View Full Version : Sharing my wi-fi with a neighbour. Ramifications?
Retrovertigo
01-03-2006, 10:01
My neighbour came knocking yesterday asking if I had a wi-fi connection. She had her laptop in her hand and had been scanning for any connections nearby.
She said she had been made redundant and wanted to know if she could pay me to share my connection for a while. She said it's mainly for email and also the odd bit of job searching.
Now, she seems like a nice enough person, as does her boyfriend. But I am guessing that if they did do anything "wrong" (however unlikely that may be) that it would be me on the receiving end of any problems? I'm talking about them looking at stuff which maybe shouldn't be looked at.
No doubt I am being extremely paranoid, but better to be safe than sorry. Is there anyway I could monitor what she does while using my connection? I don't mean physically read any emails etc. Just monitor what websites they may visit, stuff like that.
Thanks for any advice.
Sharing your connection in that way breaks NTL's terms of use; taking money for it even more so. Be very careful!
I't isn't a good idea as she can see what you are doing as well!!
You should enable the security functions passworld ect to secure your conection, also change your password at least once a month, you never can tell!!!
brundles
01-03-2006, 10:26
You might want take a look at http://cableforum.co.uk/board/showthread.php?t=43153
Personally, I wouldn't mind my neighbours using my wifi as long as they don't use p2p. Hell for emails, job searching, msn etc. I would just let them use it for free but I'd sure switch on the router logging.
I think its a personal decision you need to make.
KevAmiga
01-03-2006, 10:58
Now, she seems like a nice enough person, as does her boyfriend. But I am guessing that if they did do anything "wrong" (however unlikely that may be) that it would be me on the receiving end of any problems? I'm talking about them looking at stuff which maybe shouldn't be looked at.
If she breaks the T&C's, your in the doghouse mate.
Id say absolutley not.
You risk getting your internet connection cut off if she does.
How would you know she isnt downloading the complete Disney collection from P2P during the night?
My 2p's worth.
Another thought, on the issue of whether she might actually do something illegal with your connection.
While NTL would hold you responsible for breaching the T&Cs for sharing the connection, or for busting the cap (if you're on a tier that has one), it would be very hard for the police to bust you if, for example, your neighbour or her boyfriend started downloading illegal material. For starters it would be their crime, not yours. They would have to show you knew what they were doing to try to get you on a charge of aiding and abetting, or failing to report.
Even so, if it happened, even if you weren't guilty of anything, having your PC confiscated while its hard drive is scoured for paedo porn, or something equally nasty, is really not worth the hassle.
I have to ask, if she is willing to pay you, why she can't afford to just get her own internet connection. If she has a nice WiFi enabled laptop she can't be very hard up.
I would say that this is at your discression - although the T&Cs do state that you should not connect from outside your home (excluding your garden), and connect only laptops/computers that you own.
It also states no more than 3 systems at any one time.
That said, I regularly have friends round (easier to have them with us than go out with a young child) and they sometime bring their laptops and connect to our BB to check mail etc.
I have also sat outside in the car with my pda connected up - so I guess I break them regularly :(
In summary - you will be breaking the Ts&Cs, but not the law. If there afre problems then NTL could remove your service, but I would expect that unless you are running solid p2p or breaking the more serious Ts&Cs (spamming hacking etc) then I would expect that they would give you a warning
If things go sour with the neighbour, then just change the key, and they cannot use it anymore (or block their MAC address to be sure).
as ever - just my 2c
It all comes down to trust imo.
Is she an :angel: or :devsmoke: ?
If you get on well with her(or would like to ;)) and you stipulate she doesn't do certain things like P2P etc. I'd say ok.
Dave
Make sure your mac address filtering is on and then set a time limit in the router for that address. I currently have mine set to kill my daughters connection at midnight otherwise she would spend half the night on msn and then wake the whole house when she decides to call it a night. Your neighbour if she was looking for heavy download time would more than likely do so overnight like most folk
DocDutch
01-03-2006, 12:35
here this is a document that we at work have received relating to what you do.
