Wardriving is fun. Really, it is. If you want to learn more about home networking and how consumers use it, the easiest thing in the world to do is just go wardriving. It's not difficult to do. And if you're in the home networking or wireless business, it's essential for your business. A great program to use for wardriving is NetStumbler. With NetStumbler, you can see SSIDs, encryption, channel, MAC address, signal-to-noise ratio data, network speed, and more. In response to wardriving, one Internet user had this to say: "I'll always leave my Wi-Fi open, for anyone who wants to connect to use. I pay for it, I will do as I please with what I pay for! Besides the fact, the Cable company has never forced a EULA on me that says I can't either. Heck, I let my friends use the free long distance cable offers too - is that wrong? Maybe it's wrong to let other people watch my Cable TV while at my house too?"
My school of thought is that if you have a wireless network, others should not be allowed to connect to it for free. I believe only companies that provide this service for free should be the ones doing it.
Something interesting, in my opinion, took place in 2002. In the First WorldWide WarDrive (Aug. 31 to Sept. 7, 2002) 200 participants used wirelessly-enabled laptop computers and sniffing software, such as NetStumbler, to detect and map almost 10,000 wireless access points around the world. Incredibly, almost 70% of these APs did not have any form of wireless security enabled. "Hardware ranged from laptops, to car mounted computer systems, to handhelds all equipped with GPS devices to accurately map the spots." Participants marked their cars with )(WarDriver stickers and wardrivers were bearing their 'wardriving is not a crime' t-shirts. According to Michael on SlashDot, "All in all the event went well."
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Monday, July 20, 2009
Wardriving, Entry #4
I will focus this blog on the legality of wardriving.
The legality of wardriving is somewhat of a gray area. Many people say that “simply driving around a city searching for the existence of wireless networks, with no ulterior motive cannot be deemed illegal.” Few people think that wardriving itself is illegal. However, if you are “searching for a place to steal internet access, or commit computer crimes then the wardriving you performed was done in a malicious manner and could be treated as such in court.”
This seems pretty reasonable to me. If you’re doing nothing other than identify wireless access points, and not attempting to connect to them, then you’re doing nothing wrong. On the other hand, if you are connecting to, or attempting to connect to, a private wireless network that is not yours then I feel this is illegal and unethical.
So, there are two distinct types of wardriving: passive attacks and active attacks. A passive attack is when the attacker gains access to a wireless network but does not cause any change or damage to the data moving on the network. In contrast, an attack is active when the intruder aims at causing damage or altering either the data or the network settings at which he has gained unauthorized access.
According to Al Case, Stamford Research, LLC, “War Driving is illegal if and only if you are attempting to bypass a password, WEP key or similar device designed to prevent unauthorized access to the network. War Driving - and 'poaching' service on open, unencrypted wireless networks is not. End of discussion.”
“There are no laws that specifically prohibit or allow wardriving, though many localities have laws against unauthorized access of a computer network.”
Legal specialists have argued that there is potential liability under the US federal Computer Fraud & Abuse Act, the Wiretap Act, and some state legislation.
Many wardrivers adhere to a strict code of ethics. This code of ethics can be summed up by the following three rules: “1) don't examine the contents of a network; 2) don't add, delete, or change anything on the network; and 3) don't even use the network's Internet connection for Web surfing, email, chat, FTP, or anything else.” Since someone else paid for the bandwidth and you don't have permission to use it, you're stealing it. Ultimately, unless you have permission, don't connect.
Private networks may either be accessed by any people who have bought the right to access them, such as wireless networks in Internet cafes and the like, or may be proprietary networks in which only authorized personnel may make use of it. In both last cases, accessing the private wireless network without the right to do so is obviously an illegal action.
Cable modem or DSL service contracts usually forbid subscribers from sharing bandwidth with strangers; therefore, it's technically illegal. Whether the owner of the wireless network made the conscious decision to open his connection to all users, or whether he doesn't realize that any passerby with a wireless card can leech off his bandwidth has a great deal to do with the user and the legality of using his or her wireless Internet connection.
The legality of wardriving is somewhat of a gray area. Many people say that “simply driving around a city searching for the existence of wireless networks, with no ulterior motive cannot be deemed illegal.” Few people think that wardriving itself is illegal. However, if you are “searching for a place to steal internet access, or commit computer crimes then the wardriving you performed was done in a malicious manner and could be treated as such in court.”
This seems pretty reasonable to me. If you’re doing nothing other than identify wireless access points, and not attempting to connect to them, then you’re doing nothing wrong. On the other hand, if you are connecting to, or attempting to connect to, a private wireless network that is not yours then I feel this is illegal and unethical.
