3 ms·
I operate a public WAP as part of the seattlewireless project. I do this for two reasons: - Not being able to access the internet seriously sucks. It took a mo
by sbierwagen 16y ago
I operate a public WAP as part of the seattlewireless project. I do this for two reasons:
- Not being able to access the internet seriously sucks. It took a month to get DSL in my apartment, and every time I wanted to check my mail in that month, I had to go to a coffee shop, or to work. Nobody in my building had an open point.
- It's a legal hack: Since my ISP never sees the MAC addresses of the machines connected to my router, there's no way to prove what traffic came from what. This may prove handy if the government drops the hammer on people who accessed the wikileaks cables.
For these reasons, it would suck if public wifi was killed. A more elegant solution would be auto-negotiated SSL tunnel to the router, over which all traffic would be routed. Protection from eavesdropping, without denying access to users.
- flawawa2 16y agoI hope you do not really think that allowing others to use your internet connection will protect you from any problems arising from bad things being done with your internet connection. But please do run a Tor exit node.
- andrewcooke 16y agoAren't these two sentences contradictory? Why would someone who is so worried about liability that they do not open up their wifi run a Tor node? Alternatively: are you implying that a Tor node is "more deniable" than an open wifi? If so, why?
- andrewcooke 16y agoI do the same, if I understand correctly - my home wifi is open. For the same reasons. I do watch the connection regularly, and I block the MAC addresses of people that appear to be downloading large amounts of data, running torrents, etc (so far MAC blocking has been sufficient - I haven't had a persistent user switching addresses or trying to use my own).