WiFi Cantennas now "illegal"

We're a little wary of Inside Bay Area's decidedly alarmist article titled "Hackers prey on unguarded wireless links," which goes the distance in furthering the meme propagating that hijacked WiFi = super duper bad and teh ev1l hax0rs will come to get j00. But what's more egregious are the claims made by Lt. Bob Lozito of the Sacramento County Sheriff's Department's Hi-Tech Crimes Task Force, who says that cantennas (WiFi antennas made of Pringles cans or like shapes) are "unsophisticated but reliable, and it's illegal to possess them." This, apparently, because a student caught trying to hack his grades at school posessed a cantenna. Uh, we're not entirely sure whether or not Mr. Lozito's quoting the law or making it up as he goes (we'll tell you what we think he's doing), but seriously, is the government going to start making pickup trucks illegal because they can be used to loot houses whose doors are left unlocked?

[Via TechDirt]

[gunifer @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

yeh, and while they're at it, ban firearms, 'cause they can be used to kill people...

[Get Real @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

They should ban laptops while they are at it.

[Asher @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Not pick up trucks... Just the doors of homes will become illegal. Since someone obviously has the potential to open them, thusly entering your private domicile. All doors will have to be removed since the end user is unable to lock them (or learn how) and will be replaced by nothing. Since nothing, is of course, far better than something (if the something is not fully understood and it's potential utilized). The nothing will then be regulated by heaps of gov't paperwork and will then become something, thus making it once again, illegal.

[Ward Mundy @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

The really troubling aspect of the Wi-Fi police activity is that some of the new Wi-Fi devices such as the Wi-Fi phone recently reviewed at http://nerdvittles.com/ automatically seek out WiFi connections whether you want them to or not.

[Lectiod @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

You're all wrong on the metaphor. Your hands would be the device that's illegal because it's a device that is used to open the door to gain entrance to the house.

[Keith Wakeham @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

People are now illegal. If you are, or ever have been a person (or homosapien) then your now banned because people can do things. Monkeys, chimps, and gorillaz are also illegal, because they might learn to pirate stuff.

Lets go a step further, atoms are now illegal, their is potential that they could somehow form something that could potentially do something illegal.

This is insane, just because something could be used for something illegal doesn't mean that it doesn't have a legal purpose. There are many legal uses for things like "cantanneas". How about like what they do, increase the access range of a wireless network.

[sunz @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

it could become illegal if a safe legal use for it can be found. (i do not know much about these cantennas) but typically that is how the law determines if something can be possed. Good Legal use. That sheriff probably made it up though since i doubt there has been any law proposed and passed on this item or similar devices .. although can anyone tell me if stealing access to open wifi signals is illegal ?

[Keith Wakeham @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

People are now illegal. If you are, or ever have been a person (or homosapien) then your now banned because people can do things. Monkeys, chimps, and gorillaz are also illegal, because they might learn to pirate stuff.

Lets go a step further, atoms are now illegal, their is potential that they could somehow form something that could potentially do something illegal.

This is insane, just because something could be used for something illegal doesn't mean that it doesn't have a legal purpose. There are many legal uses for things like "cantanneas". How about like what they do, increase the access range of a wireless network.

[Asher @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

All fun aside... our gov't has set a precedent in the last ten years or so of acting as though it's first function is to regulate the society that empowers it. The general public does not give enough of a damn to stop this from happening. The population that has the power to elect the gov't has allowed the gov't to strip that power from its people. Unless ppl say stop, this trend will only become more invasive as technology spreads and develops.

[Ben @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Cantennas cannot be declared illegal since they are antennas. If they ban them then they'll have to take all of the directional antennas of the shelves, which will be impossible.

[Lectiod @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

#8, when this happens I am moving to the Neitherlands, or Canada

[Ian Jardine @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

I thought there was a basic right for any citizen to receive all radio signals ota. This is the reason why there is no Federal Law against radar detectors. Thus antennaes themselves are legal, are they not?

