Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Connected Collar Lets Your Cat Do the War-Driving

timothy posted about 1 month ago | from the wifi-password-|"pl[\'as[cnp dept.

Security 110

MojoKid (1002251) writes "Security researcher Gene Bransfield, with the help of his wife's grandmother's cat, decided to see how many neighborhood WiFi access points he could map and potentially compromise. With a collar loaded with a Spark chip, a Wi-Fi module, a GPS module, and a battery, Coco the cat helped Gene identify Wi-Fi networks around the neighborhood and then reported back. The goal here is obvious: Discover all of the unsecured, or at least poorly-secured, wireless access points around the neighborhood. During his journey, Coco identified dozens of Wi-Fi networks, with four of them using easily-broken WEP security, and another four that had no security at all. Gene has dubbed his collar the "WarKitteh", and it cost him less than $100 to make. He admits that such a collar isn't a security threat, but more of a goofy hack. Of course, it could be used for shadier purposes." (Here's Wired's article on the connected cat-collar.)

cancel ×

110 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

War-diving? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643711)

I thought cats hating water?

Re: War-diving? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643755)

"Hated" dipshit.

Re: War-diving? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643801)

No, present and future tense, dipshit.

Re: War-diving? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47645127)

It's "fucktard", dipshit.

Re:War-diving? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47644199)

"Hate" dipshit.

Re:War-diving? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47644925)

I thought English evolving always?

Re:War-diving? (1)

davester666 (731373) | about 1 month ago | (#47645201)

they love diving in water, as long as they are in a burlap sack.

Cue the 'cats should be kept indoors' crowd in 5.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643721)

n/t

Re: Cue the 'cats should be kept indoors' crowd in (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47646101)

If cats are kept inside, how are my coyotes supposed to eat?

Sorry, had to be asked (5, Funny)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | about 1 month ago | (#47643731)

I can haz internetz?

Why? (3, Insightful)

sycodon (149926) | about 1 month ago | (#47643917)

The goal here is obvious: Discover all of the unsecured, or at least poorly-secured, wireless access points around the neighborhood.

Here's what has to be asked...why? Any particular reason for wanting to know this?

Isn't that pretty much like going to all the front doors and checking to see if they are locked?

Re:Why? (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | about 1 month ago | (#47644595)

He should get in touch with Mozilla to commercialise the idea.

They have a 'stumbler' application to map the world using wifi. Create a campaign to map neighbourhoods by kitty!

https://location.services.mozi... [mozilla.com]

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47644601)

Chain them all together with load balancing so everyone has faster internet, like santa claus, who also violates legislation by flying in restricted airspace, but that's off-topic

Re:Why? (1)

Sobrique (543255) | about a month and a half ago | (#47645701)

I have wondered, give that drones are getting quite cheap - how much would a true 'peer to peer' network node cost? One that forms a mesh across a city, and finds 'downlinks' in the form of open access Wi-Fi to create a ... well, routed, self healing network. True routing protocol discovery and all.

Re:Why? (1)

Lord Lemur (993283) | about a month and a half ago | (#47647231)

Then only security, responsibility and privacy remain an issue.

Re:Why? (1)

ctrlshift (2616337) | about 1 month ago | (#47644973)

Seems to me if he could get his cat to do it with a specially-designed techno-collar, he probably would do that too. And we'd all be impressed.

Re:Why? (4, Insightful)

Phics (934282) | about 1 month ago | (#47645203)

It's kind of like giving the Coke machine down the hall an IP address with sensors.... 'why' becomes such an unimaginative and mundane question in such scenarios, and if pressed, can simply be answered with, "Because I can."

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47645675)

I think it is rather like wandering around and doors shouting out loud when they see you, "I am locked with a WPA key!" or "I am locked with a WEP key!" or "I am wide open", without entering. Being a cat I am obliviously curious and make a list :D

Re: Sorry, had to be asked (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47644287)

they didnt mention denial of service dog. he was much better.

Re:Sorry, had to be asked (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 1 month ago | (#47644409)

Toonses never talked like this.

Re:Sorry, had to be asked (1)

toonces33 (841696) | about a month and a half ago | (#47645957)

Speak for yourself.

Re:Sorry, had to be asked (5, Funny)

penguinoid (724646) | about 1 month ago | (#47645041)

There's no pussyfooting around the security implications. This, more than ever, proves that security is a cat-and-mouse game. The script kitties will be all over this -- they'll milk it for all it's worth.

Re:Sorry, had to be asked (1)

penguinoid (724646) | about 1 month ago | (#47645065)

This exploit is built around a flexible skeleton that can fit through the smallest holes. You can't remain insulated forever, and shedding the old will lead to a powered vacuum. This agile system sinks its claws into its opposition and quickly gets to the meat of the matter. Don't expect the fat cats to do much work -- someone has to get off their tails and get rid of all the vermin. You should be warned that this system is susceptible to worms.

Re:Sorry, had to be asked (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47647039)

One more reason to shoot all cats on sight. It's the only way to be sure now.

Re:Sorry, had to be asked (1)

easyTree (1042254) | about 1 month ago | (#47645129)

I can haz internetz?

I can haz lotz EM radiation thru ma hed.

I can haz lettr R? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47646909)

I no liek war divin. I hate teh watrs.

Open WiFi (4, Insightful)

TechyImmigrant (175943) | about 1 month ago | (#47643753)

If people just left their WiFi open, it wouldn't be called a vulnerability, it would be called ubiquitous connectivity.

Re:Open WiFi (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643839)

Oh, go hug a tree, hippie.

Re:Open WiFi (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643843)

Indeed! In fact, there's a whole movement dedicated to that idea:

https://openwireless.org/

Personally I'd favor not just open wireless, but direct TOR access. Not only would that help obfuscating TOR traffic even more, but also protect the owner of the Internet connection from any irresponsible abuse of his/her kindness.

Instructions here:

https://learn.adafruit.com/setting-up-a-raspberry-pi-as-a-wifi-access-point

https://learn.adafruit.com/onion-pi

Imagine these things everywhere! :-)

Re:Open WiFi (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47644489)

How hilarious.

Open Wireless points are a security threat. Fullstop. Tor is a security threat, and you are not innocent by leaving open wireless points or Tor nodes. All it does is say you have something to hide, abut are choosing to hide in plain sight.

A mesh network of open wireless point that has -NO- direct internet access is a better concept. Sure you're not going to get half a megabit or low latency, but it solves the question of how to hide in plain sight. All leaving open access points does is let pirates and pedophiles drown the access node until whoever is providing the access gets subpoena'd or the ISP cuts it off for other abuse reasons like spam.

If you've ever used the open WiFi at Starbucks or McDonalds you'd notice that the connection capacity is not very high, and you usually can't access SMTP or Youtube.

Re:Open WiFi (1)

easyTree (1042254) | about 1 month ago | (#47645141)

All it does is say you have something to hide

It's a sign of the times that this is considered wrong / bad / anti-NSAmerikkkan.

Unwash ur brain.

Re:Open WiFi (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47645515)

How hilarious.

Open Wireless points are a security threat. Fullstop. Tor is a security threat, and you are not innocent by leaving open wireless points or Tor nodes. All it does is say you have something to hide, abut are choosing to hide in plain sight.

A mesh network of open wireless point that has -NO- direct internet access is a better concept. Sure you're not going to get half a megabit or low latency, but it solves the question of how to hide in plain sight. All leaving open access points does is let pirates and pedophiles drown the access node until whoever is providing the access gets subpoena'd or the ISP cuts it off for other abuse reasons like spam.

If you've ever used the open WiFi at Starbucks or McDonalds you'd notice that the connection capacity is not very high, and you usually can't access SMTP or Youtube.

Voting him down to -1 doesn't change the fact that he's correct. He isn't saying this is how he wants things, or saying that's how it should be.

Re:Open WiFi (2)

godrik (1287354) | about 1 month ago | (#47643859)

Indeed, I leave my WiFi open by choice. This is not a vulnerability, but an choice.

Overages and legal liability (2, Interesting)

tepples (727027) | about 1 month ago | (#47643957)

When someone uses your connection excessively in the opinion of your ISP, watch "an choice" become "an bill". Or when someone uses your connection for copyright infringement or child pornography, watch "an choice" become "an lawsuit" or "an criminal charge".

