Is it illegal to connect to an unsecured wi-fi?

Remove all ads!

It's not really that simple with radio signals, actually. If you tap and decrypt military or confidental broadcast (possibly with state secrets) just because the "signal" goes through your property, you will still end up being prosecuted (at least if you do something with the information). If it was unsecured broadcast with state secrets (not likely, but let's assume it), then you could say "I didn't know what I received, it should have been encrypted", but you would still be in trouble if you've also used/published the information you recorded in that way. (If you get a document with state secrets in a letter, it's still a crime to publish/use it.)

Of course, this topic is just about connecting (without recording and using the tapped data), but I just wanted to emphasize that in the practice, the rule "it reaches my property, so I can access it" doesn't really apply to radio broadcast in such a raw way (it's obviously regulated properly in each country, but I'm not familiar with this field in details).

Actually, there might be something to help you. A flat of mine in Budapest, bought in 2006, was said to contain such a filtering system (embedded in the walls), they said it's something new stuff. Fortunately, mobile phone still works when I'm there (just kidding, it would be both strange and surprising if it didn't). I haven't examined or asked what sort of thing this is (probably not some tremendous invention), so I don't know any details (on a second thought, I even don't know if it's activated or not), search for it if you would like to prevent some signals "forced upon your home"

 

WTF?!?!

First, the output of WiFi, Bluetooth, cell phones, and other wireless devices is nominal...my Linksys WiFi router has output power of 18dBm...which translates to 1.78V @ 63.10 mW (0.0631Watts), also most "electromagnetic" pest control system actually use ultrasonic *sound* waves...which humans can't hear.

Considering that ESD can be several thousands of volts with much higher Wattage, I don't think that a 18dBm antenna is going to hurt anyone.

 

Didn't you know, Mobile phones are so bad that we all died in the 80's and this is all just a crazy part of the afterlife?

For some reason, whenever I try to secure my Wi-Fi, the network then refuses to let one of my work laptops on...not great when you run a business over the internet!

I'm lucky in that I live on the end of the road and the house to one side isn't close enough to access my signal and the guys next door have their own supplier

 

look, I am just arguing points that people could make, while I do not think this, some people do and they have rights.

radio waves are naturally occuring, these are artificial.

yes, precisely my point, those are secured and people have taken measures to break them, that is illegal, we are talking about an unsecure network, if people dont know enough to properly secure their network then they shouldnt moan when they use one and other people access it.
like I said, this is something that they are broadcasting outside of their home, it is their responsibility to make sure it is properly protected. its like giving away your wallet and then complaing that theyve taken money from it.

I am simply arguing logic, I know full well that the laws are there to protect the ignorant.

 

It is not illegal to connect use unsecured networks in Sweden, unless you have been informed otherwise. Technically just labelling the network as private is sufficient notice to make access by the public illegal. Circumventing security measures is illegal. Technically even just searching for encrypted networks is illegal. But for it to be illegal you have to purposely search (intent) and not just accidentally let the computer autosearch for networks.

A wiki article on the subject
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_Piggybacking

 

the law in this instance would have to relate the the circumstance, lets say for example, a person has their own Wi-fi connection, but then is detecting 6 signals from their neighbours and they connect to the wrong one?

I have another crap analogy:

Its like when someone commits suicide by jumping from a bridge and the council get criticised for not putting in place adequate prevention, the council built the bridge so its their responsibility, if it werent there, the person couldnt have jumped from it.

 

When I have family visit and my modem(router) is turned off; they ask if anyone else in the vacinity has a router they can connect too. I, take the bold move and turn on my router which takes only a few seconds. After that they can connect.

I don't have any password protection setup on my modem as I rarely use. Most of the time I use the internet for PS3 gaming or updating computer software once a week. I am online with my computer at most an hour; it maybe longer if a large software update is required (Vista SP1, etc...).

If needed I can quickly disconnect my router from the modem and directly connect the modem to my computer; another two minute job.

If my internet speed does slow down when I am online; I quickly shut off the modem and turn it back on after 5 minutes. Usually I will hear my tenants cuse as they tend to use my internet connect every now and than.

If someone does mess anything up; I will drop the router and connect only directly throught he computer.

As stated before I only have wifi setup for the internet because I like to play online games with my PS3 and now the Wii; though I will remove it if needed.

It is also my own fault if anything does happen.

People who seek legal action should spend their money fixing the mess they allowed instead of wasting not only their funds but those who screwed them over.

 

I don't know why people think this is stealing? Forcibly sharing ... maybe .. but calling it stealing is just hyperbolic. I even bought an antenna so people can use my connection. Of course, I've set a firewall between me and the outside world, of course.

Even if it is against the law, it's just the law because corporations want to suck money out of your wallet not because there's any reason to think that there are any "victims" of using someone else's connection.

 

If it is a service that you have to pay for, and you are obtaining that service by taking it off a paying customer (even if it doesn't effect them)... Then I'd call it stealing.

 

Using the logic of stealing from an unprotected wi-fi connection would make T-Mobil and their customers the biggest group of thieves ever thanks to the Hotspot program.

T-Mobil Hotspot program uses a wi-fi connection to offer their customers free to use cell minutes as long as they are in hot spot zone; hot spots are places that offer wi-fi connection, this includes personal wi-fi routers that do not have password protection. This being said, should the United States FCC and other countries communication bureaus sue T-Mobil for stealing?

Or has the world realize for Wi-Fi it is only stealing if you access a protected Wi-Fi network that you do not have permission to access?

Since a corporation encourages their world wide customers to select the hotspot options, I believe stealing from a wi-fi network occurs only if access a secure network that you do not have permission to access.