Mi sembra interessante.
jc
-------- Original Message --------
Michiel de Jong <michiel@unhosted.org> Jul 05
10:13PM +0200 ^
this has some info http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,15194360,00.html
and this is relevant to the topic:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/04/open-wireless-movement
so there are two problems with open wifi:
- the wifi protocol does not have a safe way of being open. it is
either
encrypted and closed, or open and unencrypted. This means that open
wifi
routers suffer from poor security for all protocols except ones that
are
themselves secure, like vpn, ssh and https.
- it is (at least in some countries) illegal to give connectivity to
strangers, or at least, it makes you partly responsible for the
behaviour of
those strangers. this is absurd - it is like if you allow people to
walk
over your land, and a bank robber uses that path to get away, you
become
responsible for helping that bank robber get away over your land.
Afaik such
rules do not apply to when you allow people to use a path over your
land,
but it apparently does apply if you allow people a path over your
router.
Anyway, what i understand is that since Fon is a closed club of
people (only
Fon owners can use other Fon access points), it's like those cigar
bars that
evade the non-smoking policy because they are a 'members club'
instead of a
bar.
Instead of blocking these efforts, governments should take an
example from
Estonia, a country that understood that universal wifi is a good
thing for a
civilized country - something like universal education, health care
etcetera.
http://news.cnet.com/Estonia-sets-shining-Wi-Fi-example/2010-7351_3-5924673.html
HTH
Michiel
--
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net
- http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com;
Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens;
http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens