logoalt Hacker News

thefounder • today at 8:43 AM • 2 replies • view on HN

how is this different than Tor? You seem a bit on the surveillance side. The computer/network is compromised if someone gains unauthorized access to it not if you share it.


Replies

forgotaccount3 • today at 1:58 PM

> The computer/network is compromised if someone gains unauthorized access to it not if you share it.

Yes. And someone did get unauthorized access to it. You don't have the permission to delegate authorization to a third party.

Did the third party connect to the guest wifi or did they connect to your computer and you have allowed them access to the guest wifi?

Did they agree to the ToS that the wifi network requires for people to use it?

Are you certain that the wifi network isn't intentionally limiting the area where it is broadcast, allowing only people within that geographic area the ability to connect to it?

If there is a purely 100% open wifi network who is only limited geographically due to technological constraints but would allow anyone in the world to connect to it if the technology allowed, then using your device to solve the technological constraint of limited wifi range would not fall under compromising the network IMO. Assuming again that the operator of the network publicized it as such and you aren't just making assumptions about their intentions.

➕ show 1 reply
account42 • today at 10:56 AM

TOR doesn't use unsuspecting participants as exit nodes, that's something you have to specificially enable.