[Unomi @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

#10 drop the illusion about the Netherlands being some kind of harbor for the free....

Here it becomes also more and more some totalitarian state led by people who want to control all and everybody and take their liberty.

- Unomi -

[Me @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Life will soon become illegal.... bah...

[Richard @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

This 'officer' is clearly talking out of his ass... I'm sure the FCC would have something to say about the illegality of a 2.4GHz antenna.

[Wayne R. @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

I'm scared! Oh God, I'm so scared! Make me safe! Please God/Allah/Jehovah/whatev, save me (just me, and everyone just like me) from everything I haven't bothered to understand! Shield me from 'the unknown'!

Fuckin' nitwits.

[Erika @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Libertarianism, please!

[Rombus @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

If Cantennas are made illegal, then only the outlaws will have cantennas, (AKA most of us)

[dutch once removed @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

unomi

to get completely off-topic, the simple fact is that the netherlands are MUCH more open with more personal freedoms than in the US.

-drug use is at least tolerated, sometimes it is prosecuted depending on which drug is involved and the amounts in question. soft drugs are generally given no attention unless it's a case of flaunting it, high volume sales and repeated offenders. at least the dutch understand that drug use is a fact of life and can't just be fought with a "war". look at the US prison population(what crime landed them there and for how long) and tell me that's an effective use considering how crimes like rape/murder/child molestation...crimes that essentially prove that as a human being you're miswired get less time than some kid caught with a sheet of LSD(which essentialy proves you like to escape)??

-the dutch also recognize that the world's oldest profession, prostitution is never ever going to go away, so it should at least be made safer for all parties involved. prostitues are forced to have frequent check-ups and recieve pensions. the only place that comes close to this in the US is Nevada, but frankly it does little to make it safer or a more finacially sound proposition for the woman.

-gay marriage...need i say more. who the hell wouldn't allow this? aside from say some backwards ass country like the US run by a megalomaniac.

-essentially the same levels of other freedoms guaranteed by the US constitution(which everyone seems to think is the end all be all of constitutions)

-more respect for human rights in every category imaginable. it's far easier to seek asylum in the Netherlands than it is in the US or even Canada. women get more respect and aid than anywhere else.

-taxation that is effectively used for the good of the people, not the good of corporations.

i could go on and on...i'd say the only way the Netherlands is becoming "totalitarian" and run be people out to steal "liberties" is the current problem with Islamic Extremists demanding that the world be remade to their standards. Personally, I have no problem with this at all, considering what Muslims have demanded - essentially that means undoing hundreds of years of social progress. Yeah, let's all go back to the stone age! Fuck that...if you have that kind of mindset why on earth would you ever WANT to move to a country like Holland?? It's not like it should catch them off guard, if they don't like it they need to look somewhere else for residency.

and yes, sometimes you truly need to restrict some freedoms to save the most important freedoms a society has. sometimes you need to defend yourself. there really is no such thing as a pure utopian society(just like there can never be a pure communist society by the very nature of humanity), but at least Holland is closer than any other country to achieving this.

and frankly if you can't see how that's a million times better than anything america has going for it, you really need to have your head examined.

[Robin @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

It makes more sense to ban Pringle's. Even though it would make no difference to WiFi hacking, it would help in the war on obesity (and force hackers to adopt a different diet).

[Chester @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Just because someone leaves a car unlocked with the keys in the ignition, doesn't give me the right to drive it away. Thus, just because someone leaves a wireless connection unsecured, doesn't give me the right to use it without asking.
That said, I really feel that there is something seriously wrong with calling a simple antenna an illegal device.
People are scared and ignorant to a lot of technology.
If a person left their keys in an unlocked car, most reasonable people would says "serves them right" when someone stole it.
However when someone uses a cantenna to snag some free internet, people don't blame the moron who left it unsecured, they blame the cantenna. This reaction is not what it should be.