There are often occasions when, whilst configuring customers' wireless networking equipment, that unencrypted wireless networks are discovered. Customers sometmes joke that they could connect to these and get away without paying.....
Please be aware of the following;
UK-Communications Act 2003
125 Dishonestly obtaining electronic communications services (1) A person who- (a) dishonestly obtains an electronic communications service, and (b) does so with intent to avoid payment of a charge applicable to the provision of that service, is guilty of an offence. (2) It is not an offence under this section to obtain a service mentioned in section 297(1) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (c. 48) (dishonestly obtaining a broadcasting or cable programme service provided from a place in the UK). (3) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable- (a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both; (b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to a fine, or to both.126 Possession or supply of apparatus etc. for contravening s. 125
(1) A person is guilty of an offence if, with an intention falling within subsection (3), he has in his possession or under his control anything that may be used-
(a) for obtaining an electronic communications service; or (b) in connection with obtaining such a service. (2) A person is guilty of an offence if-
(a) he supplies or offers to supply anything which may be used as mentioned in subsection (1); and (b) he knows or believes that the intentions in relation to that thing of the person to whom it is supplied or offered fall within subsection (3). (3) A person's intentions fall within this subsection if he intends-
(a) to use the thing to obtain an electronic communications service dishonestly; (b) to use the thing for a purpose connected with the dishonest obtaining of such a service; (c) dishonestly to allow the thing to be used to obtain such a service; or (d) to allow the thing to be used for a purpose connected with the dishonest obtaining of such a service. (4) An intention does not fall within subsection (3) if it relates exclusively to the obtaining of a service mentioned in section 297(1) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (c. 48).
(5) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable-
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both; and (b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to a fine, or to both. (6) In this section, references, in the case of a thing used for recording data, to the use of that thing include references to the use of data recorded by it.
127 Improper use of public electronic communications network (1) A person is guilty of an offence if he- (a) sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; or(b) causes any such message or matter to be so sent. (2) A person is guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, he-
(a) sends by means of a public electronic communications network, a message that he knows to be false, (b) causes such a message to be sent; or (c) persistently makes use of a public electronic communications network. (3) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable, on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both.
(4) Subsections (1) and (2) do not apply to anything done in the course of providing a programme service (within the meaning of the Broadcasting Act 1990 (c. 42)).
DaggaDagga
01-03-2006, 12:48
My worry would be that, unless you buy an additional router, they'll be on the unprotected side of your router's firewall.
I have no firewalls within my network, so if anyone connected their virus-infested PC to my network, their viruses would have a free run at all my PCs.
I also have shared folders and a shared printer. Unless I restricted access, they'd also have unlimited use of these.
A (not very techy) friend turned up with their laptop, and wanted to connect to my network. I first shutdown all my PCs, then connected theirs and did a McAfee online freescan. It was choking with viruses.
It seems like a simple, kind idea. But, on balance, it's probably not a good idea. I'd be wondering why she's so keen to use someone else's net connection. As said previously, she obviously isn't completely broke. Not all criminals are blokes, and they all live somewhere!
Ignition
01-03-2006, 13:08
*Growl*
Stop quoting the law at this guy please. There is nothing at all illegal about this, it's just against terms and conditions that ntl supply, which isn't the same as the law.
Unless his neighbour steals his connection there is no crime at all, and to be honest I don't really see the harm in it in this case, it won't harm ntl at all they're harmed far more by people hammering their connections.
If I were you though mate I wouldn't worry about it too much, so long as you trust her shouldn't be a problem.
However you will be responsible for what they do with the connection, although there is a potential legal defense in that it's not possible to prove who behind the wireless did the evil deeds, and we're innocent until proven guilty. There is a test case in the US along just these lines.