Re:Overages and legal liability (3, Insightful)

penguinoid (724646) | about 1 month ago | (#47645087)

When someone uses your connection excessively in the opinion of your ISP, watch "an choice" become "an bill". Or when someone uses your connection for copyright infringement or child pornography, watch "an choice" become "an lawsuit" or "an criminal charge".

When someone does the same over your secured connection, either because you shared your password with the wrong friends, someone guessed your password, or you got hacked, good luck explaining to a jury that it's possible for others to use your secured connection.

Re:Overages and legal liability (1)

easyTree (1042254) | about 1 month ago | (#47645151)

When someone uses your connection excessively in the opinion of your ISP, watch "an choice" become "an bill". Or when someone uses your connection for copyright infringement or child pornography, watch "an choice" become "an lawsuit" or "an criminal charge".

When someone does the same over your secured connection, either because you shared your password with the wrong friends, someone guessed your password, or you got hacked, good luck explaining to a jury that it's possible for others to use your secured connection.

Nooooo. He has a one-to-one identity-relation with his IP address; the music industry told me.

Re:Open WiFi (1)

SJHillman (1966756) | about a month and a half ago | (#47648095)

Just because it's by choice doesn't mean it's not a vulnerability. You can choose to never lock your front door, but that doesn't mean it's not a vulnerability... it just means you made the choice not to secure it.

Re:Open WiFi (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643861)

no, its a feature, spurious, semi-high availability fallback networking feature..
 

Re:Open WiFi (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47646381)

Unsecured and proud of it. I am amazed, in all the locations I've lived, typically I see about 10 networks around me. Mine is consistently the only one that is open and free. Just about everybody who's come over has asked me, "aren't you worried?" About what? The FBI gonna take me in for not encrypted my wireless? Truth be told, for whatever reason, I always had to reset the damn thing in the past when I used a password. Now that it's open, it works like a champ. I don't recall resetting it for over 6 months now. Maybe a year. Maybe 2. Pretty damn amazing. Karma?

"Coco the cat helped Gene identify Wi-Fi networks" (0)

kruach aum (1934852) | about 1 month ago | (#47643759)

Sounds like the start of a problem written by someone why doesn't know the alphabet starts with A and B instead of C and G.

Scuba? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643811)

Came for scuba/sewer cat story, leaving disappointed.

Re:Scuba? (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 1 month ago | (#47643823)

Good [googleusercontent.com] .

Easily-broken WEP security (4, Insightful)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 1 month ago | (#47643815)

Just because a lock is weak doesn't give you the right to break it and enter the place. That argument wouldn't stand in court for physical access, stop deluding yourself that you have the "right" to access WEP-secured networks.

Re:Easily-broken WEP security (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643853)

> Just because a lock is weak doesn't give you the right to break it and enter the place

He didn't say it did.

> That argument wouldn't stand in court

What argument? The man simply stated a fact. WEP *is* weak.

> stop deluding yourself

Oh, go take your Ritalin.

Re:Easily-broken WEP security (0)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 1 month ago | (#47643869)

I didn't say he did either, my reply was a comment aimed at some Slashdot readers.

You're two hours late for your Ritalin by the way.

Re:Easily-broken WEP security (1)

Cyfun (667564) | about 1 month ago | (#47645423)

No shit, Sherklock. Wardriving isn't about hacking networks, it's about mapping them passively and gathering real-world statistics about how many networks are properly secured and how many aren't.

Besides, if a cat can hack your WEP, good luck taking him to court.

Re:Easily-broken WEP security (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about a month and a half ago | (#47646271)

Where did I say that wardriving was about hacking networks? As usual, as soon as you make a generic comment, people on Slashdot always assume you're attacking them personally and making stupid pointless replies.

Re:Easily-broken WEP security (1)

Doug Otto (2821601) | about a month and a half ago | (#47646481)

I lol'd.

As usual, as soon as you make a generic comment, people on Slashdot always assume you're attacking them personally and making stupid pointless replies.

Re:Easily-broken WEP security (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47647261)

Anybody who regularly goes to the trouble of "wardriving" without actually using the connections they find has some kind of mental issue. I'm not saying the guy doing it so he can get anonymous access to enable other hacking / fraud / whatever is a good person, but at least he's not doing it to get the laziest, least productive kind of 1337 points from his imaginary fan club.

also of interest to cats: war-standing (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643827)

My cat particularly enjoys standing on the keyboard while I am attempting to write code, resulting in constructs such as:


for (int x=0; x<10; ++iaaqaaaqaaassssaqqaqaaaaddaqqqqaawa

Which doesn't even bloody compile.

