You can’t steal WiFi
Every time the legality/morality of using open wireless comes up, we are treated to yet another uninformed debate. People get worked up that someone might be “stealing” WiFi by accessing it without authorization but the analogies they use to explain why this is wrong reveal a stunning ignorance about how WiFi works. [1]
These are all actual analogies I have seen used to argue that using WiFi without express permission is akin to stealing:
- If you left your door unlocked, does that give me authorization to enter?
- If you left your bicycle in the driveway, am I authorized to ride it?
- If you don’t have a gate on your garden, am I authorized to wander around it?
- If you leave a hose on, does that authorize me to drink the water?
Those analogies suck. WiFi is nothing like a door, or a garden, or a hose, or a bicycle. As a public service, let’s look at the basics of open WiFi:
- The router actively advertises the open connection
- The user’s computer asks to use the connection, and the router authorizes the request.
The conversation goes something like this:
Router: Hey, free Internet over here! Come and get it!
Computer: Hey, can I have a connection?
Router: Sure, here you go.
You want a good analogy for using open WiFI? Open WiFi is like using a web site. Do I have to call up Google and ask permission [2] before I do a search? No, because behind the scenes my computer is asking for me:
Computer: Hey google.com, can I have a list of pages about “tour de france?”
Google’s web server: Sure, here it is
My computer asks Google for a service, their server grants the request. That’s no different from using open WiFi: my computer asks your wireless router for a connection, and your router grants it. [3]
You still want to use a hose analogy? At least keep it accurate:
I stand on the corner with a hose yelling “Hey, free water! Come and get it!” A man walks up and asks “Can I have a drink?” I give him one. Did he steal the water?
You can’t steal WiFi.
[1] I only hope the people who finally decide on the legality of using open WiFi understand the technology. The recent “series of tubes” debacle doesn’t raise my confidence.
[2] At least I know who runs google.com. My computer sees 6 routers from my living room. If I wished to seek permission, which neighbors would I ask?
[3] Some argue that Google intends for their servers to be public, while ignorant owners of open WiFi do not. This is likely true, but the situation is really no different from if you posted a photo online without realizing it was publicly available. Would it be wrong for me to view the photo? No.
June 22nd, 2007 at 8:13 pm
Of course it is theft.
If a person has a cable between his home modem and his living room computer, then even an idiot has to agree that breaking in and attempting to use his broadband is illegal. Ditto if you tried to tie in outside the house.
Just because the person decides to remove the cable and use a wireless connection, his broadband doesn’t suddenly become free. It’s still theft of the services that he’s paying for.
The only valid argument is: how do you know what’s freely given and what’s not. There needs to be a standard for SSID naming, so that it’s clear.
June 29th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
I think you misunderstand my argument. The wireless router is actively advertising and granting connections on behalf of the owner. Most people ignore this in their analogies, which skews the debate.
Your cable example makes using the wireless seems like theft. But it ignores the whole advertisement aspect. Here’s a modification that more accurately represents the transaction: A person stands on his front porch holding a cable connected to his modem. He yells “Free Internet!” at anyone who walks by, and if they stop, he hands them the cable and invites them to plug in.
Does it still seem like stealing?
The owner has invited anyone in the area to use his connection, although perhaps he didn’t intend to. Using it is hardly in the same league as breaking & entering or stealing a bicycle. Trying to equate the two smacks of the same disingenuous propaganda as the movie trailers that try to make us believe that downloading a movie is as bad as stealing a car.
We both seem to agree on the core problem, at least: Some people would be surprised to realize that they’ve configured their router to eagerly attempt to share their Internet connection. At the same time, wireless users can’t easily tell if the owner intended to share his connection (as some of my friends and many small businesses do) or whether the owner made a mistake.
it is sad, because this is something that could be solved fairly easily by the router manufacturers: If they shipped routers with open access turned off by default, then any remaining open nodes would be obviously intentional. I would much prefer a technical solution like this to a cumbersome legal solution, which I fear we will be saddled with.
July 8th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
So is an open door inviting to a greedy person. Just as to a wifi network. You’re rejecting the analogy for a faulty reason.
My neighbor is not Google; an advertised business that gets paid by your frequenting it.
It’s theft, stealing, trespassing, and it’s wrong.
July 10th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
I’ll say it again: wifi is not a door. It more like a doorman who invites people into your house. I strongly suspect that people who compare wifi to a door simply do not understand how it works, and I think this is the root of the problem.
Imagine the outrage you would feel if you moved into a new apartment, but didn’t realize it came with a doorman who would invite any passerby into your living room. If you came home and found your neighbors in your house, you would call it trespassing, when in reality your doorman had actually invited them in.
The problem is that many people simply do not understand wifi, and that manufacturers do not accommodate this lack of knowledge with more secure defaults.
August 6th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Good Grief! You’re broadcasting a signal for Pete’s sake. If you don’t want anyone using it, encrypt the damn thing.
August 7th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
OK how about this i do not want your wifi in my yard car Ext. ext. to me it is trash please remove it now
my argument is this
leave your hose on and it floods my yard i will be upset
park your car in my drive way i will have it towed
please to not throw trash in my yard
i find your signal as a intrusion of my private space
my computer keeps trying to connect to it and i have to tell it not to
i don’t think i should have to tell my computer to do anything as it is your signal causing the problem…….thanks your neighborly asshat
October 1st, 2008 at 8:28 am
Mike Elgan of Computer World makes a great analogy about open WiFi:
“The conventional wisdom is that using an open Wi-Fi network is theft. The argument goes something like this. “It’s my network, and my bandwidth, and by using it you’re stealing. It’s just like breaking into my house and eating my food. What gives you the right to use my property?”
But that metaphor doesn’t match what really happens when you connect to a Wi-Fi network.
A wireless router isn’t passive, or contained within the home or business of the owner. It actively broadcasts a radio signal dozens or hundreds of feet in 360 degrees. If you can see your neighbor’s network on your computer, that means he’s breaking into YOUR house, not that you’re breaking into his. That signal penetrates your walls and your body (the full effect on health has yet to be determined conclusively) and, of course, your computer. He’s affecting to a small degree what’s going on inside your computer. (What gives him the right to use YOUR property?)
If you connect via the signal of your neighbor’s router, you’re connecting to something that is inside your home, and has been placed inside your home without your permission. So it’s not like breaking into your neighbor’s house to eat his food. It’s more like your neighbor breaks into your house without your permission and leaves his food in your refrigerator. If you eat it, the legality or ethics of that usage or consumption is different, isn’t it?”
Makes total sense to me.