>>25414
In much the same way as TV detector vans can detect TVs.
They'll still be working from their big list of addresses without licenses, but with one reason for not needing a license now being removed. 'sallbolloxinnit.

>>25415
Their actual TV detector vans can indeed detect CRTs, but hardly anyone uses them these days. Their "enforcement vehicles" are basically minibuses with flashing lights in the back, which get parked outside supermarkets with the lights on display. (As far as I'm concerned, this is a psychological no better than the fake bomb detectors.) Of course, while they could fit out their fleet with kit to detect usage on wifi, it would be illegal for them to actually use it in anger, since even if there were some nastiness in the Abolition of Privacy Bill that would allow it, it's not yet on the statute books and so the Communications Act and Computer Misuse Act would apply.

Looking at IP addresses is an invasion of privacy but packet sniffing isn't? What the fuck

Without cracking WPA, all they're going to get is packet size and timing. Regardless of the legality, WPA cracking is massively CPU intensive and so completely impractical at scale.

It's possible that they could tinker with iPlayer's network stack to make the size or timing of packets very distinctive, but that would be very technically challenging. iPlayer is a massively complex platform, because of the vast amounts of data being sent to a very diverse range of client platforms.

If anyone is particularly interested, it might be worth putting in an FOI request:

Senior Policy Advisor
BBC TV Licensing Management Team
Room 4436
BBC White City
201 Wood Lane
London
W12 7TS

>>25414
>A van would also not necessarily have to be directly outside a property to pick up its network if it uses special antennas that can pick up signals from long distances.
I can confirm this. Many years ago I used a cheap "high gain antenna" and a repeater to connect to an unsecured wifi network across the street and several doors down.

I guess as usual, the solution to obscene restrictions is piracy. Use bittorrent to put more traffic in there to drown out the signal.

>>25418
Better still, use WhatDoTheyKnow so everyone can see it.

They only need to confirm that you have wifi to get inside. If you have wifi you have internet and you can access the iPlayer which you'll need a license for.

>>25421
I certainly hope magistrates won't be granting search warrants on the basis of "'E's got wifi, innit".

>>25422
It's only a matter of time.

>>25421

You only need a license if you use the Wifi to watch iPlayer, in the same way you only need a license if you use your television to watch television as it is broadcast; they can't use Wifi as justification to enter your home. Also, detector vans are a load of fucking horseshit, there is no way a public entity as strapped for cash as the BBC has a fleet of high tech detector vans. When asked to provide details of what technology the were using to spy on people they shrugged and released a statement tantamount to "Dunno", because it's horseshit.

Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc, are all still fine and if you have Sky then use the Ethernet port instead of the Wifi, if you want to dodge the charge, assuming they have a bloke lurking round your ends in a transit innit. The only thing connected to my router via Wifi is my printer and my phone, you'd be mental to have any thing else over Wifi. They still have no rights to access, just politely tell them to come back tomorrow as you don't need a license, because the house is a mess. If you're being dodgy, hide everything.

End of thread.

There is no WiFi detection or packet sniffing plan.

>>25424

>You only need a license if you use the Wifi to watch iPlayer, in the same way you only need a license if you use your television to watch television as it is broadcast

Yes, but owning a television is considered proof that you're watching TV as it's broadcast by TV licensing

>>25426

No it isn't, they check if you have Sky or Virgin or a Freeview box/roof aerial cable in the back of the TV then they ask you if you use it to watch live TV, to which you reply "No, just as a PC monitor to play games on the PC, also the consoles and Netflix and Amazon Prime. I don't use iPlayer." and then they go away. He told me I would stop getting letters for 12 months and that I would "Re-assessed" then.


Don't be a prat.
I had them in recently.

>>25414

Well I, for one, don't even own a television.

>>25427

Enjoy your court summons, lad. I bet you'll rue making that post as you sit in the big house with Barry the Rapist wanting to know what you're in for, and vigorously intruding on the sanctity of your bum hole when you tell him it's because you own a TV.

>>25429

>vigorously intruding on the sanctity of your bum hole

Oh, you tease. Sounds delightful!

Unfortunately though, I have it in writing. They wrote to say my address didn't need a license, so no bum sex for me... oh well, I'll pop down the Golf course later. I'm bound to get a bumming there.

>>25429
>Barry the Rapist
I thought it was "Barry the Bumder", not forgetting his backing group the Bumder Chums.

