How to Take Over a Train Station 356
ThinkComp writes "Everyone knows that home wireless networks are insecure, but who would expect a major transportation hub to be vulnerable to the same problems? Well, waiting for my friend's train at South Station in Boston, MA, I happened to notice that it was possible to take control of the entire station's wireless network, including its home page and authorization method (free wireless, anyone?)--and those of thirty other businesses throughout Massachusetts, thanks to a few coding errors on the part of the wireless company with which South Station contracted."
wireless is insecure? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:wireless is insecure? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:wireless is insecure? (Score:5, Insightful)
And, if their web site is that insecure, what makes you think their other systems (electronic and other) aren't similarly flawed?
Regardless, what I would really like to hear is the behind the scenes stories from all companies involved.
Re:wireless is insecure? (Score:5, Insightful)
I wish I could believe that.
What will probably happen is they get hacked and any problems that arise will be considered a terrorist act. The company will get all sorts of sympathy from the unknowing public while the perp goes to federal "pound him in the ass" prison and owes $4 Billion in damages. The CEOs of the company will denounce the act, get fat bonuses, jump ship, and might even throw a quarter at the problem on their way out the door.
But I feel that last part is overly optimistic.
Re:wireless is insecure? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:wireless is insecure? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:wireless is insecure? (Score:4, Funny)
That's great. Can you wait until after I get to work on Monday before you do this? Thanks.
Not wireless (Score:5, Informative)
So really, the site that served images from an unobfuscated directory allowed the person to know what to look for, the directory was fully listed in a way that directories shouldn't. The passwords were very, very insecure. This had nothing to do with wireless security, but rather web services security, and basic things for security that people don't do.
The passwords in the article, BTW, no longer function. At least, not form my remote machine. Anyone reading this from South Station wish to see if the passwords still work on-network?
Google HTML version available :) (Score:5, Informative)
That's a stupid question (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, would you expect railroad company employees to be any smarter about computer things than your average Joe Blow surfing the innurnet down the street?
I'd be more surprised to find open hubs around, say, Linksys buildings. But then again, only slightly more surprised, mind you.
Re:That's a stupid question (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:That's a stupid question (Score:4, Insightful)
But guess what? All these people are like you and me. Yes, better educated within their particular field but still as fallible(?) as any other person. A cop on the beat will not know about IP law. A doctor will have specialised in a particular field of medicine. Anyone could misjudge the meter and the guy with the hot dog stand could serve you food that will kill you.
Until recently I (kind of) had all these expectations. That changed when I started my education as a network engineer and looked into doing practice work with the university IT department. Know what? They are just regular guys. They go for a pint after work on a friday. They do normal stuff all the time and they are not ubermensch as we like to think. Not all companies can afford to employ the cream of the crop in all departments. After all, a company's main purpose is to MAKE MONEY. Everything else comes second. This includes the computers and IT infrastructure. If 10Mb ethernet can do, it will have to do and if an unsecure wi-fi access point can do, I suppose it will have to do too.
I suppose my point is that you may not be too far off saying the cleaners were involved in the IT rollout. In the real world we all wear many hats, some better fitting than others.
Re:That's a stupid question (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:That's a stupid question (Score:3, Insightful)
The average idiot couldn't set this thing up in the first place. These idiots were special.
Laypeople aren't that dangerous because they aren't that trusted. It takes an expert or professional making a small mistake on somthing very important to really cause a problem.
He was just saying the proverbial "noone's perfect"
Re:That's a stupid question (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't expect my doctor to know everything about the human body, but I'd expect him to have a certain degree of basic competence. If he asks me to remind him which is the leg and which is the arm, I'm out of there.
Connecting a wifi network in a public place to the machine you do your credit card authentication to is incredibly stupid, even without leaving default passwords in place.
BTW, do we know that it is the IT department that put this in, and not someone pluggin
Re:That's a stupid question (Score:3, Insightful)
I would expect the doctor to wear gloves and mask for his and my protection.
