly.) and turned the PSP off wondering if I’m doing something wrong.

I highly doubt this is mortally sinful. But is this a venial sin? Do I have to make gasp restitution. I don’t even know which shop/office the signal is coming from.

 

[Della]

I know next to nothing about modern means of accessing websites, but if there is no security I would think it means it is open to being explored without any penalties. If that is the case, you have committed no sins at all, mortal or venial. Can I get an ?

 

[Caesar517]

I think it would be a sin to hack into a network, but if it was an unsecured signal, I don’t think it’s a sin.

 

[Marauder]

It would depend on where the signal was coming from. It is one thing to access a hot-spot outside say a Starbucks that allows for free access within the Starbucks. It is totally different to steal the signal from a place that isn’t allowing for free access.

P.S. If you can tell where it is coming from and you know they don’t intend on letting customers using it, it would be a good thing to let them know. This is a typical way hackers steal things like credit card numbers, personal account information, etc. From people that set up wireless networks and don’t know how to set up the security.

 

[TylerM]

I am familiar with this technology. This is a gray area. A security enabled wireless network is not hard to set up. It is probably for convenience that one is not set up. For this reason it is quasi-public. This is a silly example, but McDonalds chooses to have public restrooms rather that having people ask for a key like some gas stations. Do we use their utilities? Yes. Do we feel guilty for using the toilet without buying a Big Mac? No. Such facilities draw people in. If they have signs asking only customers to use the wireless, I would respect that. However, it seems hard call it stealing if they make it public and do not say a purchase is required. Of course, you could always just ask or sit in the shop while using the net. Many businesses would just like to get people in the door. Final word: follow your conscience and the advice of strongly moral people.

 

[Severus_Snape]

It’s fine, if it’s public and unsecured, it’s perfectly OK. If they didn’t want you, then they would have secured it.

 

[teachccd]

It’s fine, if it’s public and unsecured, it’s perfectly OK. If they didn’t want you, then they would have secured it.

I would have to agree. If there is an outdoor concert in which people paid to get in, I would not consider it a sin if you can hear it from a distance. It’s a secondary effect of the circumstances. I think that we tend to get too scrupulous about techincalities and forget to love others more. If you were looking at porn, then that is the issue within itself. So let it go and get to the big stuff like that homeless person or someone who is in need of a hug today…God Bless…teachccd

 

[MarcellusW]

I think that assuming it is ok just because you are able to access it is not the right attitude to have.

Most public stores that offer wi-fi access intend its use for their customers only, it is free, but under the assumption you are a patron, (just like parking). In this situation, it would probably be best to simply ask a store employee if it is ok to use the wifi even though you are not a customer. If they say no problem then its no problem. If they say no, then it would be wrong to access it even though it is unsecured.

Just because something is not secure or ‘locked’ doesnt mean it cant be stealing. Think of a thief stealing an unlocked car, it is still stealing. (I am not trying to say you are like a car theif, only to give a basic premise.)

Also, there was a FOXnews story about something like this a couple months back, I will search for it if anyone needs. This was alot different situation though. A guy parked his car outside of starbucks consistently for a couple of months just to access the wifi (which was free, on an unsecured network, for customers only), and… they ended up pressing charges when they found out about it.

 

[ibkc]

I
Also, there was a FOXnews story about something like this a couple months back, I will search for it if anyone needs. This was alot different situation though. A guy parked his car outside of starbucks consistently for a couple of months just to access the wifi (which was free, on an unsecured network, for customers only), and… they ended up pressing charges when they found out about it.

I would like to see the story, because I am wondering on what basis they were able to press charges. Their wifi was unsecured by choice; if they wanted to make sure that only customers could access it, they should have passworded it, made the password available to customers inside the store, and changed the password often. The only thing I can think of that would maybe have been a crime would be if the guy was using their connection to download many gigabytes of pirated media, or something like that.

 

[MarcellusW]

Here is a story from England. It sounds like even companies dont realize that their wifi can be accessed from outside their stores.

technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article2872726.ece

 

[didymus]

I would like to see the story, because I am wondering on what basis they were able to press charges. Their wifi was unsecured by choice; if they wanted to make sure that only customers could access it, they should have passworded it, made the password available to customers inside the store, and changed the password often. The only thing I can think of that would maybe have been a crime would be if the guy was using their connection to download many gigabytes of pirated media, or something like that.

He was committing theft. He was aware that the Starbucks wifi was for customers, all he had to do was go in and buy a coffee, but he chose to sit outside and pirate their signal. From what I understand (admittedly not a lot) it’s technically difficult to setup a wi-fi hotspot such as Starbucks offers so that there isn’t leakage beyond the store.

