>>>My reading of this is that these features are illegal, period. Rogue AP
>>>detection is one thing, and disabling them via network or
>>>"administrative" (ie. eject the guest) means would be fine, but
>>>interfering with the wireless is not acceptable per the FCC regulations.
>>>
>>>Seems like c
On 10/3/14 3:44 PM, "Lyle Giese" wrote:
>
>On 10/03/14 17:34, Michael Van Norman wrote:
>>>>> My reading of this is that these features are illegal, period. Rogue
>>>>>AP
>>>>> detection is one thing, and disabling them via network o
IANAL, but I believe they are. State laws may also apply (e.g. California
Code - Section 502). In California, it is illegal to "knowingly and
without permission disrupts or causes the disruption of computer services
or denies or causes the denial of computer services to an authorized user
of a co
On 10/3/14 7:25 PM, "Hugo Slabbert" wrote:
>On Fri 2014-Oct-03 17:21:08 -0700, Michael Van Norman
>wrote:
>
>>IANAL, but I believe they are. State laws may also apply (e.g.
>>California
>>Code - Section 502). In California, it is illegal to "know
One of the reasons I pointed to the California law is that it covers above
L1 even if FCC authority does not. The state law also provides for
criminal penalties. I do not know if other states have similar laws.
/Mike
On 10/3/14 7:42 PM, "Hugo Slabbert" wrote:
>On Fri 2014-Oct-03 16:49:49 -070
5 matches
Mail list logo