[Asher @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Although he cannot seem to find all the syllables, GWB will undoubtedly tag this as a turist(sic) device and make it a violation of the patriot act to use it.

[Jeff @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Wow, some very good points raised. Not trying to advertise, but you guys should check out www.onlinedebate.net, perhaps a better forum for your opinions, hopefully I'll see you there.

[Tin Lizzy @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

and you probably, like me, thought it impossible that the Supreme Court could ever rule that fileshare software creators are responsible for folks using the software to pirate copyrighted material...

It's a head-scratcher to me why that logic has never applied to guns/killing. I mean if a) people don't download files illegally, software downloads files illegally; then b) people don't kill people, guns kill people.

But I guess making sure greedy companies aren't deprived of a single cent is more important than people dying - silly me.

[Bud @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

At least Dutch knows the difference between "your" and "you're".
I'd leave this pathetic country any day for a life in the Netherlands, where there are no rednecks!

[gork @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

I believe, from the Federal level, they have been illegal for non-licensed use for quite some time. There's a ERP level you shoul dnot exceed. This usually means only using antennas made specifically for your WAP. Use the ducks that come with it or the upgraded ducks. Cantenna's can raise the ERP to a level beyond what it should be for unlicensed operation.

[JK @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Spectre:

Your american pride lets you down here... saying that we have a few thousand years headstart is rich... if my mental image of you is any good you have european origins, and the earliest your ancestors could have become "Americans" would have been in the 1500s... 500 years ago, not a few thousand.

You see, America started through immigrants from Europe sailing to the USA (the pilgrim fathers), not a sudden evolutionary blip and the creation of Alabama in a short, sharp move. Perhaps pick up a kids textbook on American History, it might broaden your mind.

As much as i respect your right to an opinion, the fact remains that I think it's utter bollocks, as is the US government, gun laws, the Iraq war etc etc...

Yours,
Jamie (UK)

[Mike @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Aren't there FCC regulations involved? I would think using any device to extend the range of your wireless connection goes against the current regulations. Is that type of violation the same thing as being illegal?

[Peter @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

So many things are wrong with the article, I've already complained to the paper. Let's count:

1. Cantennas boost signals from "several miles away" - LOL. Where can I buy those super cantennas?

2. Possession of cantennas is illegal - it's scary that a police officer sworn to uphold the law knows so little about it but that a newspaper couldn't do the simplest fact checking and discover he's wrong?

3. Did the high school hacker even try to hack into his school's wireless network? Does the school even have a wireless network? Read carefully and note the reporter is very careful NOT to say anything about hacking into a wireless network. In fact, it sounds like it was a just an ordinary case of a kid trying to hack into a wired network from home. So why is he used as the boogeyman in an story that's supposed to be about unauthorized access to wireless networks?

Absolutely terrible journalism, not even the most basic fact checking and the convenient twisting of facts to suit the reporter's premise.

[Peter @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Response to #29:

Mike,

There's no FCC issue because the cantenna only amplifies RECEIVED signals. It doesn't boost outgoing signals and therefore, doesn't increase or cause interference with other signals.

[Peter @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

This is on the cantenna.com website in its FAQ:

Is it legal to use your Cantenna?

Yes, our Cantennas and Pigtails have been tested and comply with part 15 of the FCC rules. Make sure other wireless devices that you use also comply. Compliance with FCC regulations is your responsibility. Check with your Internet Service Providers to find out if they permit sharing of their Internet connections.

[Joshua @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Actually, for those old enough to remember the CB craze back in the 70s, you would already know that antennas designed to boost or alter the FCC approved BROADCASTING capabilities of a licensed radio device are, in fact, illegal. Have been for about 50 years.

Receiving antennas would probably require explicit laws to ban them. Such laws have already been passed dealing with specific devices whose only use is intercepting otherwise secure microwave transmissions.