>>25424
>there is no way a public entity as strapped for cash as the BBC has a fleet of high tech detector vans
A couple of years ago, they put out an ITT for maintaining 25 minibuses. It's thought that they are entirely for TVL, and constitute the entire fleet. I daresay they'll still just be kitted out with some flashing lights which are visible when the doors are open, though a small display and a Raspberry Pi running a Matrix screensaver wouldn't be particulary expensive. I know from personal experience that a bunch of old, dead kit on the back seat of my car was enough to fool people at a local festival that I was with the media. The BBC almost certainly has lots of old stuff that doesn't work but would look impressive to an untrained eye.

>When asked to provide details of what technology the were using to spy on people they shrugged and released a statement tantamount to "Dunno", because it's horseshit.
Classic snake oil technique. I wouldn't be surprised if the "controlled demonstration" in the article was the same sort of trick as Project Alpha, fixing and exploiting the experimental controls and the like.

>>25432

Project Alpha? Is this VW stuff you are on about, or Beeb related?

>>25424
>you'd be mental to have any thing else over Wifi

I'm detecting a smug nerdy The Register-reading type here, but nevertheless: why's that? As the lad above says, WPA-cracking is massively CPU intensive.

>>25434
In theory, they don't need to crack WPA. If they can manipulate the traffic that they deliver, then they may be able to detect that by sniffing the still-encrypted packets. If they can detect it, that would have to be how they do it, since actually attacking the network (e.g. forcing a 4-way handshake) is entirely illegal, and will remain so until the Privacy and Presumption of Innocence (Abolition) Bill Investigatory Powers Bill gets through with powers to authorise it.

>>25435
Why can't they just do what the organisations combating filesharing do - cross-reference the IP addresses streaming iPlayer with the personal details registered to the ISPs?

>>25436
The majority of people will be licensed so the mere use of iPlayer does not give rise to reasonable suspicion that would warrant the use of investigatory powers. It's completely different to your example where someone is known to be acting unlawfully.

>>25438

Yup. It'd be a massive fishing expedition that wouldn't fly under the Data Protection Act. It's conceivable that Spymaster May could grant them powers under RIPA, but I don't see a Tory government going out of their way to help the BBC.

>>25434

As long as you've got WPS turned off and use a relatively strong password, WPA is bulletproof.

Ethernet is faster and more stable, but 802.11ac is more than enough for 99% of users.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5MnyRZLd8A

>>25440
So when people talk about wardriving, it refers solely to WPS?

>>25442
No, they generally mean any of the WiFi protocols but as the lad in >>25440 intimates, there are more holes in WPS and shorter passwords, so potentially easier to crack.

>>25442

All the major ISPs provide routers with secure default settings, so wardriving is on the way out. There are still a few crap old routers in the wild, so there are opportunities if you're determined. There are also a few open routers in public places, crap wireless range extenders, insecure wireless printers etc.

WEP is the technology that preceded WPA and is completely broken. WPS is an add-on to WPA that was supposed to make setup easier, but actually created a massive security hole. WPA is exploitable if the SSID is very common using something called a rainbow table. That's why most SSIDs now contain a string of random digits, like "sky48201" or "VM849275".

There are still a few shortcomings in the standard routers supplied by ISPs. The most significant I'm aware of is the default password used on Virgin Media routers. They use a key of eight letters, all lower case. I presume this was chosen as a trade-off between security and ease of use. If you have a really powerful GPU setup (eight Titan X cards) then you can bruteforce those keys in about 24 hours.

>>25449
>If you have a really powerful GPU setup (eight Titan X cards) then you can bruteforce those keys in about 24 hours.
That's assuming that your home network is interesting enough to be worth breaking into.

>>25450
I like to know what porn people watch, and what things they like to google.

>>25451
This is why I use wifi jumper cables to conduct the four-way handshake.

>>25452

That's a pretty interesting fetish.

How feasible would it be for the BBC to allow students to be exempt from needing a TV licence? It seems like the sort of thing the NUS could put forward a strong case for if they weren't too busy campaigning about identity politics and infighting over Zionism and anti-semitism. I can't imagine many students will bother to pay to watch iPlayer legally anyway and given the BBC's public service mandate an argument could be put forward for it on the basis of programmes that educate or inform on current affairs.

>>25458
Oh and before that one pedant chimes in, replace "the BBC" with "whichever governing body decides on BBC licencing legislature."

>>25458

To be honest we were all going to pay our tv licence at uni because we were do gooders, then we realised that every student they thought was a student property they bombarded with threatening letters and all sorts of dubious claims such as taking us to court that obviously wouldn't hold up.

