|
Should those who slurp WiFi be jailed? | by Illiad | 2007-10-08 11:34:07 |
|
Yes. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-10-08 11:41:32 |
|
Agree, with second part anyway. Besides, if | by taitano | 2007-10-08 11:45:22 |
|
If you leave your house's door open, | by CynicalRyan | 2007-10-08 11:46:47 |
|
Different situation | by subbywan | 2007-10-08 11:47:56 |
|
How don't I have that claim? | by CynicalRyan | 2007-10-08 11:51:33 |
|
Because you're technically broadcasting. | by shadowsystems | 2007-10-08 12:00:56 |
|
Which means that the system is wrong. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-10-08 12:04:48 |
|
The owner of the AP is actively broadcasting | by joecrouse | 2007-10-08 12:17:02 |
| Actually, it is not "actively broadcasting". |
by CynicalRyan |
2007-10-08 12:20:57 |
In the stricter sense. You have to be on the WiFi network, to actually receive the payload, and not just the radio waves.
To actually make use of the AP, you have to connect to it.
Short: you can sniff the traffic (if your hardware supports a *special* promiscuous mode), but you cannot utilize the router's functions.
If your hardware doesn't support promiscuous mode, you won't see the traffic, but only the SSID (sp?) of the router. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
CMIFAW. An unsecured AP is actively distributing | by joecrouse | 2007-10-08 12:23:13 |
|
You have to set that up. | by subbywan | 2007-10-08 12:24:53 |
|
When setting up an AP, You are litteraly asked | by taitano | 2007-10-08 12:38:48 |
|
Like a trucker's CB radio. (n/t) | by taitano | 2007-10-08 12:39:31 |
|
nope, not with many of them | by Freakazoid | 2007-10-08 14:22:29 |
|
Yep, and many of them end up connecting | by ToLazyToThink | 2007-10-08 16:50:03 |