I would expect the meter maid to see that the needle is in the red.
I would expect the chef to ensure that the vegetables are clean? (That one's a stretch, but so was yours =)
Securing a publicly-accessible portal (wireless or otherwise) should be basic knowledge. Perhaps not the method itself, but knowing that a method needs
Its a TRAIN STATION for crying out loud... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Its a TRAIN STATION for crying out loud... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Its a TRAIN STATION for crying out loud... (Score:3, Insightful)
Chances are, the Wireless Internet is a service of Amtrak's Acela Lounge. There is a business lounge with net access and coffee and newspapers, and it probably bleeds over. The name is South Station because that's where it is.
The MBTA doesn't provide wireless at any other station , to my knowledge. (which i'd like to think is good, I ride the Red Line into South Station every
Re:That's a stupid question (Score:3, Interesting)
Unfortunatly, yes. At the downtown offices of one of the clients I support, one of the corner office managers setup an out-of-the-box secured Linksys so he would not have to plug in his ethernet to his laptop. It wasn't until two weeks later that I discovered the device while troubleshooting connectivity issues. Since he plugged it directly to the ethernet port in his office and the switches in this location (it is only
Re:That's a stupid question (Score:2)
Re:That's a stupid question (Score:5, Informative)
Decisions, decisions (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Decisions, decisions (Score:3, Interesting)
They're coming (Score:4, Funny)
Re:They're coming (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:They're coming (Score:2, Insightful)
No they aren't (Score:5, Funny)
We have recently come to our attention that you are using methods of pinpointing locations of individuals that may infringe on our "Latitude/Longetude" [slashdot.org] techniques (Patent Pending).
You are hereby ordered to cease & desist all location activity until you have properly licensed our intellectual property rights.
Yours Truly, -Microsoft Legal Team
Re:this isn't that funnny -- I just reported him.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Dear guestBox employee... (Score:4, Interesting)
huh? since when is L:P admin:admin or South:Station or wifi:wifi considered a perfectly good lock? If you believe that, I have an oragami based home-security system I would like to sell you.
This is a relatively formal security report - and I certaintly feel that I have right to know that a major wifi network that I might pay to use (with my CC# mind you) is compromised severly in security. Kudos for the publicity - he also mentions that he attempted private contact before writing this paper. Publishing this makes the purpotrater (South Station for acting under the pretention of providing a secure network) and potential victims (customers) very aware of the need to reconfigure the network.
75 out of 100 people that might have discovered this trick would have left it as "hey cool, free wifi access for me and my buds," another 20 or so out of 100 would have done much worse (we're talkin' goatse on the homepage).
At worst this was a subtle brag of "L33tness", at best a noble public security gesture.
and hey, if you lose your job at guestBox over this - I hear Diebold is looking for a few good men...
Illegal access (Score:5, Funny)
Summary: here's documentation of my illegal access to a system, please prosecute me, thanks.
Re:Illegal access (Score:2)
Re:Illegal access (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, I was totally on his side until the "I changed the access mode from 'credit card' to 'free'". That's bullshit. I know he immediately changed it back, but that's wrong. Nothing gives him the right to do that. Surely bringing up the admin page was enough to be able to contact the admins and tell them they fucked up. Before he did that, he might have had a chance of claiming complete innocence.
It's like th
Re:Illegal access (Score:3, Insightful)
Awfully alarmist, but I don't see how you can equate changing the access mode from 'credit card' to 'free' and immediately changing it back again with continually making withdrawals at an ATM. That's insane. That doesn't mean what he did is correct, but it is certainly NOTHING like "the people who abused the ATMs".
hold that thought (Score:5, Funny)
and close the doors when you are all the way through
next stop: home
There is one silly error in an otherwise great art (Score:5, Informative)
Re:There is one silly error in an otherwise great (Score:5, Informative)
-molo
DecNet requires the ability tonchange your MAC (Score:5, Interesting)
The old DecNet required that all ethernet cards have the ability to change their mac address. Part of the protocol, and you couldn't connect to DecNet unless you had the right mac address. (which was changed as part of the network protocol, you normally didn't change this manually)
Just in case a customer ever tries to use their chipset with DecNet nearly all cards allow, software to change the mac address. Since all current chips have the ability, when designing a modification to the old chip it is easier to leave that ability in than take it out.
