Catching criminals ...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Catching criminals who use open Wi-Fi

5 Posts
3 Users
0 Likes
421 Views
(@audio)
Posts: 149
Estimable Member
Topic starter
 

I've heard law enforcement can use printer dots on a printed page to find the serial number of the printer, and stores can record the serial number of the printer when it was purchased. So law enforcement can sometimes easily link a suspect to a crime with a printed page.

It seems like it would be useful if stores also recorded the MAC address for laptops and NICs, so if a crime was traced back to an open Wi-Fi network, the MAC address could be retrieved from the router's logs and linked to a suspect. Of course the MAC address could be spoofed, but not everyone is that tech savvy or careful.

How does someone who uses a home user's open Wi-Fi for crimes usually get caught? An investigator would have a MAC address, so does law enforcement go to various stores/restaurants in the area that offer Wi-Fi and see if they have seen that MAC address before? Do they put a device on the Wi-Fi network used for the crime, and have it send an alert if the suspect's MAC address shows up again?

 
Posted : 08/10/2012 2:54 pm
jaclaz
(@jaclaz)
Posts: 5133
Illustrious Member
 

I've heard law enforcement can use printer dots on a printed page to find the serial number of the printer, and stores can record the serial number of the printer when it was purchased. So law enforcement can sometimes easily link a suspect to a crime with a printed page.

Well, only colour laser printer (and not all of them).

It seems like it would be useful if stores also recorded the MAC address for laptops and NICs, so if a crime was traced back to an open Wi-Fi network, the MAC address could be retrieved from the router's logs and linked to a suspect.

Sure. let's make a Law about it, possibly

  1. forbidding Open Wi-FI
  2. needing to ask an authorization to the Police for making a Wi-Fi spot
  3. requiring stores to identify (and keep records for two years) of the ID of anyone requesting an access
  4. requiring stores to additionally record MAC and also all the pages visited/accessed (for the same two years)
  5. [/listo]

    JFYI, this Law actually existed in Italy, supposedly as an anti-terrorism measure, from 2005 to 2010 and managed to have

    1. NO actual terrorist be caught through this method
    2. setting back the clock 5 (five) years on diffusion of Open Wi-Fi spots
    3. [/listo]
      Some reference (in Italian)
      http//nexa.polito.it/pisanu_faq

      jaclaz

 
Posted : 08/10/2012 4:26 pm
(@miket065)
Posts: 187
Estimable Member
 

I had a bad guy consistently using the same open wifi. I replaced the router with my own (with consent of the owner) configured with the SSID. I enabled logging and put a sniffer on it. I got what I needed.

I think that legislation will just make free wi-fi go away.

 
Posted : 08/10/2012 6:14 pm
(@audio)
Posts: 149
Estimable Member
Topic starter
 

Well, only colour laser printer (and not all of them).

Just because there aren't yellow dots, doesn't mean there isn't another method being used. Purdue Sensor and Printer Forensics. No one told the public about the yellow dots, so they aren't likely to tell us about another method they may be using… Which leads to another question about this. If they're catching people using yellow dots that have been around since at least 1995, how do they keep that a secret in the US? Shouldn't that evidence come out in trial?

Sure. let's make a Law about it, possibly

  1. forbidding Open Wi-FI
  2. needing to ask an authorization to the Police for making a Wi-Fi spot
  3. requiring stores to identify (and keep records for two years) of the ID of anyone requesting an access
  4. requiring stores to additionally record MAC and also all the pages visited/accessed (for the same two years)
  5. [/listo]

    JFYI, this Law actually existed in Italy, supposedly as an anti-terrorism measure, from 2005 to 2010 and managed to have

    1. NO actual terrorist be caught through this method
    2. setting back the clock 5 (five) years on diffusion of Open Wi-Fi spots
    3. [/listo]
      Some reference (in Italian)
      http//nexa.polito.it/pisanu_faq

      jaclaz

That Italian law seemed to go a little overboard. I'm not advocating going that far. ) The stuff I mentioned isn't any more invasive than what LE is already doing to catch criminals… But if law enforcement isn't using any of those techniques, how are they catching criminals who use open Wi-Fi?

 
Posted : 08/10/2012 7:51 pm
jaclaz
(@jaclaz)
Posts: 5133
Illustrious Member
 

If they're catching people using yellow dots that have been around since at least 1995, how do they keep that a secret in the US? Shouldn't that evidence come out in trial?

Maybe because they "yellow dots" are relevant only during investigations but are not "good enough" to be brought forward in a Court, or, more likely because (and hopefully) Prosecution has heaps of much "better" evidence and thus they never "landed to Court".
About the work at Purdue, it seems to me like it is nothing more than an updated method of "typewriter" or "calligraphy" identification. (by comparison, i.e. you have a printed sheet of paper and the machine that supposedly printed it and you can verify if the piece of paper was actually printed by it).
The "yellow dots" are IMHO a completely different beast, they say "Hi, this piece of paper was printed on printer make X model Y serial Z on dd/mm/yyyy at hhmmss", so ideally there could be also a GPS device inside each printer and a track record of buying and selling printers (like cars and houses).

The stuff I mentioned isn't any more invasive than what LE is already doing to catch criminals… But if law enforcement isn't using any of those techniques, how are they catching criminals who use open Wi-Fi?

The issue is - as always - that this kind of provisions tend to put on the responsability of the store owner that more often than not - even if willing to comply - has not the technical knowledge or means to perform the chores that the Law impose(d).

On the other hand, if (say) a Government Agency would provide

  1. a list of "suitable" hardware
  2. a list of "approved" or "certified" vendors for software
  3. [/listo]
    Everyone would be (not so wrongly) start crying about breach of privacy, political control, lobbyism and what not.

    jaclaz

 
Posted : 08/10/2012 9:28 pm
Share: