Travel Technology - FT blocked on airline crew wi-fi!

A little while ago, I was waiting for a flight when a travel companion noticed an unexpected wi-fi access point listed in her laptop network menu. From the name, it was clearly the wireless provided by an airline for its crew members... but surprisingly, it was not encrypted. Our laptops could see and connect to the network easily, and the signal was strong at this particular gate.

We were about to board, so I just loaded Google and Yahoo to test the connection. Success! Tried FlyerTalk... and got a "blocked site" page! I suppose this airline doesn't want their crewmembers visiting FT, at least not while at work. I don't know what else was blocked, because I had to pack up and board. And sadly, the signal wasn't strong enough to see it from the plane.

I have intentionally left out the airport and airline information -- I'd rather not incriminate myself any further for unauthorized access of an wi-fi network, and I don't want to be the idiot that draws company attention to an open access point that others may be secretly utilizing .

I wonder how many of the airlines are blocking FT from general employee access? Many major airlines have company representatives (official and unofficial) on the boards, but I suppose they don't want the rest of their crew joining in!

I have intentionally left out the airport and airline information -- I'd rather not incriminate myself any further for accessing an unauthorized wi-fi network, and I don't want to be the idiot that draws company attention to an open access point that others may be secretly utilizing .


I know of one in a particular airport. I'd be interested if it is the same one. The one I used was at least active for over a year the last time I used it... Which has been awhile.

It might simply wome webfilters that block out discussion forums and the like. I had to have FT and AFF specifically unblocked as I do use them for work as well as fun.

Lots of company networks block a ton of sites, any Bulletin Boards, ebay, shopping sites, porn, etc. I wouldn't assume it's just Flyertalk.

I'd rather not incriminate myself any further for unauthorized access of an wi-fi network


Incriminate?
Is it a crime in that state?

Lots of company networks block a ton of sites, any Bulletin Boards, ebay, shopping sites, porn, etc. I wouldn't assume it's just Flyertalk.

I certainly don't assume that FT is the sole blocked site. If I have time on my next pass through, I'll try a few other interesting URLs. But it struck me as interesting that FT was specifically blocked through their blockedsites.htm filter.

FlyerTalk is industry-related... but perhaps not in a way that airlines always like. ;)

Incriminate?
Is it a crime in that state?

No cases have been successfully prosecuted, but it's one of many states that lump unauthorized wifi access with "hacking" and other computer-based fraud (some lawyers even believe that Federal law covers this "crime"). I never assume that some enterprising prosecutor in any jurisdiction couldn't come up with some list of charges.

...it's one of many states that lump unauthorized wifi access with "hacking" and other computer-based fraud (some lawyers even believe that Federal law covers this "crime"). I never assume that some enterprising prosecutor in any jurisdiction couldn't come up with some list of charges.It's interesting. Any idiot can buy a wireless router and set it up--just about plug and play these days--as unsecured.

But the same idiot who just happens to connect to another unsecured WAP without knowing which it is (I think it's safe to assume that if you're stupid enough to not secure your own access point that you're stupid enough to not notice what access point you're connecting to) could be prosecuted.

People should be required to pass a test in order to purchase a WAP. Why does everything have to be brought down to the biggest-idiot denominator?

I think it's safe to assume that if you're stupid enough to not secure your own access point that you're stupid enough to not notice what access point you're connecting to

While I agree with the rest of your post, I find this part quite insulting. It's obviously never crossed your mind that one may want to keep their access point intentionally open for any number of reasons (e.g. using a PDA like mine which can receive wifi signal but is a pain to configure and loses the encryption settings each time round....or simply wanting to keep the access point open as a way of helping troubled passers-by and attracting a bit of good karma. :D ). Not all unencrypted access points exist just because of stupidity!

Not all unencrypted access points exist just because of stupidity!
Agreed. Bruce Schneier, a respected security analyst and creator of the Blowfish encryption algorithm makes a strong argument for open access points. (http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/01/my_open_wireles.html)