I don't know if anyone in the world still runs DecNet, but it isn't a chance network vendors are willing to take.
Re:There is one silly error in an otherwise great (Score:5, Informative)
obligatory reply (Score:5, Funny)
What a waste of bandwidth (Score:5, Insightful)
1.) Try the default login/password combination and make some educated guesses.
2.) Look at the source code of web pages.
3.) Don't be an idiot admin and leave your system wider than your momma.
Not just wireless (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not just wireless (Score:5, Interesting)
I just got a Wireless router the other day. What my room mates couldn't understand is why I locked down the router so hard. They were amazed that I had to put the WPA key on all the computers, and why I also did MAC and IP filtering. They just couldn't understand. Although it is not totally secure, hopefully it is enough to keep the dorks out and at the same time allow for wireless inconvience. The last thing that I want to worry about is some dork running around with a laptop and deciding that my internet is his internet and then doing something stupid.
Why play with HO scale? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why play with HO scale? (Score:2)
See mom? Buying me those train sets 20 years ago paid off! At least I hope I got it right =P
accountability? (Score:4, Informative)
Very good article. However, one of the author's ideas for improving security doesn't actually hold water. The problem is to verify the identity of people being assigned dynamic IP addresses on a wireless network. He proposes
"... to force accountability,Actually, most network cards allow you to set the MAC address by software if the factory one isn't good for you. For example, this is needed for drop-in-replacement functionality.
Re:accountability? (Score:5, Informative)
Well? (Score:5, Funny)
You are now guilty of terrorism or treason/spy.... (Score:2, Insightful)
misleading title and rather arrogant, IMHO (Score:3, Informative)
Such strange attitudes (Score:5, Insightful)
At first this wasn't entirely the case. Consider, for example, copying all the files from /usr/bin to your home directory 1000 times. Back in the old days that would be enough to fill up the harddrive which would quickly stop other people from using the system. You could affect other people, the kernel didn't stop you, so it must be allowed right! Well no. You're wasting resources and being an asshole. But rather than put a sign on the wall that said "please don't waste disk space" someone decided this was a "security" issue and implemented disk quotas into the kernel. Now you can't affect other users by using up all the disk space.
Consider the "fork bomb" issue. For those who don't know, this is just like using up all the harddrive space, except instead of disk you're wasting memory. A fork bomb will quickly bring an older unix machine to its knees, and back in the days when I had the joy of sharing a unix lab with other students, a fork bomb would go off at least twice a day. Why? Cause if the kernel permitted it, it must be ok right? Now there's protections in most kernels just to detect a fork bomb and stop it.
Such a strange way of thinking. Thankfully most unix users do not try to apply this attitude to the real world. If there were to see the police or the government as some kind of kernel they might be surprised to find that they could kick over granny in the street or go ballistic with an automatic weapon. The police didn't stop me, it must be ok, right?
Just to bring this long post back on topic: just because you can take over the wireless internet of a train station, doesn't mean you should do it. It doesn't mean that it is permitted. There doesn't need to be a failsafe kernel monitoring and stopping every undesirable action that you can possibly perform. We can live with people being able to break the rules. It's called freedom.
Re:Such strange attitudes (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Such strange attitudes (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not about pranks.It's not a question of what the reviewer should and shouldn't do.