So, there are two distinct types of wardriving: passive attacks and active attacks. A passive attack is when the attacker gains access to a wireless network but does not cause any change or damage to the data moving on the network. In contrast, an attack is active when the intruder aims at causing damage or altering either the data or the network settings at which he has gained unauthorized access.
According to Al Case, Stamford Research, LLC, “War Driving is illegal if and only if you are attempting to bypass a password, WEP key or similar device designed to prevent unauthorized access to the network. War Driving - and 'poaching' service on open, unencrypted wireless networks is not. End of discussion.”
“There are no laws that specifically prohibit or allow wardriving, though many localities have laws against unauthorized access of a computer network.”
Legal specialists have argued that there is potential liability under the US federal Computer Fraud & Abuse Act, the Wiretap Act, and some state legislation.
Many wardrivers adhere to a strict code of ethics. This code of ethics can be summed up by the following three rules: “1) don't examine the contents of a network; 2) don't add, delete, or change anything on the network; and 3) don't even use the network's Internet connection for Web surfing, email, chat, FTP, or anything else.” Since someone else paid for the bandwidth and you don't have permission to use it, you're stealing it. Ultimately, unless you have permission, don't connect.
Private networks may either be accessed by any people who have bought the right to access them, such as wireless networks in Internet cafes and the like, or may be proprietary networks in which only authorized personnel may make use of it. In both last cases, accessing the private wireless network without the right to do so is obviously an illegal action.
Cable modem or DSL service contracts usually forbid subscribers from sharing bandwidth with strangers; therefore, it's technically illegal. Whether the owner of the wireless network made the conscious decision to open his connection to all users, or whether he doesn't realize that any passerby with a wireless card can leech off his bandwidth has a great deal to do with the user and the legality of using his or her wireless Internet connection.
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Wardriving, Entry #3
The term wardriving was coined around April 2001, by Peter “Evil Pete” Shipley of the San Francisco, California area. He’s the guy that started the whole thing, in an attempt to alert people of the security problems with wireless.
I’m going to talk now about some court cases involving wardriving. There have been several court cases involving wardriving. I will talk briefly about two of them.
In one such case, in December, 2004, “A 21-year-old Michigan man was sentenced to nine years in federal prison … for his role in a failed scheme to steal credit card numbers from the Lowe’s chain of home improvement stores by taking advantage of an unsecured Wi-Fi network at a store in suburban Detroit.” His accomplice, 21-year-old Adam Botbyl, first stumbled across an unsecured wireless network at the Southfield, Michigan Lowe’s in the spring of 2003, while he and a roommate, Brian Salcedo, were driving around charting wireless networks with their laptop computers.
Prosecutors say that this is likely the first criminal conviction for wardriving in the U.S. And according to the Associated Press, the US government declared it “was the longest jail sentence ever issued in the country for hacking offences.”
The hackers used the wireless network to route through Lowe’s corporate data center in North Carolina and connect to the local networks at stores in Kansas, North Carolina, Kentucky, South Dakota, Florida, and two stores in California. At two of the stores, one in Long Beach, California and the other in Gainseville, Florida, they modified a proprietary piece of software that Lowe’s uses to process credit card transactions, building in a virtual wiretap that would store customer’s credit card numbers where the hackers could retrieve them later.
I feel that this was definitely wrong of these hackers to do; however, I do think that the IT manager at this particular Lowe’s store should be smart enough to at least secure their wireless network.
According to the Houston Chronicle, “A Houston computer security analyst has been charged with hacking after demonstrating the insecurity of a county courts wireless LAN.” Stefan Puffer was indicted by a Grand Jury in March 2002 with two counts of fraud for supposedly breaking into Harris County district clerk’s wireless computer system. Puffer wardrove into the Harris County District Clerk’s office, and because of this, Harris County District Clerk Charles Bacarisse shut down a wireless computer network in his office after officials found it could be vulnerable to high-tech vandals. Puffer, who was employed briefly by the county’s technology department in 1999, could have gotten five years in jail and up to a $250,000 fine on each count if convicted. However, in February 2003, a Texas jury acquitted Puffer, because after just 15 minutes of deliberation the jurors hearing the case found that Mr. Puffer did not intend to cause any damage to the county’s systems. He was therefore found not guilty of the charges.
