Members of the BuzzBlog Brigade were asked to weigh in on the notion of private property owners being required by regulation or law to secure their wireless networks. Here’s what Brandon Sussman had to say:
I tend towards libertarian. Usually.
The way you put the question begs for the libertarian answer. But I think the question should be very differently framed:
“Should the owners and managers of a network be allowed to require that folks hooking in not open security holes that may affect the user community (other unit owners, etc)?”
I realize that my formulation is as leading as I think yours is. But… The network is not my private property.
Counter-example: I am required by the state to meet safety standards for my automobile. After all, it is on the road with you, too. And you may not have any opportunity to avoid me. I see this as a very similar situation.
I do not think this is a potential “big brother” issue. Here they are making a requirement of membership. Like “If you want to swim in our pool you have to use our showers. I think any proprietor has the right and obligation to require that members not compromise community resources.
Yes, from a libertarian point of view, it would be nice to allow anybody to hook up anything, no matter how unsecure. This is the “Everybody has the right to travel to the underworld in an Easter basket that they, themselves, wove” argument and I agree with it. The problem is unwilling passengers.
Much of the detrimental effect of an unsecure node on a network is felt by folks other than the user of the unsecure node. Even if I am secure, sharing a network with an unsecure node can slow me down, cause outages that affect me, maybe get me banned (do you know how many folks will ban an entire B-block rather than do the work of tracing to the 1 IP or C-block that deserves it?) and generally cause me grief, without there being anything I can do to mitigate.
In answer to your question: No they cannot (or should not) be allowed to compel me to practice any particular thing. But yes, they can and should be allowed to require me to meet safe standards if not doing so can affect other members of the community.
Now we can argue over what constitutes safe wireless …
— Brandon Sussman
