Legal responsibility of WLAN insecurity
in [Cryptography]
|
Prev: Major step ahead for cryptography
Next: SHA-3 Ouch!
From: Mok-Kong Shen on 28 May 2010 09:39 If one doesn't secure his WLAN connection with an appropriate password, then he would be (to a certain extent) responsible for eventual abuses by others, according to a recent verdict of the German Bundesgerichtshof: http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi-bin/rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bgh&Art=pm&pm_nummer=0101/10 What is the legal status of such cases in other countries? Thanks. M. K. Shen
From: Tom St Denis on 28 May 2010 12:52 On May 28, 9:39 am, Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.s...(a)t-online.de> wrote: > If one doesn't secure his WLAN connection with an appropriate password, > then he would be (to a certain extent) responsible for eventual abuses > by others, according to a recent verdict of the German > Bundesgerichtshof: > > http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi-bin/rechtsprechung/document.py?... > > What is the legal status of such cases in other countries? In Canada you're not responsible for your net connection in that way. Though if your IP gets used for illegal activity you might be on the receiving end of a search warrant. Tom
From: unruh on 28 May 2010 21:53 On 2010-05-28, Carsten Krueger <cakruege(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Am Fri, 28 May 2010 09:52:09 -0700 (PDT) schrieb Tom St Denis: > >> In Canada you're not responsible for your net connection in that way. >> Though if your IP gets used for illegal activity you might be on the >> receiving end of a search warrant. > > Than everbody could lie about the usage and say my open wlan was used by > someone else. Just like you can murder someone and lie and say you did not do it. The legal system is used to dealing with lies. > > greetings > Carsten
From: unruh on 28 May 2010 21:55 On 2010-05-28, Carsten Krueger <cakruege(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Am Fri, 28 May 2010 10:53:53 -0700 (PDT) schrieb Tom St Denis: > >> All I said is if someone uses your wifi to then commit crimes you are >> NOT liable for it. Not that "anything goes on the net." > > Only in criminial law or in civil law, too? The only diffeence is in the standard of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt vs balance of probabilities) > > greetings > Carsten
From: Mok-Kong Shen on 30 May 2010 03:28
Mok-Kong Shen wrote: > > If one doesn't secure his WLAN connection with an appropriate password, > then he would be (to a certain extent) responsible for eventual abuses > by others, according to a recent verdict of the German > Bundesgerichtshof: [snip] One should use a sufficiently long and secure password, says the verdict. But how "precisely" could one determine whether a given password is safe or not, there being a plethora of (well-known or yet unknown) means of cracking passwords? M. K. Shen |