Re:also of interest to cats: war-standing (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643841)

'cat' doesn't care what the input is, it just spits it to standard out. :)

Re:also of interest to cats: war-standing (1)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | about 1 month ago | (#47643879)

'cat' doesn't care what the input is, it just spits it to standard out. :)

In my experience, $CAT prefers to spit to errout, especially if I've crossed her...

Re:also of interest to cats: war-standing (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643885)

My cat particularly enjoys standing on the keyboard while I am attempting to write code, resulting in constructs such as:


for (int x=0; x<10; ++iaaqaaaqaaassssaqqaqaaaaddaqqqqaawa

Which doesn't even bloody compile.

It would compile if you had a global variable named iaaqaaaqaaassssaqqaqaaaaddaqqqqaawa.

Re:also of interest to cats: war-standing (1)

neminem (561346) | about a month and a half ago | (#47647815)

No it wouldn't; there's no end-paren.

Remember, keep it in perspective. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643857)

Remember peoples,
its fun to look around, but poor judgement and or bad decisions can really screw it up for the rest.

eventually making postings like this one have to go underground, or be strictly confined to academia.

my 2c

Shades of the 1960's CIA "Acoustic kitty" (5, Interesting)

innocent_white_lamb (151825) | about 1 month ago | (#47643865)

Over $25 million dollars was spent to install a battery, transmitter and microphone into a cat, with an antenna in its tail.

They dropped the cat off to eavesdrop on two men in a park near the Soviet Embassy in Washington DC. The cat was hit and killed by a taxi while walking across the road.

The project was expensive, gruesome, and a failure. It was abandoned in 1967.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A... [wikipedia.org]

http://mentalfloss.com/article... [mentalfloss.com]

Re:Shades of the 1960's CIA "Acoustic kitty" (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643969)

Over $25 million dollars was spent to install a battery, transmitter and microphone into a cat, with an antenna in its tail.

They dropped the cat off to eavesdrop on two men in a park near the Soviet Embassy in Washington DC. The cat was hit and killed by a taxi while walking across the road.

The project was expensive, gruesome, and a failure. It was abandoned in 1967.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A... [wikipedia.org]

http://mentalfloss.com/article... [mentalfloss.com]

That's what they want you to think. The truth is that there is now an entire army of CIA spy cats.

Re:Shades of the 1960's CIA "Acoustic kitty" (3, Informative)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 1 month ago | (#47644535)

No, the truth is that there are a couple of folks who split 25 million dollars and one squashed cat intermixed with some random electronic parts.

Re:Shades of the 1960's CIA "Acoustic kitty" (5, Funny)

Austerity Empowers (669817) | about 1 month ago | (#47644941)

That's what they want you to think. The truth is that there is now an entire army of CIA spy cats.

You must not be a cat owner. The real truth, the truth they don't want anyone to know, is that the CIA, NSA, FBI, KGB, IRS, and especially the DMV, are entirely run by cats. That acoustic cat was actually a senior agent, trusted with testing a next gen prototype. He was not "run over by a car", he was assassinated by an enemy agent. That thing cats do in the middle of the night, where they charge around the house as if an axe murderer were on a spree? That is spy versus spy warfare, your cat saved your life. There's a war going on, a war most of us never see, and it rages under your bed, on your kitchen counters, even on top of your refrigerator.

The NSA isn't so much monitoring your email to see what dirty emails you send each other, they're looking for coded messages from field agents as they "walk across the keyboard". They no longer need acoustic agents, the agents are simply embedded everywhere, and they are always watching. It sounds as if this Snowden person has altered the communications flow, necessitating another field trial of a more "cat in the middle" interception plan. War kitteh is a hero.

 

Re:Shades of the 1960's CIA "Acoustic kitty" (1)

LongearedBat (1665481) | about 1 month ago | (#47645539)

he was assassinated by an enemy agent.

If I'm not mistaken, the enemy agent was probably a dog.

