Register Guidelines E-Books Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   MobileRead Forums > Miscellaneous > Lounge

Notices

View Poll Results: Should browsing on an unsecured wireless network become legal?
Yes, it should become legal 26 59.09%
I have no opinion 6 13.64%
No,browsing on unsecured wireless networks is and should remain illegal 12 27.27%
Voters: 44. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-18-2008, 03:52 PM   #46
ShortNCuddlyAm
WWHALD
ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
ShortNCuddlyAm's Avatar
 
Posts: 7,879
Karma: 337114
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Mitcham, Surrey, UK
Device: iPad. Selling my silver 505 here
Quote:
Originally Posted by badgoodDeb View Post
I've had some probs getting WEP to work, since I had mixed computer flavors in the house (mac/pc). I opted for "allow in only these specified machine numbers" protection. Is there any reason this is a bad idea?
You should still be able to use some form of encryption (WPA is stronger than WEP, so if you have the option to use WPA, go for that) - we have a mix of Macs and PCs (as well as smart phones, games consoles, and a brace of N800s) in the house, and use WPA quite happily. We also use MAC
addresses(*), because we're paranoid

I can't think of a good reason why it would be a bad idea to control access by MAC address. It can get annoying if you have a lot of devices to add, but it is reasonably secure (not completely, nothing is).

(* MAC(***) addresses are the machine numbers, or more accurately the network card(**) identifiers, that each network device has. It has nothing to do with Apple Mac computers)

(** computers etc that connect wirelessly still have a network card of sorts)

(*** It stands for Media Access Control. And yes I know I've played silly buggers with the order of the footnotes )

Last edited by ShortNCuddlyAm; 11-18-2008 at 03:52 PM. Reason: can't spell this evening...
ShortNCuddlyAm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2008, 04:45 PM   #47
rlauzon
Wizard
rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.
 
rlauzon's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,018
Karma: 67827
Join Date: Jan 2005
Device: PocketBook Era
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertgrandma View Post
Okaaaay........but wouldn't this hacker be looking for a unsecured network first? That would be way easier than hacking a secure network.
Certainly. But your "secure" network (assuming that you are using WEP) isn't much more secure than an unsecured network.

Quote:
Originally Posted by desertgrandma View Post
And realize I am less than knowledgeable about how all this works, but couldn't this 'child porn server' be traced back to its original source?
Not necessairly. There was an incident a few years ago where a person hijacked a Home Depot wireless network to set up a child porn server. The server basically ran off his car, which he parked near the store. It took the police quite some time to track down the server since it was almost never there when they were.
rlauzon is offline   Reply With Quote
Advert
Old 11-18-2008, 04:48 PM   #48
rlauzon
Wizard
rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.
 
rlauzon's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,018
Karma: 67827
Join Date: Jan 2005
Device: PocketBook Era
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan View Post
You could claim ignorance in either case, and it would probably have the same impact on the court.
Sure. If the court was made up of people who knew about wireless networks, which probably won't be the case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan View Post
But if your network was secured, you could claim that you did what you could to restrict such access, to a reasonable degree.
Which means that you are probably an accessory to the crime and lying to the court about your involvement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan View Post
If you left it open, you could easily be held liable due to negligence (where ignorance is considered no excuse).
What negligence? It's not illegal to open your wireless network. It may be a violation of your contract with your service provider, but there's no law against an open network.
rlauzon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2008, 05:07 PM   #49
desertgrandma
Enjoying the show....
desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
desertgrandma's Avatar
 
Posts: 14,270
Karma: 10462841
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Arizona
Device: A K1, Kindle Paperwhite, an Ipod, IPad2, Iphone, an Ipad Mini & macAir
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlauzon View Post
Sure. If the court was made up of people who knew about wireless networks, which probably won't be the case. Of ocurse not, that why your lawyer finds the experts



Which means that you are probably an accessory to the crime and lying to the court about your involvement. How can securing my network connection be turned into being involved with something like this? It just doesn't make sense. You secure your connection to prevent stuff like this, not invite it. Thats a lot like saying locking your car or house and getting it broken into makes you an accessory to that.



What negligence? It's not illegal to open your wireless network. It may be a violation of your contract with your service provider, but there's no law against an open network.
It may not be illegal, but it is certainly negligence. Failing to take proper precautions.

I'm sorry, but I just can't buy your argument. In this day and age, you must take whatever care you can to keep from being a victim. Saying that securing your connection links you to the crime committed by thieves is ludicrous.
desertgrandma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2008, 05:54 PM   #50
rlauzon
Wizard
rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.
 
rlauzon's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,018
Karma: 67827
Join Date: Jan 2005
Device: PocketBook Era
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertgrandma View Post
It may not be illegal, but it is certainly negligence. Failing to take proper precautions.
You keep asserting that it's negligence without backing it up with any argument.
So I'll ask yet again: how is it negligence to have an open network?