Up to you me old mucka but ignore all the gack about how illegal all of this is there is nothing at all illegal about you sharing connection with the neighbours.
One major problem, is that if you invite someone else onto your wireless network, it's no different to them plugging into your LAN.
More of a problem if you have other things on your LAN and consider LAN addresses as trusted, less so if you lock down the LAN the same as if you were running with no router.
It's the same issue when windows make accidental connection to another network - one reason I've set my software firewall now NOT to detect LAN address, as it seems to default them to allowing Netbios.
Retrovertigo
03-03-2006, 19:08
Well, after all the replies you kindly gave - it has come to nought so far anyway.
My P.C decided to go belly up and I have spent the last couple of days re-installing everything. I used this as an excuse to tell her for the time being she couldn't use my connection. I just felt "less safe" her using it while I had no access to anything whatsoever.
As for her getting net access, they are new properties at the back of me and are without any "quick fixes" with regards getting either NTL or BT installed as she honestly wants a temporary measure.
She claims she only uses the net at work and I believe her as she has lived there for over 6 months and not bothered with a phone line so far.
But yes, as some have stated. It would come down to petty things like, what if the router crashed while I wasn't home but she was in the middle of something. What if I was hogging all the bandwidth...etc etc. Too many silly things to argue over.
I have to say that going against NTL's t&c's would have been bottom of my list of concerns, I don't see it as any different than having a lodger and them wanting to use it.
But as I say, things have gone quiet for now as she thinks I still have a knackered PC - which I think I'll be happy her thinking a few days longer.
Oh yeah, she happens to be drop dead gorgeous which is the only reason I even gave this a second thought ;) that plus she is French and sounds....well, with that accent I'm sure you can imagine :P
Gorgeous and french,
I'll run a wire from my house :D
Graham M
03-03-2006, 20:13
My worry would be that, unless you buy an additional router, they'll be on the unprotected side of your router's firewall.
That makes no sense what so ever.
JohnHorb
03-03-2006, 20:16
I presume he means HIS PCs are protected from the net by the firewall, but if the nieghbour is using the same router, she will be on the same LAN, and there will be no firewall between the OP's PCs and the neighbour's.
Graham M
03-03-2006, 20:18
OK well... that's what software firewalls are there for.
It sounds fair enough to me if you don't think she'll abuse it. You can always change the WEP key later.
As for the NTL T&Cs, I really can't see NTL getting rid of a customer for something like this, and frankly if they tried to enforce their T&Cs with me (I have used more than 3 pc to connect behind the NAT), I'd tell them to stuff it and get another ISP. Their loss.
The only points to consider is access to your shares, potential viruses, and the complications if you decided to stop it.
If you dont know her to well I wouldn't bother.
The only points to consider is access to your shares, potential viruses, and the complications if you decided to stop it.
This is the major point. If you are considering to share your bandwidth with a neighbour, whether it is wired or wireless, the public IP address is assigned to the account holder, the ntl customer. If for any reason the neighbour is doing something they shouldn't, knowingly or unknowingly, then its the account holder who will fall fowl of ntl's abuse team.
It's a very noble gesture in my opinion, but as GeoffW says, complicated if you had to stop it.
You could give her the WEP key and tell her you change it every month, that way she'd have to come back to ask for the new one.
Or if she's really nice you could change it every week. :)
I would say that this is at your discression - although the T&Cs do state that you should not connect from outside your home (excluding your garden), and connect only laptops/computers that you own. It also states no more than 3 systems at any one time. That said, I regularly have friends round (easier to have them with us than go out with a young child) and they sometime bring their laptops and connect to our BB to check mail etc. I have also sat outside in the car with my pda connected up - so I guess I break them regularly :( In summary - you will be breaking the Ts&Cs, but not the law. If there afre problems then NTL could remove your service, but I would expect that unless you are running solid p2p or breaking the more serious Ts&Cs (spamming hacking etc) then I would expect that they would give you a warning If things go sour with the neighbour, then just change the key, and they cannot use it anymore (or block their MAC address to be sure). as ever - just my 2c Sorry but that is total bollox.. i'd use as many PC's as i want..
they even sell routers, with 4 adaptors, you think they would get special 3 port ones? correct?..
http://www.ntlshop.ntlworld.com/webstore/search.aspx?CatId=7&GroupRelationSelected=26
-----
dude tell em to get a free dial up number + user & pass
if they only use it for email n job research 56k is enough..