Re:Shades of the 1960's CIA "Acoustic kitty" (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about a month and a half ago | (#47646917)

For more info, you can watch this documentary. [imdb.com]

Re:Shades of the 1960's CIA "Acoustic kitty" (1)

Austerity Empowers (669817) | about a month and a half ago | (#47647885)

Dogs are actually a feline attempt at genetic engineering that went awry. Created intentionally with a sort of built in Stockholm syndrome, they seem to have developed an overly strong empathy with their captives instead. Their intentionally capped intelligence which was to be useful for the more mundane task of physical security, and possibly to serve as a pack animal, also backfired: they chased anything that moved quickly, including their creators.

The project was quickly abandoned, unfortunately the prisoners and their obsession with all things related to mating have bred the abortions beyond all reason. The best that can be said for the beasts, perhaps, is that they provide distraction and amusement.

Re:Shades of the 1960's CIA "Acoustic kitty" (1)

Michael Woodhams (112247) | about 1 month ago | (#47644319)

Here [gawker.com] is another cat hack story, although it seems in this case the cat was only used as a data repository.

Overstating cat's role? (1)

Livius (318358) | about 1 month ago | (#47643895)

Apparently Coco the cat:
"reported back."
and
"identified dozens of Wi-Fi networks"

It seems Coco is doing far more than just walking around carrying the hardware. So, is Coco's performance better or worse than a human doing the same thing?

Re:Overstating cat's role? (1)

Jumunquo (2988827) | about 1 month ago | (#47643927)

Better than the bum but not as good as the undocumented at Home Depot and more expensive than both.

Re:Overstating cat's role? (5, Insightful)

MacTO (1161105) | about 1 month ago | (#47643967)

Cats can wander around without arousing much suspicion. In residential areas, that includes going into front and back yards. In commercial areas, that includes going into secured lots. In that respect, cats would be able to perform better. Of course, that leaves the issue of getting cats to explore areas that you're interested in in the first place.

Re:Overstating cat's role? (2)

sir-gold (949031) | about 1 month ago | (#47644281)

Cats explore everything. They will eventually go where you want if you wait long enough.

Re:Overstating cat's role? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47645241)

Of course, that leaves the issue of getting cats to explore areas that you're interested in in the first place.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

Re:Overstating cat's role? (2)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a month and a half ago | (#47645983)

Seems like a high gain directional antenna would be much easier, cheaper and controllable.

Cats are the most contrary animals on the planet. They figure out what you want them to do, and then do the opposite.

I initially thought that ... (5, Funny)

MacTO (1161105) | about 1 month ago | (#47643909)

... this was the best argument that cats are smarter than dogs. You don't exactly see dogs running around neighbourhoods to hack networks after all.

Then I realized that this was just another script-kitty.

Re:I initially thought that ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643937)

... this was the best argument that cats are smarter than dogs. You don't exactly see dogs running around neighbourhoods to hack networks after all.

Then I realized that this was just another script-kitty.

*cringes*

Re:I initially thought that ... (1)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | about 1 month ago | (#47643961)

script-kitty

I want you to go to your room and think about what you've done.



Best. Pun. Evar. On. Slashdot.

I initially thought that ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47644695)

bravo monsieur. bravo!

War-Driving? (1)

dugancent (2616577) | about 1 month ago | (#47643923)

Welcome to 2002.

Re:War-Driving? (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 1 month ago | (#47643949)

Ah, beat me to it. I was going to ask why the story wasn't about the time machine the cat was sent through.

Re:War-Driving? (1)

Alioth (221270) | about 1 month ago | (#47645529)

Well except in 2002 the hardware that can do this and is small enough and low power enough to attach to a cat didn't exist.

Rename war driving (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47643941)

Can we please rename war driving to something that better describes what it is? Like fat nerds looking for free wifi?

Re:Rename war driving (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 1 month ago | (#47643953)

War driving. Two things the usual participants are otherwise entirely unknown to participate in.

Could've called it Sex Sprinting.

Re:Rename war driving (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47644233)

Man, i was going to post the exact same thing.
Why "war driving"? Isn't this just a bunch of nerds with too much time on their hands driving around looking for wifi access?
Maybe back in the early 2000's this was "cool" but now you can just go down to any restaurant and get wifi access.

