Broadband ISP TalkTalk ( The Carphone Warehouse ), which has consistently opposed Lord Mandelson’s plan to tackle illegal file sharing, recently sent one of its Internet security experts to visit The Highway, a residential road in Stanmore, Middlesex. The expert managed to identify networks that would be vulnerable to unauthorised file sharing and could potentially lead to the owners being accused of an offence that they never committed.Within a couple of hours he had identified 23 wireless connections on the street – more than one-third of the total – which are vulnerable to Wi-Fi hijacking. These connections are either completely unsecured (6%) or use WEP encryption technology (28%), which has long since been broken and is easily hacked. In fact many broadband routers supplied by UK ISPs still ship with WEP enabled by default or as the only option.
From a total of 68 Wi-Fi connections on the road only one used the strongest available security (WPA2). The majority (65%) used WPA security which, while reasonably secure, can still be hacked by more experienced abusers; especially if the wireless routers firmware hasn't been updated with the latest security fixes in awhile.
TalkTalk's blog said:
"To show how vulnerable people are to unauthorised filesharing, our expert downloaded legal music files from two connections, including Barry Manilow’s hit Mandy and the soundtrack from the 1992 film Peter’s Friends.
Scarily, The Highway is actually comparatively well protected. Our expert conducted a Wi-Fi survey of central Ealing in West London on 11th October and found that 41% of 1,083 Wi-Fi networks were vulnerable to unauthorised use.
Connecting to a Wi-Fi network is just one way that illegal filesharers can use other people’s internet connections, leaving innocent people vulnerable to disconnection. PC hijacking is another. The clear implication is that millions of people would be at risk of ‘superhighway robbery’ under Mandelson’s plans."
"To show how vulnerable people are to unauthorised filesharing, our expert downloaded legal music files from two connections, including Barry Manilow’s hit Mandy and the soundtrack from the 1992 film Peter’s Friends.
Scarily, The Highway is actually comparatively well protected. Our expert conducted a Wi-Fi survey of central Ealing in West London on 11th October and found that 41% of 1,083 Wi-Fi networks were vulnerable to unauthorised use.
Connecting to a Wi-Fi network is just one way that illegal filesharers can use other people’s internet connections, leaving innocent people vulnerable to disconnection. PC hijacking is another. The clear implication is that millions of people would be at risk of ‘superhighway robbery’ under Mandelson’s plans."
This issue is just one of many that we ourselves have highlighted countless times before. It is simply wrong to place a presumption of guilt upon individuals without giving them a fair trial. IP addresses are clearly not a reliable way to identify specific individuals. They can easily be abuse in many other ways too.
The risk of innocent people being disconnected or unfairly fined is not hypothetical and, according to past studies from Which?, has already happened on quite a few occasions. Instead TalkTalk, which agrees the problem must be tackled but not that customers should be cut-off based on a suspicion, has called on the content industry to develop new business models and become more affordable.
TalkTalk recently confirmed that it was gearing up to launch a new form of 'Parental Control' for broadband ISP customers. This would allow parents to restrict Internet access via cinema-style classifications (U, 14, 18), which will include the blocking of file sharing sites that host illegal torrent downloads (e.g. The PirateBay).
Tweet
Comments: 5
Voice of ReasonPosted: 16 October, 2009 - 11:44 AM
Link to comment
The fact that people's accounts can be abused in this way doesn't matter at all to Big Media.
All they say is that the owner of the account is responsible for what happens to their account, which includes securing it from unauthorised use by strangers. This example is equivalent to leaving your front door wide open and then being surprised that intruders just walk in and use it for illegal purposes. Duh.
They are still liable.
MarkJPosted: 16 October, 2009 - 3:30 PM
Link to comment
No it is NOT "equivalent to leaving your front door wide open and then being surprised that intruders just walk in and use it for illegal purposes". Many of the networks are using security and, thanks to their ISP/router manufacturers/compatibility, they have no choice but to use WEP.
This is more like somebody having a lock on their door but a burglar can simply come along and bash it in, just like any door.. though some are stronger than others. It is not usually their fault a burglar did this, it is the burglars fault.
You can not seriously expect everybody to fully comprehend the details of network security, they shouldn’t have to. Just like you shouldn’t have to know the detail of how an engine is built to be able to drive a car. It should just work.
maftvyfllxPosted: 17 September, 2011 - 9:55 AM
Link to comment
8zWddH <a href="http://capmaqvdfylh.com/">capmaqvdfylh</a>
pvfrhasarfPosted: 20 September, 2011 - 9:48 AM
Link to comment
h14ULj , [url=http://lmuopzidkfru.com/]lmuopzidkfru[/url], [link=http://drvwwuobeqqy.com/]drvwwuobeqqy[/link], http://rxmbfpvwavrr.com/
Generated in 0.53308 seconds.
DB queries: 8
Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved (Terms, Privacy Policy, Links (.), Live Chat & Website Rules).