full-disclosure - Wireless legal to eavesdrop

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.0.20040423192426.01b14120@mail.buckeye-express.com>
From: sidhayn at buckeye-express.com (Richard Farina)
Subject: Wireless legal to eavesdrop

I apologize for appearing on the list magically and responding to this, but 
as an active kismet user and someone who runs a business in wireless 
security (among other things), I thought I should throw in my .02 cents.

As far as my research has showed me, you are allowed to RECIEVE wireless 
traffic for anything except certain frequencies (cell phones, government 
bands) or encrypted traffic (satellite tv, WEPed APs). The information you 
may intercept, however, cannot be rebroadcast or used for personal 
(business) gain.  Just my .02.

-Richard Farina

At 06:21 PM 4/23/2004, D B wrote:

> > Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 08:21:01 -0700 (PDT)
> > From: D B <geggam692000@...oo.com>
> > To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
> > Subject: [Full-Disclosure] Wireless legal to
> > eavesdrop
> >
> > I have been reading and am wanting some other
> > opinions.
> >
> >
>http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/wiretap2510_2522.htm
> >
> > ( this does pertain only to the US .. my apologies
> > to
> > those outside )
> >
> > **snip**
> >
> > (g) It shall not be unlawful under this chapter or
> > chapter 121 of this title for any person--
> >
> >     (i) to intercept or access an electronic
> > communication made through an electronic
> > communication
> > system that is configured so that such electronic
> > communication is readily accessible to the general
> > public;
> >
> >     (ii) to intercept any radio communication which
> > is
> > transmitted--
> >
> >     (I) by any station for the use of the general
> > public, or that relates to ships, aircraft,
> > vehicles,
> > or persons in distress;
> >
> >     (II) by any governmental, law enforcement, civil
> > defense, private land mobile, or public safety
> > communications system, including police and fire,
> > readily accessible to the general public;
> >
> >     (III) by a station operating on an authorized
> > frequency within the bands allocated to the amateur,
> > citizens band, or general mobile radio services; or
> >
> > **snip**
> >
> > part III of the above pertains to the bottom 6
> > channels of wireless. ( channels 1 - 6 are in the
> > amateur radio spectrum )
> >
> > Does this mean if someone is not using WEP on those
> > channels all their information is as open as
> > something
> > I pick up on the police scanner ?
> >
> > opinions ?
> >
> >
>
>i would like to thank those who replied to me on and
>off list
>
>the reason i posted this is because i have been
>butting heads with a local wireless ISP , it seems a
>trend among several smaller wireless ISPs is to not
>use WEP or WPA to get more customers per access point
>
>so the entire town is blanketed with peoples emails
>and other such things, just turning on kismet will
>fill my poor little zaurus up in minutes
>
>when i tried to make the people aware of this in the
>towns they serve ...well ..it has been a struggle
>
>think im on the downhill side tho ...
>
>thanks again
>
>
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25?
>http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
>
>_______________________________________________
>Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
>Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html