(no subject)
Aug. 11th, 2006 07:56 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
*scratches head*
I have a question. It's to do with UK law, but any input would be appreciated.
Is it a legal requirement that the SSID be broadcast on all wireless networks. I've heard that the UK requires that all wireless networks be visible to the public, whether encrypted or not, but I've not had any occasion to worry about it until tonight. A customer wants to hide his SSID because he believes that he's being "hacked into". Now whether he is or not, he's as thick as two short planks, and he's not gonna be able to pick out his SSID when he's scanning for wireless networks, which will lead him to freak out and ring us, and nobodys gonna think to check the "Broadcast SSID" tick box, because nobodys come up against this issue before.
I told him that there was legal issues surrounding it and that my company advised him to keep it ticked, but that basically he could do what he liked, and he held all responsibility for the consequences.
I'm googling my nuts off right now, but do any of you have any comments/opinions on this?
I have a question. It's to do with UK law, but any input would be appreciated.
Is it a legal requirement that the SSID be broadcast on all wireless networks. I've heard that the UK requires that all wireless networks be visible to the public, whether encrypted or not, but I've not had any occasion to worry about it until tonight. A customer wants to hide his SSID because he believes that he's being "hacked into". Now whether he is or not, he's as thick as two short planks, and he's not gonna be able to pick out his SSID when he's scanning for wireless networks, which will lead him to freak out and ring us, and nobodys gonna think to check the "Broadcast SSID" tick box, because nobodys come up against this issue before.
I told him that there was legal issues surrounding it and that my company advised him to keep it ticked, but that basically he could do what he liked, and he held all responsibility for the consequences.
I'm googling my nuts off right now, but do any of you have any comments/opinions on this?
no subject
Date: 2006-08-11 07:06 pm (UTC)I do know that stealing your neighbour's wireless internet has become an arrestable offence (found by Googling "uk law broadcast ssid"), but that's about it.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-11 07:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-11 09:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-12 09:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-12 01:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-13 08:05 pm (UTC)Took me a while to figure that one out too.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-11 08:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-12 02:03 am (UTC)Running on channel 14 is much better security. No one has touched my network since I did that.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-12 02:52 am (UTC)Look, I'm not getting into this with you. I have a deadbolt on my front door but if someone really wants to come in, they'll break the sliding glass door in the back. It doesn't mean I'm not going to go ahead and lock the front door.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-12 07:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-12 07:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-12 05:40 am (UTC)With your customer though, if someone is trying to hack into his network, disabling the SSID is going to do sweet F-A, unless they're a relatively ignorant person who's relying on Netstumbler. If they're determined, it's not going to help.
He's better off binding his MAC addresses to the router, and using proper WPA encryption (not WEP). Disabling the SSID is fine, but in this instance it might be like bolting the barn door after the horse has fled (if he was getting serious incursions).