---------- Post added at 10:58 ---------- Previous post was at 10:55 ----------
It sounds fair enough to me if you don't think she'll abuse it. You can always change the WEP key later. As for the NTL T&Cs, I really can't see NTL getting rid of a customer for something like this, and frankly if they tried to enforce their T&Cs with me (I have used more than 3 pc to connect behind the NAT), I'd tell them to stuff it and get another ISP. Their loss. The only points to consider is access to your shares, potential viruses, and the complications if you decided to stop it. Very true, thats lame, image a big family, 4 bedroom house etc, or even 3.
mums room, kids room etc, will be 4 comps, more if they got family computer down stairs.. lol
Sorry but that is total bollox.. i'd use as many PC's as i want..
they even sell routers, with 4 adaptors, you think they would get special 3 port ones? correct?..
http://www.ntlshop.ntlworld.com/webstore/search.aspx?CatId=7&GroupRelationSelected=26
-----
dude tell em to get a free dial up number + user & pass
if they only use it for email n job research 56k is enough..
---------- Post added at 10:58 ---------- Previous post was at 10:55 ----------
Very true, thats lame, image a big family, 4 bedroom house etc, or even 3.
mums room, kids room etc, will be 4 comps, more if they got family computer down stairs.. lol
Easy Now, I merely pointed out what it says in the Ts&Cs.
You will note from the post that I do not agree with them - merely that they would be withing their rights to withdraw service if they felt the need.
I also do not appreciate being told that something is B****ks when it is what is stated in the Ts&Cs :afire: ... (closest I've ever come to red repping someone)
as Ignition said - there is nothing Illegal about doing this, but NTL have put things in their Ts&Cs that mean they would be within their rights to withdraw the service (not that I believe for one moment they would do so.)
Anyway, regarding sharing my wife with a neighbour..................
OK well... that's what software firewalls are there for.
That wouldnt be the best way to do it as then you have to allow sharing between you own PCs but not anything the neigbour has. This would become a difficult to manage, especially if using DHCP. The best way would be to get another router and put your own network behind that.
Which was alluded to in the post that made no sense to you :)
Lordy
Retrovertigo
07-03-2006, 10:59
Well, I haven't seen the neighbour for a few days so I am guessing she has been going to the local sainsburys and using the net cafe area there.
I don't actually have any sharing enabled on my P.C so I doubt security would have been an issue - or would it?
I only have the wi-fi for connecting my Nintendo DS to the net. My P.C and Xbox 360 are hardwired.
But thanks for all the responses. Been an eye opener learning aboit certain things which maybe would never have crossed my mind.
Oh and despite the french girl beinga real cutie - her boyfriend is HUGE. He must go to the gym about 4 times a day. So I reckon I would have been nice to him and not tried to steal her away :)
<snip>
Oh and despite the french girl beinga real cutie - her boyfriend is HUGE. He must go to the gym about 4 times a day. So I reckon I would have been nice to him and not tried to steal her away :)
She must be alone a lot then :naughty:
obscura2k
07-03-2006, 12:48
why not just let her use it and put some strict parentl controls on the router, most routers nowadays come with useful tools to stop certain content ... just block everything you can think off that might land you in the deep end ... xxx, p2p, warez etc ...
OK well... that's what software firewalls are there for.
That wouldnt be the best way to do it as then you have to allow sharing between you own PCs but not anything the neigbour has. This would become a difficult to manage, especially if using DHCP. The best way would be to get another router and put your own network behind that.