It's a question of what he could do, and therefore what someone with malicious intent could do. Expecting people's actions to just natually blend into the common good is great and all, but it's simply not going to happen. There's a reason for police there's a reason for locks on doors, there's a reason for computer security, and there's a reason I don't leave my lunch out when my cat is in the room. Somebody's going to take advantage, and I'm going to get screwed.
Re:Such strange attitudes (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a question of what he could do...
There's a reason for police there's a reason for locks on doors, there's a reason for computer security, and there's a reason I don't leave my lunch out when my cat is in the room. Somebody's going to take advantage, and I'm going to get screwed.
If this isn't the largest piece of FUD I've seen this month, I don't know what is. Good god man, it's just wireless internet access. Get a grip. There's no magic train derailing webapp on the website. The ticketing isn'
Re:Such strange attitudes (Score:3, Insightful)
Considering that he was able to obtain a list of usernames and passwords a
Re:Such strange attitudes (Score:3, Insightful)
Considering that he was able to obtain a list of usernames and passwords as well as change the prices charged for WiFi access -- anything from "Free" to perhaps hundreds of dollars per hour -- he could have either caused the station to lose revenue or, at worst, jacked up the price, use others' login accounts, and maybe their credit cards would have been automatically billed without them knowing.
Holy smokes! Call the fire department!! Why does everyone get all hopped up whenever CCs are involved, as if
Re:Such strange attitudes (Score:4, Insightful)
It's all about what you should and shouldn't do.
Understand something: Police aren't around (at least in the US) to PREVENT crime, they're there to respond after the fact. Locks don't prevent theft; they merely deter the casual person from entering a space, or making off with a bike, or a laptop, etc. Anyone who's determined to do something can usually find a way to do it.
You might be surprised to learn that most physical security isn't really about preventing unathorized access, it's about deterring people from trying. Security guards aren't some super-vigilant breed of human that can focus their attention on every detail of a situation for extended periods of time. They might be looking around with a suspicious expression (if they're really gung-ho, and not reading a magazine), but they're almost definately thinking about something unrelated.
So why do we expect better from software that's been written by people? If someone wants to gain access to a system, they will. It's all about posturing and setting up an interface with a "secure feel," just like the security gate at a building. Sure, you don't just leave the gate open and let the guard leave the station unattended, but there comes a point where you're expending more resources by keeping a facility secure than you stand to lose by having the facility compromised.
I'm not trying to make excuses for wanton disregard of basic practices.. there's no point in having a gate if you have no fence after all. But to expect any security to be bullet-proof is being unrealistic.
Re:Such strange attitudes (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Such strange attitudes (Score:4, Insightful)
Every type of security involves a series of compromises between risk and effort. Most businesses keep their cash in a cash register with someone watching it, not in an open box next to the door.
The result of people being able to "break the rules" in computer security is not freedom but chaos. Viruses, malware and spyware are all the result of other people being able to break YOUR rules in YOUR computer (well, I assume you have a rule against people doing naughty things on your machine).
Being able to break "laws" is what freedom and responsibility are about. Having mechanical enforcement of all of our laws would be called a police state. Having locks on your doors is not.
Re:Such strange attitudes (Score:2)
Fork bombs (Score:2)
In case you don't know what we're talking about here, this is how simple fork bombs can be:
Re:Such strange attitudes (Score:5, Insightful)
It is certainly not permitted for random strangers to enter your house or drive your car, so why worry about locks? Leaving doors unlocked and car keys in the ignition is much more convenient.
I suspect you understand this attitude far more than you pretend. And no, the attitude of most users is not that you can do these things if it isn't physically prevented -- just as most people are basically honest and won't trespass or steal your car. It's the few assholes you have to be on guard against. Recall the price of freedom.
Re:Such strange attitudes (Score:2)
Re:Such strange attitudes (Score:3, Insightful)
Let's consider a
guestBox (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, this is the product:
guestBOX [guestboxuser.com]
And... this is the company:
Atlantis Technology Corporation [atlantistech.com]
So, all that research... and it never occured to you to contact the vendor? Granted, maybe these are so plentiful some re-seller or VAR put in in there... but you didn't make mention of that line of thinking (or was this not the whole PDF?) so.... sorry, that's just sounding a little on the lame side.
Now, if they scoffed or blew you off at that point, okay maybe... but still. You knew the company from just looking at it. Did you try to contact them? I think that would be more telling than surfing through open Indexing on a web server like a kid curl'ing porn images.
Re:guestBox (Score:3, Funny)
And if you go to the guestBox site [guestboxuser.com] you'll find you can login with username test and password test.
Re:guestBox (Score:2)
Re:guestBox (Score:3, Interesting)
Whilst i can't speak for the article author, sometimes it doesn;t matter even if you do,
Just after the Google Exposes Web Surveillance Cams [slashdot.org] story a while back I came across a camera in an Airport that was wide open pointing at an area that in the UK would have you almost shot for filming.
I emailed both the airport and TSA to let them know about the security lapse, *nothing was done*. Apart from the auto 'Thanks, well be back in touch' form email I he
Re:guestBox (Score:3, Insightful)
DO GOOD! BE A ROBIN GOOD! (Score:2, Funny)
Totally misleading article leadin. (Score:2, Insightful)
Did he find a way of stealing credit card information? I didn't see
Re:Totally misleading article leadin. (Score:3, Funny)
The fact that he did this at a train station is totally irrelevant
Well, it does make it easier for someone to leave the scene of the crime. :)
I'm not violating a Patriot Act provision regarding giving assistance in committing crimes by suggesting people could use a TRAIN to leave the TRAIN STATION to avoid getting caught, right? ;)
Terrorist!!!!! (Score:2)
Watch out...
Can you say "airpwn"? (Score:2)
(Warning: here there be goatses!)
Mal-2
Tread carefully! (Score:5, Insightful)
You will be caught and be fined heavily! Just ask the other teenager how fun sitting in court was. This is not to mention damage to your entire professional life (I assume it exists).
Slashdotters here might encourge you, but remember that you will be sitting in the dock alone. In other words, you will be answer for YOU. Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT.
Woah There... (Score:3, Insightful)
What the author of this white paper really accessed is the admin interface of a wireless internet service provider. With this access, he/she could steal internet service or allow others to do so, or even obtain personal customer data, includingcredit card information, and use it for his/her own gain. While these are of course Bad Things, they really come nowhere close to constituting a national security risk. An inconvenience and a violation of state and federal law, yes, but a national security risk, no.
What would change things is if it were actually possible to access _train station_ systems through the wireless network. However, these systems are not configured this way. The wireless access is provided by a 3rd party provider that handles only pay-for-service internet access. Anything related to station services or railway control would be handled by its own seperate network. The author of this white paper says nothing to indicate that it is possible to do anything that would touch train station operations or that would be of any use to terrorists in an attack on the "very important" nearby buildings.
Sounds like a whole lot of nothingness to me...
Of Astroturf and Grandstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
Ignoring the grandstanding title and the fact that the author astroturfed his own "article" and site, here's a quote:
A more farfetched, but very real possibility, is that computers or workers at airports and train stations also use these same networks to make everything tick. If that is the case, it might be possible for an intelligent high school student to start changing train timetables or rerouting baggage.
And his evidence for this is, what? His own personal opinion? He's been watching Hackers too much if he thinks the schedule board at South Station is networked; it's a -flip- chart (seriously, stick around for 5-10 minutes, and watch it update itself). I'd be amazed if it had anything better than a dedicated thinnet connection to an ancient PC. It's not like some kid with mad h@x0r skills is going to go bippity-boop and put up "TRAIN TO FUCKVILLE 4:20". No. That happens in Hollywood, where people "launch the genetic algorithmic viral defenses!". It does not happen in the real world.
