5 ms·
It is if you use it to maliciously interfere with someone else's network.
by NateyJay 10y ago
It is if you use it to maliciously interfere with someone else's network.
- mjolk 10y agoI suspect that the definition of "maliciously interfere" is the tricky part to define. In this case, the convention center was effectively DOS-ing its visitors/customers to vendor-lock internet access, which is as clean a case that a court could receive. AFAIK (and IANAL) in the USA (IANAL in other countries either :)), some areas even criminalize the act of intentionally joining an open wifi, so I imagine a court could be extremely broad in its definition of "interfere" -- in our technophobic atmosphere, I wouldn't be shocked if this extended to scanning for SSIDs outside of the context of the OS.
- necessity 10y agoBut in this case the hotel owned the network, so it seems it can be illegal even if you use on your own network, which is absurd.
- throwaway7767 10y agoThe hotel did not own the networks they were interfering with, that's why the FCC is getting involved.
- darkarmani 10y ago> so it seems it can be illegal even if you use on your own network, which is absurd They used it on other people's networks and their wifi APs. If they only DoSed their own APs, no one would care. You are allowed to DoS your own APs.