Marriott wifi blocking

Fri Oct 3 22:54:22 UTC 2014

On 10/3/14 3:44 PM, "Lyle Giese" <lyle at lcrcomputer.net> 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 or
>>>>> "administrative" (ie. eject the guest) means would be fine, but
>>>>> interfering with the wireless is not acceptable per the FCC
>>>>>regulations.
>>>>>
>>>>> Seems like common sense to me. If the FCC considers this
>>>>>'interference',
>>>>> which it apparently does, then devices MUST NOT intentionally
>>>>>interfere.
>>>> I would expect interfering for defensive purposes **only** would be
>>>> acceptable.
>>> What constitutes "defensive purposes"?
>> Since this is unlicensed spectrum, I don't think there is anything one
>>has
>> a right to defend :)
>>
>> /Mike
>>
>>
>If you charge for access and one person pays and sets up a rogue AP
>offering free WiFi to anyone in range.  I can see a defensive angle there.
>
>Lyle Giese
>LCR Computer Services, Inc.

In that case turn off the offenders access.  No FCC violation doing that.
In any case, that was not what was happening here.

/Mike