[OpenWireless Tech] A small question about tracking
Todd
Todd at chiwifi.net
Tue Nov 6 04:01:42 PST 2012
Typical end user does not care if the service they are using is not open.
On 11/06/2012 06:00 AM, Natanael wrote:
>
> Where are the commercial offerings that provide open source
> standardized platforms for automatic detection of and connection to
> free WiFi that also provides freedom of liability for the router owner?
>
> IIRC, Fon also uses VPN:s/tunnels for the secondary users that
> connect. But the platform ain't open, right?
>
> Den 6 nov 2012 12:55 skrev "Todd" <Todd at chiwifi.net
> <mailto:Todd at chiwifi.net>>:
>
> How is what you mentioned any different then already existing
> projects,
> like fon, which btw also does not use VPNs.
>
> So far you have suggested that this become massive enough to include
> hardware manufactures and for it to be world-wide but at the same time
> said these systems would not scale to city sizes.
>
> Most importantly however is the fact that it makes no effort what so
> ever to change any portion of the existing internet, only the way in
> which people connect to it. It also does not it in any way impact
> internet freedoms, instead it just shuffles around responsibility.
>
> So I ask again, why should anyone give a crap if all you are doing is
> trying to copy already existing and mature commercial offerings, and
> making it more complicated and slow with throwing on some VPN crap ?
>
>
> On 11/06/2012 05:46 AM, "Andy Green (林安廸)" wrote:
> > On 11/06/12 19:37, the mail apparently from Todd included:
> >
> >> Why should anyone feel responsible for giving anyone else
> internet, when
> >> they are paying for out of their own pocket for it?
> >> What do they get in return ?
> >
> > Well, the VPN thing is to try to reduce the "responsibility" to zero
> > and eliminate that downside.
> >
> > They can throttle the leechers how they like as well, and / or QoS
> > them down so the real user never even notices them.
> >
> > I guess it boils down to if they contribute, and there's a useful
> > critical mass, then they are free to "be the leecher" when they need
> > it. For example, if you visit other countries, roaming rates
> make it
> > insane to casually use Internet on your SIM.
> >
> > This way, you might get a reasonable facsimile of continuous
> internet
> > connection for receiving email etc as you walk around a city. Or if
> > you are stuck in a hotel with expensive Internet, if there are other
> > APs nearby you will be able to get by.
> >
> > Actually those are quite nice benefits that could appear
> worldwide if
> > this scheme took off. For that, it would be ideal if AP
> manufacturers
> > included the support and enabled it by default alongside the regular
> > WPA network so the AP owner's own traffic remains safe.
> >
> > And again the other part is that APs should be ready to be the VPN
> > server for the owner when he is roaming.
> >
> > -Andy
> >
> >>> On 11/06/12 19:29, the mail apparently from Todd included:
> >>>> On 11/06/2012 05:20 AM, "Andy Green (林安廸)" wrote:
> >>>>> On 11/06/12 18:53, the mail apparently from Christian Huldt
> included:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2012-11-06 kl. 11:10 skrev Todd:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> One thing note here is, most of the responses have been solely
> >>>>>>> about
> >>>>>>> "protecting the router owner" via throwing on varying
> levels of
> >>>>>>> VPN. As
> >>>>>>> far as I can tell, the average member of this list is
> more worried
> >>>>>>> about their continued ability to pirate then providing
> ubiquitous
> >>>>>>> wifi
> >>>>>>> which is very disheartening.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I beg to disagree, IMHO this is about being able to
> convince your
> >>>>>> neighbor that
> >>>>>> he/she can also share wifi without any immediate risks -
> which there
> >>>>>> are, at least in Germany.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Exactly, same in UK.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Since the VPN story includes trying to get the client's home
> AP as
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> server, going out on the internet with the IP in the
> client's name,
> >>>>> this has nothing whatsoever to do with 'piracy'.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You can see for yourself that the very few open personal APs
> left
> >>>>> seem
> >>>>> to mainly be so by accident (SSID of "Netgear", etc), at least
> >>>>> where I
> >>>>> live and travel your average router owner "knows" that
> unencrypted is
> >>>>> dangerous even if he couldn't explain it in terms of his traffic
> >>>>> being
> >>>>> sniffable, he could tell you it's dangerous due to
> possibility of
> >>>>> other people exploiting it to his detriment.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> To get people to make the other decision, to offer anonymous
> >>>>> access on
> >>>>> their IP again, there has to be a story that definitively
> counters
> >>>>> this perception, a reason why something changed and it is
> now safe to
> >>>>> do so, and we might see (VPN-only) open APs become normal again.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The only story I know that would convince me is VPN-only,
> since it
> >>>>> directly counters the "but the bad guy might use my IP" concern.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -Andy
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> The "bad guy might use my IP" argument is completely
> irrelevant if the
> >>>> IPs are not being assigned by the large ISP (IE.. comcast, att,
> >>>> verizon,
> >>>> etc..)
> >>>
> >>> I am not sure what scenario you are imagining, but the guys on the
> >>> ground with compatible APs all around are exactly customers of
> these
> >>> kind of ISPs. If you look at your scan list you will likely
> see loads
> >>> of WPA-protected private APs right now.
> >>>
> >>> If most of those normal people opened their APs for VPN-only,
> because
> >>> it was built-in to their APs, you could pretty much bank on
> getting
> >>> service whereever there was habitation, without any special
> >>> provisioning activity.
> >>>
> >>> They already power their AP, have a live internet connection, are
> >>> close by, etc...
> >>>
> >>> -Andy
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Tech mailing list
> >> Tech at srv1.openwireless.org <mailto:Tech at srv1.openwireless.org>
> >> https://srv1.openwireless.org/mailman/listinfo/tech
> >>
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tech mailing list
> Tech at srv1.openwireless.org <mailto:Tech at srv1.openwireless.org>
> https://srv1.openwireless.org/mailman/listinfo/tech
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.eff.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20121106/71a5d75e/attachment.html>
More information about the Tech
mailing list