Quote:
Originally Posted by desertgrandma View Post
I'm sorry, but I just can't buy your argument. In this day and age, you must take whatever care you can to keep from being a victim. Saying that securing your connection links you to the crime committed by thieves is ludicrous.
Argument:
You claim your network is secure.
The bad guys used your network to commit a crime.
Since your network is secure, the bad guys must have had your cooperation, which makes you an accessory.

It's a rather simple argument and, unless the court is tech savvy, one that is reasonable.
rlauzon is offline   Reply With Quote
Advert
Old 11-18-2008, 06:15 PM   #51
ShortNCuddlyAm
WWHALD
ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ShortNCuddlyAm ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
ShortNCuddlyAm's Avatar
 
Posts: 7,879
Karma: 337114
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Mitcham, Surrey, UK
Device: iPad. Selling my silver 505 here
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertgrandma View Post
It may not be illegal, but it is certainly negligence. Failing to take proper precautions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlauzon View Post
You keep asserting that it's negligence without backing it up with any argument.
So I'll ask yet again: how is it negligence to have an open network?
I think the "failing to take proper precautions" that she mentioned.

In the same way that it is not a criminal offence to leave the door of your premises(*) unlocked when no-one is in, but if some one then waltzes in and does something illegal then you would be considered, at the very best, naive and a bit stupid.

Although your arguments suggest you think people should leave their front doors unlocked, as if they claim to have secured their premises by locking the door, and a criminal gains entry by picking the lock, then you must have co-operated with the criminals.

The jury and/or judge may not be tech savvy, but the prosecution should explain things to them in a way a lay person can understand - or call witnesses who can. I'm sure there must be plenty of things brought before court in which the jury are not experts...

(* house, car, office, shop etc etc and so forth)
ShortNCuddlyAm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2008, 06:24 PM   #52
pshrynk
Beepbeep n beebeep, yeah!
pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
pshrynk's Avatar
 
Posts: 11,726
Karma: 8255450
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: La Crosse, Wisconsin, aka America's IceBox
Device: iThingie, KmkII, I miss Zelda!
The principle of "Attractive Nuisance" makes you liable for having an open network that someone uses for nefarious purposes.

If you have a secured network, then you are covered inasmuch as the prosecution needs to prove that you cooperated with the criminals who hack your system. There is no ipso facto assumption that if they are there, you are complicent.

I would be interested in case law that would support the idea that a secured network menas that you are liable for what hackers do when they illegally enter your system.
pshrynk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2008, 07:16 PM   #53
Patricia
Reader
Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Patricia's Avatar
 
Posts: 11,505
Karma: 8720163
Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Wales, UK
Device: Sony PRS-500, PRS-505, Asus EEEpc 4G
It occurs to me, pshrynk, that if you ever work from home (answering emails, for example, or writing up notes) that your workplace might well help with computer security. Mine will provide some help in this area because they realise that academics work from home or use their laptops in archives.
Patricia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2008, 08:23 PM   #54
Steven Lyle Jordan
Grand Sorcerer
Steven Lyle Jordan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Steven Lyle Jordan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Steven Lyle Jordan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Steven Lyle Jordan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Steven Lyle Jordan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Steven Lyle Jordan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Steven Lyle Jordan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Steven Lyle Jordan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Steven Lyle Jordan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Steven Lyle Jordan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Steven Lyle Jordan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Steven Lyle Jordan's Avatar
 
Posts: 8,478
Karma: 5171130
Join Date: Jan 2006
Device: none
Quote:
Originally Posted by pshrynk View Post
I would be interested in case law that would support the idea that a secured network menas that you are liable for what hackers do when they illegally enter your system.
As would I.
Steven Lyle Jordan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2008, 08:55 PM   #55
desertgrandma
Enjoying the show....
desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
desertgrandma's Avatar
 
Posts: 14,270
Karma: 10462841
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Arizona
Device: A K1, Kindle Paperwhite, an Ipod, IPad2, Iphone, an Ipad Mini & macAir
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlauzon View Post
You keep asserting that it's negligence without backing it up with any argument.
So I'll ask yet again: how is it negligence to have an open network?



Argument:
You claim your network is secure.
The bad guys used your network to commit a crime.
Since your network is secure, the bad guys must have had your cooperation, which makes you an accessory.

It's a rather simple argument and, unless the court is tech savvy, one that is reasonable.

