Story

Marriott fined $600,000 by FCC for interfering with customer WiFi hotspots

Preview

I see a couple things here (Score: 1)

by codemachine@pipedot.org on 2014-10-09 18:06 (#2T6R)

On one hand, it might protect some of their customers who would otherwise foolishly connect to unsecured rouge access points run by some scammers. I could see a little bit of validity to the security argument.

On the other hand, if there is a law that makes it illegal to purposefully jam a WiFi signal, shouldn't a denial of service attack that takes out the WiFi be similarly illegal?

Re: I see a couple things here (Score: 2, Funny)

by fnj@pipedot.org on 2014-10-09 20:43 (#2T6T)

Yeah, those "rouge" access points sure are a problem. Is that jeweller's rouge, or morticians rouge? Just ladies' make-up rouge?

Moderation

Time Reason Points Voter
2014-12-05 17:54 Funny +1 genkernel@pipedot.org
2014-10-09 20:49 Funny +1 tanuki64@pipedot.org
2014-10-10 22:12 Overrated -1 zafiro17@pipedot.org

Junk Status

Not marked as junk