There are a lot of cheap shots and snide remarks aimed at "The Guvmint", "The Man", etc. This guy sounds like he's about 19, not to mention he's just admitted to logging into places he knew he didn't belong AND changing settings (he changed the back, but still...) Sounds like a great federal inditement to me.
Some googling shows he's in his very early 20's(graduated from Harvard in 2004 in "3 years", which means he's maybe 21 now), runs some consulting company. Sounds like he's just out to promote his business like every other story submitter these days...
Re:Of Astroturf and Grandstanding (Score:3, Interesting)
A quick Google turns up an interesting story from his undergraduate days [thecrimson.com] at Harvard, when he ran a web site that required that users use the same password on his web site as on their university accounts. Tsk, tsk.
Evidence? Who needs it? (Score:5, Informative)
While I agree with you on the fact that he's just speculating at that point, nevertheless a possibility exists for this sort of thing to happen.
Simple example: I went wardriving through town once. I found a lot of connections of course, but basically I just set the sniffer up on the laptop and drove around slowly. Later, when I got home, I checked out what I had found, and using timestamps I figured out where the different access points I had found were (I lacked a GPS then).
One of the ones I found was a drugstore. I looked at the raw trace and saw some really odd plaintext there. So I went back and left the laptop in the car while I went in and bought some stuff and took a look around.
What I found:
- Their cash registers were all wirelessly linked to some system in the back. When you scanned an item, the barcode was read, transmitted to the machine in the back, which looked up the price and spat it back to the register. Credit card authorization was handled the same way. All this was plaintext, as I looked at the data and found my credit card number as well as barcodes from the items I purchased in there. Didn't understand the formatting, but it wasn't too difficult to see my name and credit card number stand out like a shining beacon.
- Some kind of prescription transactions were wireless as well. While I didn't get a lot of data of this sort, there were packets containing various drug names, in plaintext, being sent over the air. I'd bet money that insurance information as well as whoever bought the prescription would have eventually gone out in the clear too.
The point being that security was basically non-existant for something you have a reasonable expectation of being private. I mean, when you design a wireless network to handle credit transactions, you'd think some form encryption would be pretty frickin' obvious, right? Let alone tossing somebody's prescription info out onto the airwaves.
So while he didn't state you could change the lights and has no idea if you can actually fuck with the trains, the point I think he was trying to make is that clearly security is not at the forefront of the minds of a lot of people for this sort of thing. Admittedly, my drugstore example happened a couple years back, and may have been fixed by now, but this sort of thing happens because people don't think about it being an issue. It's that part that needs to be fixed. Whether any given example can actually be compromised in a serious way is not the point.
mmmkay... (Score:3, Insightful)
Either way, I'd like to see a followup to this at some point stating what happens with the guy next:
"Does he really get arrested, or is he hired on by wireless network providers? Stay tuned to find out!"
Hmm (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, it is nice that this guy actually bothered to write this up, but he seems to simply be using a lot of common mistakes and guesswork. On top of that, his knoweledge of some basic concepts in hardware administration and business processes is somewhat lacking.
First, MAC address are not unique. There is no universal table of MAC's that hardware manufacturers report to. I have installed ethernet cards from the SAME manufacturer that have had the SAME MAC address while setting up machines for a client.
Second, many of these errors are not necessarily the programmers fault. They are more than likely the responsibility of management being cheap and forcing programmers to do the jobs of multiple people. IT is seperate from software development. The fact that the network and server are insecure is the IT department/person's fault. In small companies this may be the same person, but in most large corporations that is not the case. Directory listing and permissions are generally the responsibility of the server administrator.
Now, the username issues are definitely scary. Leaving test accounts open with simple passwords is just plain stupid. The company I develop software for has over fifty million dollars worth of data on their servers. We also store credit card info for clients, etc. If we used common passwords like that, we would be fired. The admin would go through the database, see the passwords, and report them to our supervisor. Say goodbye! Not to mention, test accounts on production servers are bad practice anyway. If you are making any money, you are extremely stupid not to have a seperate development environment.