Wrong, oh kemo sabe. I claim I secured my network as recommended by my network provider, using their guidelines, to prevent unauthorized used of my bandwidth.
Now, tell me how in the widest stretch of the imagination you can possibly say I 'conspired' or in anyway helped thieves gain access??

(sorry, would have answered sooner but was away.....)
desertgrandma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2008, 10:20 PM   #56
pshrynk
Beepbeep n beebeep, yeah!
pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pshrynk ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
pshrynk's Avatar
 
Posts: 11,726
Karma: 8255450
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: La Crosse, Wisconsin, aka America's IceBox
Device: iThingie, KmkII, I miss Zelda!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patricia View Post
It occurs to me, pshrynk, that if you ever work from home (answering emails, for example, or writing up notes) that your workplace might well help with computer security. Mine will provide some help in this area because they realise that academics work from home or use their laptops in archives.
The exigencies of privacy for health care information makes it nearly impossible to take work home with you if you work in health care. I'd love to be able to access patient charts when I'm on call, but they cannot allow it. So, they have minimal concern with my home network privacy.
pshrynk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2008, 06:09 AM   #57
rlauzon
Wizard
rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.
 
rlauzon's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,018
Karma: 67827
Join Date: Jan 2005
Device: PocketBook Era
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShortNCuddlyAm View Post
I think the "failing to take proper precautions" that she mentioned.
Which is undefined for this topic. What is "proper precautions" for wireless networks?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShortNCuddlyAm View Post
Although your arguments suggest you think people should leave their front doors unlocked, as if they claim to have secured their premises by locking the door, and a criminal gains entry by picking the lock, then you must have co-operated with the criminals.
My argument suggests nothing of the sort.

Let's use your example: You have a house with a top of the line security system. You go on vacation. A bad person comes in and uses your house for illegal purposes. They are caught and, when examined, the top of the line security system was working properly and had not been disabled.

Are you going to tell me that a court will not try, very hard, to not hold you responsible for what the bad person did? A prosecutor will make a very convincing case that you had knowledge since the bad person was able to use the house despite your top of the line security system.
rlauzon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2008, 06:10 AM   #58
rlauzon
Wizard
rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.
 
rlauzon's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,018
Karma: 67827
Join Date: Jan 2005
Device: PocketBook Era
Quote:
Originally Posted by pshrynk View Post
The principle of "Attractive Nuisance" makes you liable for having an open network that someone uses for nefarious purposes.
Those laws were made to make sure that the neighbor's kid didn't drown in your pool.

An open network is not an "Attractive Nuisance" since you won't notice it unless you are looking for it.
rlauzon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2008, 06:12 AM   #59
rlauzon
Wizard
rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.
 
rlauzon's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,018
Karma: 67827
Join Date: Jan 2005
Device: PocketBook Era
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertgrandma View Post
Wrong, oh kemo sabe. I claim I secured my network as recommended by my network provider, using their guidelines, to prevent unauthorized used of my bandwidth.
Now, tell me how in the widest stretch of the imagination you can possibly say I 'conspired' or in anyway helped thieves gain access??
The thieves gained access. Your network was secure. Therefore they must have had your cooperation. Otherwise how did they gain access?

Having your network secured as recommended by your network provider, using their guidelines, to prevent unauthorized used of my bandwidth, only makes it harder for you to claim that you had nothing to do with it.
rlauzon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2008, 08:31 AM   #60
desertgrandma
Enjoying the show....
desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.desertgrandma ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
desertgrandma's Avatar
 
Posts: 14,270
Karma: 10462841
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Arizona
Device: A K1, Kindle Paperwhite, an Ipod, IPad2, Iphone, an Ipad Mini & macAir
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlauzon View Post
The thieves gained access. Your network was secure. Therefore they must have had your cooperation. Otherwise how did they gain access?

Having your network secured as recommended by your network provider, using their guidelines, to prevent unauthorized used of my bandwidth, only makes it harder for you to claim that you had nothing to do with it.

No sense in continuing this discussion.

Your arguments remind me of my 5 yr old granddaughters......"But Whyyyy?"

Buh Bye!
desertgrandma is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Unsecured Text thymaster Sony Reader 4 09-10-2010 04:01 PM
Windows CE 95%+ English for SmartQ, wireless network working Houndx Alternative Devices 24 01-14-2010 09:15 AM
can't connect to wireless network RibRdb2 iRex 9 12-11-2007 09:40 PM
Verizon to Open Their Wireless Network RWood Alternative Devices 1 12-07-2007 11:41 PM
User Friendly Wireless Network Management alanine iRex 7 10-22-2007 09:06 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:52 AM.


MobileRead.com is a privately owned, operated and funded community.