I feel that wardriving, if only used to access the Internet and not maliciously hack into someone’s system, is a positive activity. If accessing the Internet by wardriving is done those who connect to public, freely-accessible networks, then I see no problem in this. However, if an individual wardrives to connect to a business or private network in order to use their information maliciously, then I believe legal ramifications should ensue.
I’m going to talk now about some court cases involving wardriving. There have been several court cases involving wardriving. I will talk briefly about two of them.
In one such case, in December, 2004, “A 21-year-old Michigan man was sentenced to nine years in federal prison … for his role in a failed scheme to steal credit card numbers from the Lowe’s chain of home improvement stores by taking advantage of an unsecured Wi-Fi network at a store in suburban Detroit.” His accomplice, 21-year-old Adam Botbyl, first stumbled across an unsecured wireless network at the Southfield, Michigan Lowe’s in the spring of 2003, while he and a roommate, Brian Salcedo, were driving around charting wireless networks with their laptop computers.
Prosecutors say that this is likely the first criminal conviction for wardriving in the U.S. And according to the Associated Press, the US government declared it “was the longest jail sentence ever issued in the country for hacking offences.”
The hackers used the wireless network to route through Lowe’s corporate data center in North Carolina and connect to the local networks at stores in Kansas, North Carolina, Kentucky, South Dakota, Florida, and two stores in California. At two of the stores, one in Long Beach, California and the other in Gainseville, Florida, they modified a proprietary piece of software that Lowe’s uses to process credit card transactions, building in a virtual wiretap that would store customer’s credit card numbers where the hackers could retrieve them later.
I feel that this was definitely wrong of these hackers to do; however, I do think that the IT manager at this particular Lowe’s store should be smart enough to at least secure their wireless network.
According to the Houston Chronicle, “A Houston computer security analyst has been charged with hacking after demonstrating the insecurity of a county courts wireless LAN.” Stefan Puffer was indicted by a Grand Jury in March 2002 with two counts of fraud for supposedly breaking into Harris County district clerk’s wireless computer system. Puffer wardrove into the Harris County District Clerk’s office, and because of this, Harris County District Clerk Charles Bacarisse shut down a wireless computer network in his office after officials found it could be vulnerable to high-tech vandals. Puffer, who was employed briefly by the county’s technology department in 1999, could have gotten five years in jail and up to a $250,000 fine on each count if convicted. However, in February 2003, a Texas jury acquitted Puffer, because after just 15 minutes of deliberation the jurors hearing the case found that Mr. Puffer did not intend to cause any damage to the county’s systems. He was therefore found not guilty of the charges.
I feel that wardriving, if only used to access the Internet and not maliciously hack into someone’s system, is a positive activity. If accessing the Internet by wardriving is done those who connect to public, freely-accessible networks, then I see no problem in this. However, if an individual wardrives to connect to a business or private network in order to use their information maliciously, then I believe legal ramifications should ensue.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Wardriving, Entry #2
I recently came across an article published by the New York Times about the small town of Hermiston, Oregon, population 15,000. This 6.5 square mile town is located in barren farm country. This farm country appears to be "the largest Wi-Fi hot spot in the world, with wireless high-speed Internet access available free for some 600 square miles. Most of that is in eastern Oregon, with some just across the border in southern Washington." (The New York Times)
According to Nicholas D. Kristof, author of The New York Times article entitled When Pigs Wi-Fi, he states, "Driving along the road here, I used my laptop to get e-mail and download video - and you can do that while cruising at 70 miles per hour, mile after mile after mile, at a transmission speed several times as fast as a T-1 line. (Note: it's preferable to do this with someone else driving.)"
Kristof believes that "this kind of network is the wave of the future," and I agree whole-heartedly with him. He also says, "Eastern Oregon shows that it's technically and financially feasible. New York and other leading cities should be embarrassed that Morrow and Umatilla Counties in eastern Oregon are far ahead of them in providing high-speed Internet coverage to residents, schools and law enforcement officers - even though all of Morrow County doesn't even have a single traffic light."
I feel that big cities like Houston and San Antonio should implement this same technology so its residents and visitors could use the Internet for free anywhere in the city.
Mr. Kim Puzey, general manager of the Port of Umatilla on the Columbia River, says "wireless broadband is central to the port's operations, argues persuasively that broadband is just the next step in expanding the national infrastructure, comparable to the transcontinental railroad, the national highway system and rural electrification."
