azurelunatic | Warchalking meets Glamourbombing

fishberryjam commented in response to my definition of "warchalking", I'd never thought about the anonymous glamourbombing possibilities presented by poorly secured computers on open wireless networks.

Okay, for everybody who I just lost... Wireless networking of computers is getting popular, and not everybody knows how to set up security on their wireless networks to make sure that someone just walking by with a wireless-enabled laptop can't just hook up to the network. So, a lot of people have networks that you can hook into just by walking up with a wireless-enabled laptop. Some of those same people don't know how to set up security on their computers so people can't just waltz in and poke through their computers, without even being in the same room.

If you've got the tools and the skills, you can leave magical messages and images in the unprotected computers of people with wireless networking.

*evil laughter*

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Random and unrelated, but a thought you might appreciate.

What's the LJ etiquette of leaving random comments in people's journals? The person who inspired that post you made asked a question that I have a novel answer to - but they guy doesn't know me at all. I hesitate to suggest it, though, because it feels somehow wrong to drop in randomly and say stuff.

Ettiquite is to introduce yourself and where you surfed in from first.

And then, of course, offer your suggestion.

Help and insights, freely offered, are good things. "You're such a fsking loser", freely offered to randoms, is not such a good thing.

Personally I would welcome such response.

The proper thing, as

azurelunatic explains, is to mention who, why, and how. Personally, again, while I find such information interesting, my feelings of privacy do not require it. But to accommodate others, it may be a good idea.

open networks is how I get my internet at some of my friends houses. Though realize it is tantamount to digital tresspass. *shrug*

Yep.

Am very aware of territorial issues on computers, as am geek. :-P

Silly geek am I.

After having given it some thought while walking to and from the parcel place, I've decided not to.

I'd feel obliged to give full details, since it involves disabling standard ease-of-use functionality, and I couldn't walk someone through making the required changes in Windows. (I could make them myself, if I had a Windows machine in front of me, but without feedback I couldn't walk someone else through it.)

My idea had been to disable the DHCP server on the wireless router. With that gone, most people will get a signal, not get an IP, and give up and go away. But it would involve manually setting IP addresses for every machine served by that router. I work that way as a matter of course, but most people rely on DHCP, even for extremely small networks.

Am not DHCP here. Is nice control.

Although there are people who leave it open deliberately, and even warchalk their own connections.

When I set up for wireless, I'll likely leave it open, but behind a bandwidth-limiting squid proxy.

Maybe it's just 'cos I live in the 'hood (seriously). But I've never had a problem with someone else jumping on my wireless connection, and I'm reasonably convinced of my own network security to think that if someone did use my wireless without my knowledge, they wouldn't be able to damage my boxen at all.

Warchalking meets Glamourbombing

no subject

Re:

Re:

no subject

no subject

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

shrug