I can't believe there are some posts that say hooking up to unsecured wifi (that is not expressly declared as public) is not theft. I often use my broadband for business purposes. There are times when I need to download a couple hundred MB of project files. Now, I paid for a certain amount of bandwidth, and I'm not rich, so I'm on a rather low DSL plan. If one or more unauthorized users were to use my line and download some large files of their own at a time when I need full bandwidth, they are depriving me of value. Theft.

Now, I'm aware of that, and I don't want them or the potential liability for their actions, and I'm lucky to have the awareness and motivation to figure out my home network equipment, so my wireless network is invisible to casual users and WPA-secured. But if I was more naive, theft would be possible.

Let's say you leave your cell phone on a table, and while you're out of the room, someone you do not know who "really needs" to make a phone call picks up your phone without permission and does so, and in doing so, manages to use up some of the limited minutes you paid for. That seems like a similar form of theft.

I'm not pure, I've jumped on such networks myself. But I think it's best to avoid them, and not just for moral reasons. For one thing, if you can see them, they can see you. If you happen to jump on a network where a savvy user exists and monitors traffic (let's say a parent is too naive to secure the family router but their kid happens to be running a sniffer from his bedroom), all your unencrypted traffic is quite readable to them. Most of my friends do not know enough to set their e-mail client to use a secure e-mail protocol, for instance. At least I do that.

I think the manufactureres should take responsibility for thier products.
I understand why devices do not come with encryption turned on, but...

It is too hard for the average home user to setup wireless security and if they can activiate it on the router, they can't join their computer to it. So they end up not using it because of the hassle.

Most users think that "I don't have any critical files, so I don't have anything to steal" so they don't bother with security.

Users should be made more aware of the issue. Routers that "nag" until encryption is turned on. Easier Setup on devices, like Linksys's "Secure Easy Setup"(not perfect, but a start.).

On the other side of things, because the router is sending out a signal that anyone can pick up, it's way to easy to "jump on" and use. If you use a CB Radio to communicate with your buddy, any one else can listen in, they just need a CB radio too. Radio scanners have been picking up broadcasted signals way before Wireless Networks.

People will always take what they can get for free, and sending out a wireless signal accross the street is easy to pick up. So right or wrong, to stop people from using your network I think it's up to the user to secure thier network and the manufacturer to supply easier to use products.

I use both WPA2 and MAC Filtering and turn off SSID broadcast so you're welcome to use my wireless network anytime.

I can't believe there are some posts that say this IS theft. How are you to know if the AP is intentionally public or not?

No it's not, they're just lazy. And if they're not bright enough to make it work properly, they should hire a professional to make it work properly. Should electrical cable manufacturers be liable because they don't make it simple enough for a homeowner to wire his own stove?

There is a price for being stupid and/or lazy.

If WPA2 is cracked, the others are completely irrelevant. Since WPA2 so far is uncrackable in a real world situation, the other stuff is not adding security, just inconvenience.

limited bandwidth
 

Limited bandwidth does not apply to everyone, so in the countries where bandwidth is usually unlimited, you can use my park-analogy (even though I think it's stupid to waste that many analogies on this topic). You don't actually harm the users and in most cases when you use someone else's WLAN you hook up, check your e-mails and off you go, no harm done.
The few cases, where you actually abuse your neighbours' WLAN (I don't really see why you can't ask then. For a tech kid, it should be easy to persuade elderly neighbours, that it doesn't change a thing for them, if he uses their router and offers some computer help in exchange, but I guess most tech kids are too introverted for that.) that might mean, that you steal their bandwidth and they have to pay more than usual, but in some countries, Sweden for example, this just is not true, most users here have high speed and unlimited traffic, they won't ever notice, if someone uses their connection (except if he really slows it down, but I hope that will be reason enough for them to take a look at their settings).

I also think that the manufacturers should take the responsibility to inform their users, but please NO nag screens, there are actually users who give and get and want their network to be public. In my hometown for example, there are students, that open up their WLAN network and give access to their public files and that's kinda cool.

Nag screens aren't needed. What's needed is for Wireless to be turned off by default. Using the same web page for both turning on wireless and security settings would put the burden squarely where it belongs: with the user. If you can't turn it on, then you need professional help. ;)

Impractical in today's world. It would result in thousands of support calls. The burden is already on the user. Your proposal would shift it to the manufacturer.

A lot of manufacturers now include a "one button setup" routine which adds security and auto-configures the system. I've never used it so I can't tell you how well it works. I believe it means all the devices have to be from the same company though.

This law should go in degrees. Like drug policy. Since it's pretty easy to see what abuse of a public network is, with simple everyday use it seems feasable. For example if someone hops on to a wirless network parked in a street, to check weather, and google maps, it's not a big deal they used up what ... 2mb of bitrate at most? However if a person down the street has been leeching off a neighbor for over three months, cancelling his own service because it's so easy. Well that indeed is theft, and intentional abuse. It's hard for me to image a situation where it isn't 100% clear that one person is abusing the unaware user.

Although if I had to simply pick, it would simply be legal to use all publicly open networks. Put a password on it, thats it.