Portland, Oregon and Philadelphia are both in the process of moving toward city-wide Wi-Fi Internet access (as of August 2005, when this article was written). I did some research and found this website: Free Portland WiFi - Free wireless internet in Portland on WifiPDX. This website offers a map of all the Wi-Fi hotspots in Portland, a list of all of the businesses that provide free Internet access, and even lets you find your closest Wi-Fi hotspot by typing in the address where you are at. I think this is very interesting and I wanted to know if San Antonio had a great deal of businesses that offer the Internet for free. Upon researching, I found a list of free Wi-Fi hotspots in Texas, and if you scroll down to San Antonio you can see that while there are quite a few businesses that offer free Wi-Fi here, it's not any where near the number of places that offer free Wi-Fi in Portland, which is less than half the size of San Antonio.
It's nice to know that San Antonio, as well as other cities in Texas, have locations where one can go to use the Internet for free. I would like to see even more businesses, or possibly the local government, offering free Wi-Fi so that no matter where you are in the city you will be able to use the Internet without having to pay. Not only does this cut Internet costs for consumers, it also provides a much needed convenience so that one can use the Internet not just at home, but anywhere.
According to Nicholas D. Kristof, author of The New York Times article entitled When Pigs Wi-Fi, he states, "Driving along the road here, I used my laptop to get e-mail and download video - and you can do that while cruising at 70 miles per hour, mile after mile after mile, at a transmission speed several times as fast as a T-1 line. (Note: it's preferable to do this with someone else driving.)"
Kristof believes that "this kind of network is the wave of the future," and I agree whole-heartedly with him. He also says, "Eastern Oregon shows that it's technically and financially feasible. New York and other leading cities should be embarrassed that Morrow and Umatilla Counties in eastern Oregon are far ahead of them in providing high-speed Internet coverage to residents, schools and law enforcement officers - even though all of Morrow County doesn't even have a single traffic light."
I feel that big cities like Houston and San Antonio should implement this same technology so its residents and visitors could use the Internet for free anywhere in the city.
Mr. Kim Puzey, general manager of the Port of Umatilla on the Columbia River, says "wireless broadband is central to the port's operations, argues persuasively that broadband is just the next step in expanding the national infrastructure, comparable to the transcontinental railroad, the national highway system and rural electrification."
Portland, Oregon and Philadelphia are both in the process of moving toward city-wide Wi-Fi Internet access (as of August 2005, when this article was written). I did some research and found this website: Free Portland WiFi - Free wireless internet in Portland on WifiPDX. This website offers a map of all the Wi-Fi hotspots in Portland, a list of all of the businesses that provide free Internet access, and even lets you find your closest Wi-Fi hotspot by typing in the address where you are at. I think this is very interesting and I wanted to know if San Antonio had a great deal of businesses that offer the Internet for free. Upon researching, I found a list of free Wi-Fi hotspots in Texas, and if you scroll down to San Antonio you can see that while there are quite a few businesses that offer free Wi-Fi here, it's not any where near the number of places that offer free Wi-Fi in Portland, which is less than half the size of San Antonio.
It's nice to know that San Antonio, as well as other cities in Texas, have locations where one can go to use the Internet for free. I would like to see even more businesses, or possibly the local government, offering free Wi-Fi so that no matter where you are in the city you will be able to use the Internet without having to pay. Not only does this cut Internet costs for consumers, it also provides a much needed convenience so that one can use the Internet not just at home, but anywhere.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Wardriving, Entry #1
According to Wikipedia.com, "Wardriving is the act of searching for Wi-Fi wireless networks by a person in a moving vehicle, using a portable computer or PDA." Wardriving was derived from the term wardialing from the 1983 film WarGames, which involved searching for computer systems to connect to, using software that dialed numbers sequentially to see which ones were connected to a fax machine or computer. Warbiking is essentially the same as wardriving, but it involves searching for wireless networks while on a moving bicycle or motorcycle. This activity is sometimes facilitated by the mounting of a wifi-capable device on the vehicle itself. Warwalking, sometimes called warjogging, is similar in nature to wardriving, except that it is done on foot rather than conducted from a moving vehicle. The disadvantages of this approach consist in slower speed of travel, resulting in fewer and more infrequently discovered networks, and the absence of a convenient computing environment. Consequently, handheld devices such as Pocket PCs, which can perform such tasks while one is walking or standing, have predominated in this area.
Warkitting is a combination of wardriving and rootkitting. In a warkitting attack, a hacker replaces the firmware of an attacked router. This allows him to control all traffic for the victim, and could even permit him to disable SSL by replacing HTML content as it is being downloaded. Warkitting was identified by Tsow, Jakobsson, Yang, and Wetzel in 2006. Their discovery indicated that 10% of the wireless routers were susceptible to WAPjacking (malicious configuring the firmware settings, but making no modification on the firmware itself) and 4.4% of wireless router were vulnerable to WAPkitting (subverting the router firmware). Their analysis showed that the volume of credential theft possible through Warkitting exceeded the estimates of credential theft due to phishing.
