Penetration Testing: RE: Interesting Ruling Regarding WiFi access

["Jeffory Atkinson" <jatkinson () zelvin com>]

Nice find,
Really make you think. Using free wireless is illegal but not if there is a
message saying public then it is not. Maybe I am not seeing the whole
picture but I believe the burden of notification is on the owner/access
point. This is the case in most states. Using the articles example of a
radar detector, if you travel in to the state of Virginia you will clearly
see the burden of notification in black and white on sign stating they are
illegal. 

I am curious to here other thoughts.

JMA

-----Original Message-----
From: listbounce () securityfocus com [mailto:listbounce () securityfocus com] On
Behalf Of ebk_lists () hotmail com
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 12:43 PM
To: pen-test () securityfocus com
Subject: Interesting Ruling Regarding WiFi access

Given all of the discussion regarding wifi access and the legalities
surrounding it, I found this interesting:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,276720,00.html

While I find the ruling in this circumstance a bit extreme, I think that it
is good that we are now getting some case law to back up what has been up to
this point mere speculation on what *may* happen in a court.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
This List Sponsored by: Cenzic

Are you using SPI, Watchfire or WhiteHat?
Consider getting clear vision with Cenzic
See HOW Now with our 20/20 program!

http://www.cenzic.com/c/2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------------------
This List Sponsored by: Cenzic

Are you using SPI, Watchfire or WhiteHat?
Consider getting clear vision with Cenzic
See HOW Now with our 20/20 program!

http://www.cenzic.com/c/2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------