Quote:
Originally Posted by plib
WPA2 is not foolproof , although it is harder to crack than the alternatives. Within reach of my router there are about 20 networks, three of which are still using WEP (which is a 60 second job to crack). I know for a fact that at least one of the WPA2 networks is still using the default manufacturer login/password. MAC access restrictions are useless, also a 60 second crack with the right software.
All this round and round about cars ( I thought no one would download a car anyway?  ) would be more appropriate if the red light runner in question could claim any or all of:
- I left my keys in the ignition
- I left my keys on the hall table but the door unlocked
- There's been a rash of burglaries in the neighbourhood with no marks of forced entry
- Yale don't make a lock which someone can't forge a key to.
which would make it a lot more similar to hijacking a wi-fi router. I'm no hacker but based on what I know I could probably hijack at least 4 routers just on our street. Based on conversations there are a number of younger acquaintances who routinely use someone else's wi-fi, not necessarily for downloading but they could.
And that's not even getting to the subject of the thousands of bot-net infected computers that exist.
|
Think about it this way, if their network is being used by someone else or if the accused family's computer has been turned into a bot --- wouldn't it actually be a service to them, if they found out this way after receiving such a notice?
This is only a notice, and a reasonable defense can still be raised. Just as in many countries you can say "I wasn't driving when that picture of my car speeding was taken". It is a valid defense, if you were not clearly identifiable. Of course, you may be forced to keep a log of who is driving your car at all times in the future. Also reasonable, if you claim you had no idea who was driving at the time your car was caught on camera.