Brits "could face legal action" for leaving Wi-Fi unsec

[brianzion]

EXTRACT FROM PC PRO

By Stewart Mitchell

Posted on 18 May 2010 at 13:59
Britons could face the prospect of legal action for not securing their Wi-Fi connections, according to a legal expert at Sheffield University.

The warning follows a German case that saw a broadband subscriber fined for not securing his wireless network, which was used to download music illegally.

If the Digital Economy Act comes into force in the UK, similar cases of liability for having an unsecured network could follow here.

There's no real definition of what 'allow' means and it could be that not setting a password could be taken as 'allowing' someone to use your network

“The German case is an illustration of what could happen here, so it's a bit of a salutary warning,” said Lilian Edwards, professor of internet law at the University of Sheffield. “At the moment there's no legal requirement to lock down your network – it's not a crime to leave it open, but it may break the terms and conditions of your ISP, and it could take legal action.”

Under the Digital Economy Act, however, you could be sent warnings and eventually disconnected from the internet if you “allow” someone else to download content illegally – a grey area that could be exploited by media industry lawyers.

“There's no real definition of what 'allow' means and it could be that not setting a password could be taken as 'allowing' someone to use your network,” said Edwards.

However, she stressed that any such sanctions would have to wait until the "technical measures" part of the Digital Economy Act had come into force, something that still requires Ofcom's recommendation in a year's time, plus a new vote in both houses of Parliament.

Campaigners against the act hope the downloading sections of the Act could be repealed by the new Government. In line with pre-election promises from now Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, party members at this week's Liberal Democrats conference called on their ministers and MPs “to take all possible steps to ensure the repeal” of large swathes of the Act.

THIS COUNTRY IS A JOKE SOMETIMES

 

[z3r010]

Honestly I dont think this will pass the second vote in anything like it's current form.

 

[kronckew]

especially since the party that started that legislation is no longer in the driver's seat.

 

[brianzion]

how many pc users out there are unaware that they use a unsecured router?

 

[z3r010]

how many pc users out there are unaware that they use a unsecured router?

7 out of 10 on my street run unsecured wifi, which is quite lucky for me if my Internet ever goes down

 

[brianzion]

yes we have that in our street ok if they pay for unlimited access but how would you feel if someone was using your internet access?

 

[kucing13]

i feel......

 

[brianzion]

service providers should be encouraged to set the wireless up and also networking. sharing files etc also friends and family being unsecured aint cool

 

[kucing13]

you could spread malware/spyware easily

 

[manhunter2826]

The entire Digital Economy Bill is a mess from what I've read...

 

[brianzion]

very true very true:mad2:

 

[DarkStar GT]

... and if I leave my keys in my unlocked car and someone takes it to commit a bank robbery or worse, would I be similarly liable? Roll on the coalition ("ConDemNation" I saw written somewhere)

[off-topic]
PS1: There'll be a surcharge on your TV licence to pay (BT?) for nation-wide "fast" broadband infrastructure.

PS2: I recently heard of a scrappage deal for analogue radios - get 10%? off a DAB radio. But why bother?

PS3: We have 4 analogue radios and 2 stereo receivers here. Times 30 million households and that's 180 million usable products ending up in landfill - not very green is it. And DAB quality is not so good. :shrug:
[/off-topic]

 

[z3r010]

Darkstar, as I understand it there will not be a surcharge on the TV Tax licence, just the BBC will get less and the rest will go to the fibre roll out. (edit) more info here - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/10131375.stm

Radio scrappage - I think this will be scrapped in the June budget, as one of the wasteful spending commitments that we cant afford.

 

[Barman58]

Back on topic

I have noticed a change in the way that consumer broadband packages are provided - whereas the default security was always set to no security, now you tend to see a WPA2 with a fairely secure password pre-set when the package is shipped to the user.

This is reflected in the status of wireless networks that show up in my area - the number of unsecured systems is a lot lower than it used to be.

On an interesting side-note to this - what would be the situation if the act was passed for those providing free hotspot wireless access - coffee shops and the like?

 

[manhunter2826]

Another thought, esp. with regards to Barman's insightful comment: there is probably a correlation here too with anti-terrorism legislation. The UK Govt. might not say so explicitly...

 

[kucing13]

i think many people setup their WI-FI unsecured. WPA2 means nothing to them?

 

[mpcrsc562]

i think many people setup their WI-FI unsecured. WPA2 means nothing to them?

I don't think the know anything about it. I think people think of everything as being "plug and play" and no further attention needs to be given to it.

As far as the main topic, I heard about this on the local radio station the other day. In theory, I agree with it. But as we all know, more often than not, implementation is usally knee-jerk so it is not done right at all. I think there needs to be more to enlighten "less informed users" of the security benefits of setting up home wireless networks without any security.

 

[HMonk]

@Brianzion: you say "THIS COUNTRY IS A JOKE SOMETIMES"

Yes, and we here across the pond are doing our best to outdo you.

Monk

 

[CarlTR6]

@Brianzion: you say "THIS COUNTRY IS A JOKE SOMETIMES"

Yes, and we here across the pond are doing our best to outdo you.

Monk

You nailed that!!

 

[HMonk]

This reminds me of one glaring example of an instance where people are wont to project their responsibility on to someone/some place else.

I am a Harley rider and, over the years, Harley-Davidson has had to defend itself in lawsuits (many related to laying the bike down and mangling a leg) because the lawyers claimed Harley was producing an inherently dangerous product.

Well duh . . . .

Monk