 

[Ray_Scheel]

From what I understand (admittedly not a lot) it’s technically difficult to setup a wi-fi hotspot such as Starbucks offers so that there isn’t leakage beyond the store.

Difficult to prevent leakage:yes

Difficult to use change the access password daily either on the router or using hotspot management software: no

2hotspot.com/

 

[MarcellusW]

Sure it is easy to setup a password, but try imagining the all the customers trying to logon to a secure network…and actually not having any problems and having to ask the employess often “can you show me how to logon?”

I taught an undergraduate computer tech class and half of them had a hard time logging onto the school’s network which should of been a relatively simple thing to do. I ended up having sit through with each one of them to show them how to connect to a simple wifi. Granted this is a different situation, my point is offering wifi is supposed to be for the customers convenience, and honestly alot of people have a hard time making their computers work when it isnt something that is done automatically (like wifi searching and connecting). Not to mention how much time it would take to offer tech support for those who had problems connecting. It would make the whole situation more trouble than its worth.

While I think it is legitimate to ask that most wifi networks be secured, it is still not right to assume that one is allowed to access someone’s wifi just because it is unsecured.

Why cant people just ask the store if they can use the wifi? It takes a minute and clears up the whole problem.

 

[Ray_Scheel]

Why cant people just ask the store if they can use the wifi? It takes a minute and clears up the whole problem.

With the growing number of public nodes available, in a mall it would be easy to presume public connections were for anyone in the mall itself. Still, a pop-up prompt for a password to connect isn’t that much additional complexity for a user to endure if someone does not want a wireless node leached from a total lack of security where leakage is probable.

 

[Starwynd]

I’d say yes, because it is using somebody;s service without paying, and that is a form of stealing, The commandment says “Thou shalt not steal”.

 

[didymus]

Difficult to prevent leakage:yes

Difficult to use change the access password daily either on the router or using hotspot management software: no

2hotspot.com/

Then it’s okay to steal just because the owner didn’t take security precautions? I hope you never forget to lock your car.

 

[Ray_Scheel]

Then it’s okay to steal just because the owner didn’t take security precautions? I hope you never forget to lock your car.

With the increasing prevalence of totally free access nodes being built into public infrastructure, this situation is more like setting out a water fountain that the owner intends to only be restricted use but not putting up any signs or barriers to indicate as much.

Further, an unlocked car does not openly declare its public availability the way an intentionally unsecured wireless node does. From the hardware of 802.11b forward, setting up
a wireless router or access point in an unsecured fashion required intentionally overriding the default secured mode. How is someone scanning for a free node supposed to tell which are free infrastructure nodes and which are intended for restricted use if the people setting up the ones for restricted use intentionally set those nodes up to advertise themselves as openly available? In any other situation, prosecuting someone for using a service that advertised itself as public use would be called entrapment.

 

[BlaineTog]

Plus it’s not like you’re actually stealing anything from them. The absolute worst thing you could be doing would be to slow down their network a little while you’re using it, but you’re probably not even doing that to any noticeable degree.

 

[newbetx]

Sure it is easy to setup a password, but try imagining the all the customers trying to logon to a secure network…and actually not having any problems and having to ask the employess often “can you show me how to logon?”

I taught an undergraduate computer tech class and half of them had a hard time logging onto the school’s network which should of been a relatively simple thing to do. I ended up having sit through with each one of them to show them how to connect to a simple wifi. Granted this is a different situation, my point is offering wifi is supposed to be for the customers convenience, and honestly alot of people have a hard time making their computers work when it isnt something that is done automatically (like wifi searching and connecting). Not to mention how much time it would take to offer tech support for those who had problems connecting. It would make the whole situation more trouble than its worth.

While I think it is legitimate to ask that most wifi networks be secured, it is still not right to assume that one is allowed to access someone’s wifi just because it is unsecured.

Why cant people just ask the store if they can use the wifi? It takes a minute and clears up the whole problem.

Well, I freeload, I guess. Sometimes I have no idea which business or house is providing the signal. I have a paid connection at home so I do pay for the service (Internet) but I may not be paying for the particular access point.

I take exception to the “difficult to get access” statement. The City of Austin has set up free wireless access in various places in town. Like some parks. There is no one to ask if it did not work. So far, I have had no trouble getting permission from the network to gain access. It would be simple for the supplier of the signal to post an opening screen that would claim it’s terms of use… “Customer only” or “free access”. One could easily sell advertising, too if they wanted.

While I would say it is not stealing unless specifically stated, other crimes are an issue. But using the access may be against the terms and conditions of the legitimate owner of the connection. So I guess I’m in the boat of those that use it like restrooms or water spigots. I don’t see it as stealing as long as there is no expectation of payment.