Which was alluded to in the post that made no sense to you :)
LordyI'm curious as to why you think that you would have to enable file/printer sharing on one of the clients when using a software firewall, in order for AlizÃÃâ€*’©e (www.moi-alizee.com) to connect to the wireless AP? She would only be connecting to the AP and not to any other devices connecting to the WAN - why would she need or want to connect to the owner's PC anyway?
I'm also unsure why you think that using DHCP would be problematic and difficult to manage? The router uses NAT to handle IP assignment of all connected endpoints? Where's the problem? :shrug:
Adding an additional router to the equation isn't the best way to do this, imo, as it's overkill. Why not set up a separate VLAN if you really didn't want her PC being on the same segment as another? Although, that too, imo, is going OTT.
---------- Post added at 15:11 ---------- Previous post was at 15:10 ----------
ps - Retrovertigo, does she have a webcam :naughty:
---------- Post added at 15:12 ---------- Previous post was at 15:11 ----------
pps - hang on, my missus is French... leave my wife alone!
Retrovertigo
07-03-2006, 21:03
ps - Retrovertigo, does she have a webcam :naughty:
I may well offer to buy her one if she is off work much longer ;)
If she approches me again I may well let her have limited access to the net using parental controls as was suggested. That, plus explain that I will close down the router overnight to stop her leeching etc if she visits any warez sites or such. Because of course, there is the possibility her boyfriend is being canny and sending her to do his dirty work!
Plus I will explain how it is only a very temporary measure. I'll see how it goes next time I bump into her.
I may well offer to buy her one if she is off work much longer ;)
If she approches me again I may well let her have limited access to the net using parental controls as was suggested. That, plus explain that I will close down the router overnight to stop her leeching etc if she visits any warez sites or such. Because of course, there is the possibility her boyfriend is being canny and sending her to do his dirty work!
Plus I will explain how it is only a very temporary measure. I'll see how it goes next time I bump into her.
Maybe you said this earlier, and I am just being lazey, but what router are you using?
I'm also unsure why you think that using DHCP would be problematic and difficult to manage? The router uses NAT to handle IP assignment of all connected endpoints? Where's the problem? :shrug:
If you are going to have an untrusted IP on your same subnet you will need to set up your software firewalls to block it.
But if IPs are assigned via DHCP then you firewall rules will somehow have to to know which IP is untrusted.
Personally, depending on how many PC's you have to manage, I think its easier and simpler to put your own network behind a 2nd router. which all you have to do is switch it on and you are immediately protected from anything that may be going on the other side of the wall.
I personally would never put a neigbour on the same subnet as myself, and also expect to trust any machines on my subnet. People can set IPs manually and walk through your securiry. Alternatively , after a powerdown, DHCP might juggle all of your IPs around.
You might not agree, but to me that seems the right way to do it. Once you home network is a certain size its easy to have a centrally managed router/firewall than lots of "Software Firewalls" all over the place.
I will now stick my fingers in my ears. :)
I didnt even like having my Brother on the same subnet, when we shared a flat, but I taught him the dark arks of Firefox/Thuderbird/AVG and Kerio.
Retrovertigo
09-03-2006, 17:32
Maybe you said this earlier, and I am just being lazey, but what router are you using?
I'm using a Belkin F5D7231-4 - and it works a treat I might add :) no messing, out of the box and my PSP and DS work with it just fine.
But more importantly for this current situation, it has parental controls, whereas my friend has just bought another model Belkin which is a cable/dsl hybrid, and contains no such feature.
Provide limited access - Secure your shares and dont allow ICS... ensure that its provided through a proxied/secured connection with content filtering - Hell only allow access at certain times and certain sites but for free or something.
That way youve covered your keister and done a good favour :P
yeh use ya router to bann certain sites/ ips, im sure theres a section for adult content, warez etc...
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.