We were pretty shocked at how disgraceful and scummy it was and didn't pay out of principle.

Maybe they should just stop being cunts. I love the BBC but a part of me can't reconcile how good the BBC is with how they behave. It's disgraceful.

>>25458
Hopefully that never happens.

>>25460
You do go to court if you're found to be using without paying.

>>25460
Yeah I got that at one house I lived at. We didn't even have a functional TV, there was an old CRT one there when we moved in but I think it got chucked into the garden shed, certainly never used. They didn't even know who we were, we just got bunches of threatening letters each addressed to "The occupier of room x" threatening visits and court action that (surprise surprise) never materialised. We all knew they had nothing to go on but I'd be fuming if they sent letters worded that way to my Nan, or older people in general who are less likely to see through the paper-thin threats.

>>25461
Yeah 2 rite m8, fuck dem stoodents wiv their lernin' and no ernin'.

>>25462
Well until the new rules come into play they could only prosecute if they could prove you were watching live TV on a mains-connected device.

>>25462
Very few people actually end up with convictions. Apparently in most cases the inspector simply ends up selling a licence. They get a commission for each one sold and a bonus if the victim goes for direct debit.

Is there an option on their website that says "I don't watch TV"? I tried to sort it out because the letters are annoying and it just gave me an option to say that the property was going to be unoccupied for a month or something. I'll have to try again if the letters come back.

>>25465
It used to be that if you ticked the box saying you don't need a licence on the form or online, they sent back a letter saying more or less "we don't believe you".

>>25466
I suppose I could phone them up and invite an agent to look around but I doubt that'd fly.

I reckon people would be happier about paying the TV license if they weren't so arse backward and stubborn about how you pay it.

For a while I avoided it simply because didn't have the cash to fork out in one go, and the instalments they offer you to pay it monthly are just plain nonsensical- It was something like you have to pay it up in six months for some reason, and then your subsequent years overlap by six months- Why can't it just be a straightforward monthly payment like any other bill?

>>25458
>the NUS could put forward a strong case for if they weren't too busy campaigning about
Oh do fuck the fuck off lad.

>>25469
Well, what a brilliant contribution you made then. You'd better have a lie down after all that mental exertion, wouldn't want to miss out on your next gem.

>>25463
Yes, fuck them students, they deserve no exception, laughable to think they do.

>>25471
It's not a question of what they 'deserve', it's a question of being less able to afford a licence when you're on £3k a year student loan vs. a full-time working adult.

>>25473
To be fair, that's the nature of the fixed fee. Personally I'd prefer to see something similar to the Australian model where public service broadcasting is funded directly from taxation. Even though the funding has increased since it was first used in the 1980s, they still talk about "where your eight cents a day goes".

>>25474

The problem with funding from general taxation is that the funds are never truly ring-fenced. It's easy for a government to justify cutting the public service broadcasting budget, which puts the independence of those broadcasters at risk.

The license fee settlement isn't perfect, but it means that the BBC only has to negotiate with the government once every few years. Replace that system with funding from general taxation and there's the constant threat of funding cuts looming over the BBC. Every time a cabinet minister complains about how they were treated on Newsnight, there's the implicit threat of "step into line or we'll cut your funding".

I think the Germans have the right idea - their license fee is fixed, but it's also means-tested.

>>25475
It's not enough to nearly justify it, what a waste of money that would be.

The BBC is not an indispensable resource. Make peace with that.

>>25475
>their license fee is fixed, but it's also means-tested.

How does this work? Seems like a bit of a contradiction to me, unless you mean that it's fixed only for those that can afford it. Which I would support - students and benefit claimants should get a reduced or free licence in my view.

>>25477
I don't. If they're on benefits they have bigger issues.

>>25478
Right? We wouldn't have a million unemployed if Jeremy Kyle was taken off the air.

>>25479
Not what I was thinking but whatever.

>>25478
Could you explain what relevance the issues faced by people on incapacity, in-work or jsa benefits has?

>>25477

The standard fee is €17.50 per month. Registered disabled people pay a reduced fee of €5.83, most people on benefits pay nothing.

>>25478
Speaking as someone who still curls up into a ball and bursts into tears whenever I catch even a brief glimpse of my "favourite" programmes from back when I was out of work I can assure you that you don't need to think of ways to try and stop unemployed people from watching television. 99.9% of them really would rather be doing absolutely anything else.