[KD5QLN @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

YES cantennas are LEGAL in all 50 states under part 15 FCC rules, you may not excede 4w EIRP (Effective Isotropic Radiated Power) from any directional antenna with gain of more than 6dB, otherwise it's 1w EIRP. see http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/news/article.php/1136171 or http://ftp.fcc.gov/oet/info/rules/part15/part15-61305.pdf if you dont believe me. If some dumb cop in cali tells you otherwise, pull out your copy of the part15 pdf and tell him to read it and weap. I on the otherhand, pullout my FCC license and tell them that I have a Federal Prvledge to operate any RF device how I see fit within my band and power limitaions (1 Kilowatt of power :P ). If you areinterestedin in amateur radio or "HAM" radio visit www.arrl.org, its easy to get a license.

Mike Down KD5QLN
Tech Class Amateur Radio Operator

[Pat @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

So do I now have to call my local police department and tell them to come take my now empty pringles can?

Yeah I know alot of traffic cops that dont know the law to how it is writen but rather how they think it is. So they say stuff along the lines of. "If your in front of a school when you see children (even tho the law dosnt say what a 'children' is) you must slow down to 25." Which is wrong. Because if there is no 'school zone' sign posted it is legally not a school zone and on top of that the 'school zone' is only 300ft from either side of the cross walk where the 'school zone' sign is posted and if its only on one side then that means one side of the road dosnt have to slow down to 25. (Thats how it works in WA at least)

But most people - including cops - think its anywhere infront/near a school is a school zone and that you must slow down to 25 even if there is no school zone sign.

So I'm going to guess that this guy merely thinks that its illegal to posses them but it truly isnt.

"Roughly two out of every three wireless signals are left unencrypted"

Roughly two out of five drivers dont ware their seatbelts...Does that mean the rest of us get punished? I thought they got a ticket for it. (By the way the seat belt law is unconstitutional) Not us. I guess we could just rip all the seat belts out of our cars now right?

About five out of five people speed. (Even if you dont mean to. It just happens some times. *sips on beer*) Does that mean we are going to make gas pedals illegal?

What about just a normal wireless router huh? I may not be able to take controll of your wi-fi connection from as far away but I can still do it. Does that mean they are illegal to? So does that mean I have to take my wireless router down. So now I cant have a home network?

I think its really more like poppy seeds. Its legal to buy poppy seeds but its illegal to intend to and to grow them. (Just for those who dont know. Poppy seeds are used to make opium. Try buying some and making some tea out of them...its good...) So what I'm guessing it really is is that its illegal to gain access to someones wi-fi connection without their consent (We all know thats illegal...well..maybe most of us) but your form of router isnt illegal...

(Man I feel like I babbled alot there.)

[OddManOut @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

"1. Cantennas boost signals from "several miles away" - LOL. Where can I buy those super cantennas?"

"It doesn't boost outgoing signals and therefore, doesn't increase or cause interference with other signals."

True, and true. For anyone still unclear on how a cantenna works, try putting your cupped hand behind your ear. Notice you can hear sounds (emanating from in front of you anyway) more clearly and with seemingly greater volume ? No, the signal has NOT been boosted, you are simply receiving more of it. The cantenna simply does the same thing with radio waves...

So I guess putting your cupped hand behind your ear either is or should be illegal too ? After all, you could do that and illicitly eavesdrop on people shouting at the top of their lungs (which is pretty much what running unsecured wireless is akin to...)...

[extra88 @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Damn our Founding Fathers for not including an amendment covering cantennas in the Bill of Rights!

[Rob Meyer @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Possessing a cantenna is likely not illegal but using one might be...the FCC might have something to say about you modifying licensed equipment with non-standard antennas when it's not designed for such. That would be my guess as to how he's tagging them as illegal. This spectrum space is pretty lawless, but if you've modified your device to project its signal further, you'll be on the losing side of the law, unless your just passively receiving signals. But if you're transmitting too, then they can likely use that regulation to come down on you.