Many wardrivers use GPS devices to measure the location of the network and log it on a website to form maps of the network neighborhood. The most popular web-based tool today is WiGLE, while one of the pioneering mapping applications was StumbVerter, which used Microsoft MapPoint automation to draw found networks. For better range, antennas are built or bought, and vary from omnidirectional to highly directional.
The maps of known network IDs can then be used as a geolocation system, an alternative to GPS, by triangulating the current position from the signal strengths of known network IDs. Examples include Place Lab by Intel, Skyhook, and Navizon by Cyril Houri. Navizon combines information from Wi-Fi and cell phone tower maps contributed by users from Wi-Fi-equipped cell phones. In addition to location finding, this provides navigation information, and allows for the tracking of the position of friends, and geotagging.
In December 2004, a class of 100 undergraduates worked to map the city of Seattle, Washington over several weeks. They found 5,225 access points; 44% were secured with WEP encryption, 52% were open, and 3% were pay-for-access. They noticed trends in the frequency and security of the networks depending on location. Many of the open networks were clearly intended to be used by the general public, with network names like "Open to share, no porn please" or "Free access, be nice." The information was collected into high-resolution maps, which were published online.
Wardrivers are only out to log and collect information about the wireless access points (WAPs) they find while driving, without using the networks' services. Connecting to the network and using its services without explicit authorization is referred to as piggybacking. The terms have been interchanged in the press, however. For instance, an EETimes article with the headline "WiFi user charged for not buying coffee" refers to a user who "piggybacked off the shop's wireless Internet service for more than three months". When reposted by Engadget, the term "wardriving" was substituted, and the headline changed to "Wardriver arrested for snagging coffee shop signal". Typical wardriving software actually takes control of the wireless radio, making it impractical, if not impossible, to wardrive and piggyback simultaneously.
Warkitting is a combination of wardriving and rootkitting. In a warkitting attack, a hacker replaces the firmware of an attacked router. This allows him to control all traffic for the victim, and could even permit him to disable SSL by replacing HTML content as it is being downloaded. Warkitting was identified by Tsow, Jakobsson, Yang, and Wetzel in 2006. Their discovery indicated that 10% of the wireless routers were susceptible to WAPjacking (malicious configuring the firmware settings, but making no modification on the firmware itself) and 4.4% of wireless router were vulnerable to WAPkitting (subverting the router firmware). Their analysis showed that the volume of credential theft possible through Warkitting exceeded the estimates of credential theft due to phishing.
Many wardrivers use GPS devices to measure the location of the network and log it on a website to form maps of the network neighborhood. The most popular web-based tool today is WiGLE, while one of the pioneering mapping applications was StumbVerter, which used Microsoft MapPoint automation to draw found networks. For better range, antennas are built or bought, and vary from omnidirectional to highly directional.
The maps of known network IDs can then be used as a geolocation system, an alternative to GPS, by triangulating the current position from the signal strengths of known network IDs. Examples include Place Lab by Intel, Skyhook, and Navizon by Cyril Houri. Navizon combines information from Wi-Fi and cell phone tower maps contributed by users from Wi-Fi-equipped cell phones. In addition to location finding, this provides navigation information, and allows for the tracking of the position of friends, and geotagging.
In December 2004, a class of 100 undergraduates worked to map the city of Seattle, Washington over several weeks. They found 5,225 access points; 44% were secured with WEP encryption, 52% were open, and 3% were pay-for-access. They noticed trends in the frequency and security of the networks depending on location. Many of the open networks were clearly intended to be used by the general public, with network names like "Open to share, no porn please" or "Free access, be nice." The information was collected into high-resolution maps, which were published online.
Wardrivers are only out to log and collect information about the wireless access points (WAPs) they find while driving, without using the networks' services. Connecting to the network and using its services without explicit authorization is referred to as piggybacking. The terms have been interchanged in the press, however. For instance, an EETimes article with the headline "WiFi user charged for not buying coffee" refers to a user who "piggybacked off the shop's wireless Internet service for more than three months". When reposted by Engadget, the term "wardriving" was substituted, and the headline changed to "Wardriver arrested for snagging coffee shop signal". Typical wardriving software actually takes control of the wireless radio, making it impractical, if not impossible, to wardrive and piggyback simultaneously.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