In my opionion, these problems seem to be more management and implementation problems, and not so much development problems as the author seems to suggest. They are still real problems though. That customer listing one for the phone company really scares me. ::shiver:: I hope SBC in Texas doesn't have problems like that.
Master Key to North Station in Boston (Score:3, Funny)
Back in the 60's, when the world was a little bit more innocent, I was able to fit a master key to all of the locks in North Station, which was also Boston Garden (the arena for the Boston Celtics and the Boston Bruins).
I never used the key; in fact I threw it away once I made it. It was only a proof in concept.
The only thins I make are my wearable art (http://www.allyn.com/ [allyn.com] and http://www.clearplastic.com/ [clearplastic.com])
Locksmithing is no longer fun with all of the security paranoia. I buy my own locks to play with. The only fun thing I do in North Station anymore is to prance around in a leather juck strap and a clear plastic raincoat.
MAC addresses are not immutable! (Score:4, Informative)
The only way to really track people is by using a transport protocol with authentication. Somehow I don't think the world is ever going to agree on one.
-- Jack
Slashdot bought out by Fox ? (Score:3, Informative)
Just some guy doing trivial guesswork to get free wireless access...that happens to be at Boston's South Station
Was writing the article his post-priori justification for the service theft ?
Re:who did you tell? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:who did you tell? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:who did you tell? (Score:2)
Re:who did you tell? (Score:5, Insightful)
Imagine you're an admin and somebody reports that you left the entire network wide open, that at least thirty different businesses' private customer data is in a compromisable position, all due to your incompetence. What are you going to do? Admit it? Hardly
The fault lies with the admin of the network, and if you ignore smart users that try to help, you deserve what happens when a real criminal comes along, downloads and sells all your customers' credit card info and then trashes your network.
Fact is, laws against what this man did are useless
Re:moderators: parent post is _not_ informative (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:who did you tell? (Score:5, Funny)
Ah, screw Charlie (Score:4, Funny)
Besides, the election's over anyway. I don't think Riley won.
Re:who did you tell? (Score:4, Interesting)
For those who don't get the joke, look here [mit.edu].
Let me tell you the story
Of a man named Charlie
On a tragic and fateful day
He put ten cents in his pocket,
Kissed his wife and family
Went to ride on the MTA
Charlie handed in his dime
At the Kendall Square Station
And he changed for Jamaica Plain
When he got there the conductor told him,
"One more nickel."
Charlie could not get off that train.
Did he ever return,
No he never returned
And his fate is still unlearn'd
He may ride forever
'neath the streets of Boston
He's the man who never returned.
Now all night long
Charlie rides through the tunnels
Saying, "What will become of me?
Crying "How can I afford to see
My sister in Chelsea
Or my cousin in Roxbury?"
Charlie's wife goes down
To the Scollay Square station
Every day at quarter past two
And through the open window
She hands Charlie a sandwich
As the train comes rumblin' through.
As his train rolled on
underneath Greater Boston
Charlie looked around and sighed:
"Well, I'm sore and disgusted
And I'm absolutely busted;
I guess this is my last long ride."
{this entire verse was replaced by a banjo solo}
Now you citizens of Boston,
Don't you think it's a scandal
That the people have to pay and pay
Vote for Walter A. O'Brien
Fight the fare increase!
And fight the fare increase
Vote for George O'Brien!
Get poor Charlie off the MTA.
Chorus.
The song is so catchy, it's a shame the guy didn't get elected. Or maybe not, or we'd have elections with theme songs. Wait, we do. [jibjab.com] Crap.
Re:Security Risk (Score:2)
Re:Security Risk (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Security Risk (Score:2)
Pathetic.
Re:Security Risk (Score:2)
Re:Thanks for the Warning!! (Score:2)
Re:Thanks for the Warning!! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Thanks for the Warning!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:all these wireless articles.... (Score:2, Funny)