Cisco sell a Wireless LAN controller, which can send disconnect packets to "rogue" APs that get set up, rendering them useless. This is particularly important at events where the airspace is severely cramped, such as big arena events, racing, horse racing etc. where the myriad of APs to provide coverage of free wifi to pundits would have to compete with these other APs. In a severely crammed airspace, this would help to encourage the other AP providers to turn their boxes off.<p>And getting a mobile telephone call in such events is even trickier, given that 50,000 people are in one space and the masts to serve them are oversubscribed. If they all suddenly want to place bets or browse the web, that's incredibly difficult to provide on the mast, so providers will set up additional masts for big events (like the big horse-racing events here in the UK). That's why they provide free wifi too, and having other APs set up and attempting to provide wifi over the airspace doesn't really help.<p>I wonder if Marriott hotels have the same approach in order to provide better wifi coverage? I have been in numerous hotels where the wifi coverage was great if you're sat in the bar but abysmal if you're down the other end of the building (where the hotels here in the UK are large old buildings with thick walls, very tricky for wifi).<p>Irritating if you're trying to use your phone to provide wifi to your laptop in order SSH to your own box at home or to get content via your mobile (which might be faster than their Internet access in some cases). I suppose you could just use a Bluetooth PAN instead (and it uses less power!)
Interestingly enough, my local Marriott has this quote posted on the wall:<p>"Wifi should be like air: Free and Everywhere"<p>And they have a totally open wifi network. I live in Karachi, Pakistan.
In Asia there are tons of places with free Wi-Fi, even where there the tap water is not potable. At a bus stop in the middle of nowhere in South Korea. At a roadside cafe in Malaysia. At a cheaper-than-cheap hotel in Indonesia. Even some airports!<p>There are no "portals," no "user agreements," just beautiful open Wi-Fi scattered all over the place. It's hard to imagine spending even $5 at any place that wouldn't offer you internet access, much less the $150+ that Marriott charges its "guests."<p>Sooner or later all this unnecessary friction (sorry, "added value") is bound to catch up.
Heh, with the government using stuff like IMSI catchers, I would not be surprised at all if using a faked AP is a common tool in the box of the 3-letter agencies.<p>I'm fine with Marriott using deauth jamming against rogue APs with <i>their SSID</i> (or a similar impersonating one, e.g. "Mariott Wifi" instead of "Marriott Wifi"), or operating on their specific wifi channel (thus downgrading the experience of the customers), but they absolutely have to leave APs alone which have a different channel/ssid.
I wish the FCC could subpoena financial records and to see the price consumers pay for Wi-Fi and the total revenue Wi-Fi sales made for Marriott. I would be willing to bet those numbers would make it harder for Marriott to argue this is anything other than an attempt to gouge captive consumers.
Obviously this is true, and hotels providing wifi services want to charge for them rather than allowing users to use their own (much cheaper) systems. No question.<p>That aside, what is the solution to rogue access points in a public space? We all know that it's pretty easy to set up camp in a public space, broadcasting a friendly-looking but dangerous wifi network. Let's says you've got someone sitting in the Marriott lobby, creating the "Marriott Free Wifi" network. A bunch of people will connect to it, and some information will leak.<p>Is there any reasonable way to deal with this issue? Obviously we have to assume that public wifi is compromised in any case and require transport-layer security, but I can certainly see there's still a gaping security hole there.
A guy know wants to block cell phone signals at his business so that customers are forced to use his phones, at a premium.<p>I'm sure there's a law against this though.