[dutch once removed @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

hey spectre

actually, i speak french, german, english and dutch as well as some russian

and if you think that your post affected my opinion of the united states, i guess you're right. americans can be thick-headed, jingoistic bastards who have the equivalent education of a 5 year old child. but i'm not one to make broad brush statements, so i'll forget about your post.

as for americans saving europe, you're probably correct, but on the other hand - that was a different USofA. back then people took pride in the fact that they had the freedoms they had, in the work they did, in what life they could scratch out.

now americans seem solely consumed by consumption on every level of everything they can get their hands on. and debt be damned! it's their god given right to lead the globe in personal and national debt while sitting atop 1400 thread-count sheets. a bit like Rome before it fell? tell me i'm wrong....

i'm not saying the USofA is all bad, but there is NO comparison between what the US has done in the past 50 years and what Holland has done.

not to mention the fact that without europeans, there would be no "Americans" - unless you happen to be a Native American(which you're probably not considering how foolish it would be for you to lick boots at this point considering how screwed over NAs get today and in the past)

so do i speak German...yes, because I'm well educated, something you seem to be completely lacking.

[Asher @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Amen Brother!

[Paul @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

#38 The US does like to collect asshats like that, but not all of us prefer to wear our asses on our heads :)

[Gromitron @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

I'm waiting for a national police sponsored 'Pringle-cans-for-shoes' trade policy to safely get the Pringle cans out of the hands of todays misguided youth.

[Lord Humungus @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Well I agree with the Dutchman's post, I will not have him disparage my 1400 thread-count sheets (made in China of course)! Granted, they cost me my first born (he'll have a much better life with the nice infertile couple with more money than most of the third world combined, and besides, initial versions always have issues), but they're soooooo damned soft! You'll have to pry them out of my cold, dead materialistic hands... ;)

[Gromitron @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

I'm waiting for a national police sponsored 'Pringle-cans-for-shoes' trade policy to safely get the Pringle cans out of the hands of todays misguided youth.

[Peter @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

If you check out the discussion thread about this on www.broadbandreports.com, someone got a reply from the police officer. He basically says he was misquoted, that he was talking about possession being illegal for someone who has been convicted of hacking. That makes much more sense but is another example of what a piss poor job the reporter did. Somehow, "possession of cantennas by persons convicted of hacking is illegal" got turned into "Possession is illegal." Unbelievable.

[Aaron Walker @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

Well, I found an email address for the officer who was quoted and emailed him. I'll post any insights here.

[stingraze @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

... why illegal...

[Danomite @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

holy anti-american bias, batman!

[Mike @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

all fun aside... our gov't has set a precedent in the last ten years or so of acting as though it's first function is to regulate the society that empowers it. the general public does not give enough of a damn to stop this from happening. the population that has the power to elect the gov't has allowed the gov't to strip that power from its people. unless ppl say stop, this trend will only become more invasive as technology spreads and develops.

----------------------------------------------
we've been brain washed so much to the point that if anyone disagrees with the way things are going on the national level they're immediately discredited and branded unpatriotic, terrorist-supporting idiots.

the media along with the education system both do a great job at keeping the masses at bay. should anyone pick up a book or a foreign newspaper they're looked down upon as "liberal misfits". knowledge and an open, global view of the world are a thing of the past. what a great society we've become. the very essence of our nation is being washed away by ignorance and close-minded individuals.

[freakshow @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

lol...about the officer sayin that...he's tellin the truth. my friend was the guy caught hacking, and he always had a cantenna and a laptop with him in school.

[Skippy @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM]

your friend might have gotten caught hacking but that has nothing to do with the cantenna. he illegally accessed parts of a system he was not authorized to access,which is why he is under arrest. the cantenna being illegal is bullshit which i dont believe. i have spent the last 2 hours looking for this law and it would seem that directional antennas would be outlawed too.