I recall reading a newspaper article some time ago about people who access the Internet for free by pirating other people's unsecured wireless networks. The writer of the article advised wireless subscribers to password-protect their wireless subscriptions to keep this kind of thing from happening.
The writer went on to warn readers of some of the possible implications of stolen signals, one of which was the fact that signal thieves could use them for cyber crimes that could then be traced back to the subscriber's network. That person would then have to prove that it wasn't them who committed the crime, ex., child pornography, terrorism, spamming, phishing, etc.
However, that problem could easily be eliminated by making most Internet access anonymous. Anyone who pays for Internet access, whether dial-up, cable, DSL, wireless, satellite, or whatever, should have the option to select anonymous access. In fact, this should be the default, unless otherwise requested. That way, no Internet access via that subscription could be traced back to any computer or network.
But what about all those terrorists, child pornographers, and spammers? Wouldn't anonymity give those cyber criminals cover and make them much harder to catch? Of course it would. But it's better to let guilty people go free than to punish or even harass the innocent. This basic value is built into our Constitution. That's why one must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Comments