Re:Rename war driving (1)

istartedi (132515) | about 1 month ago | (#47644675)

If wiki [wikipedia.org] is to be believed, you're not going to have much luck. I was aware that "wardriving" came from "wardialing" but didn't know that the "war" part was a War Games reference. TIL (Today I Learned, for those not familiar with Reddit).

War diving? (2)

PPH (736903) | about 1 month ago | (#47643991)

Looks like Timothy is trying to drown his cat.

Re:War diving? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47644181)

Looks like Timothy is trying to drown his cat.

Be careful. I insulted Timothy once and my Aunt got cancer. Coincidence? Maybe. But I'm not going to take that chance again.

Re:War diving? (1)

nitehawk214 (222219) | about 1 month ago | (#47644345)

Looks like Timothy is trying to drown his cat.

Be careful. I insulted Timothy once and my Aunt got cancer. Coincidence? Maybe. But I'm not going to take that chance again.

My aunt got cancer and already beat it and I have not yet insulted Timothy. Better fix that now:

You're a jerk, Timothy... A complete kneebiter.

Re:War diving? (1)

aNonnyMouseCowered (2693969) | about 1 month ago | (#47644255)

Not the first time a computer geek has used a feline for nefarious purposes. In Japan.

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/... [slashdot.org]

Re: War diving? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47644311)

Beat me to it. Old news, moving along.

Cats should be left indoors (0)

swb (14022) | about 1 month ago | (#47644173)

And not allowed to roam and kill songbirds.

Re:Cats should be left indoors (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47644795)

I dunno, if they didn't want to be killed why are they constantly broadcasting "here I am, come pwn me"

Re:Cats should be left indoors (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47646203)

And I say they should roam and kill songbirds... THINK OF THE WORMS!!!!

Birds = Bird Flu, rats = plague (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month and a half ago | (#47646371)

See subject-line above: Care to debate that? Cats stop them, dead. You're easy to outsmart & history (especially on rats and plagues) + facts (bird flu recently alone) back me. Go away, lowbrow. There is a reason both cats and dogs are so highly esteemed in human society for ages: They are our best friends. See many birdseed commercials on TV too? I don't. I do for cats and dogs though.

New version of an old idea. (1)

sir-gold (949031) | about 1 month ago | (#47644267)

This sounds like a modern cyber-warfare version of the Soviet anti-tank dogs or the American bat-bombs.

If a cat collar can sniff wifi, it can run an automated exploit script too.

Re:New version of an old idea. (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 1 month ago | (#47644447)

Saint Bernard's dog, Flipper, Skippy, and a whole menagerie of others.
(Batman and Spiderwoman were so many fakes.)
Meanwhile, Coco the Cat seems to want Any Mouse -- at least it's avoiding the camera.

This isn't war-driving (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47644295)

It is war-prowling.

That's A Big Problem, (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47644821)

That is exactly why you don't want to do that around my neighborhood. There are way too many cats and way too many wardriving dickheads.

WarKitteh? (5, Funny)

NotSoHeavyD3 (1400425) | about 1 month ago | (#47645037)

So "Cat Scan" was too bad of a pun?

This seems pointless (1)

Cyfun (667564) | about 1 month ago | (#47645431)

Why not just throw your laptop in your car and do a few laps around your neighborhood? You could cover the same amount of area in half an hour that took the cat a week. It's not like the cat can get closer to networks than your car can, as most WAPs broadcast far enough to reach the road, not to mention the wifi adapter is more powerful and antenna is bigger on a laptop than on a cat collar contraption.

I understand that this is more of a proof-of-concept and a cool gadget to rig up, however if this gentleman is already into wardriving, then he's probably already mapped most of his neighborhood, and the information his cat obtained is nothing new.

Re:This seems pointless (4, Insightful)

Sobrique (543255) | about a month and a half ago | (#47645793)

Secure sites will get upset if you drive a car through them. Cats they're much less likely to make a fuss about...

yes but ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 1 month ago | (#47645613)

After the Cat gets tired of looking at Kitty-Porn using those unsecured Wi-Fi APs then it gets bored and goes hunting or something....

What was he THINKING?? (1)

ClickOnThis (137803) | about a month and a half ago | (#47647205)

internet + cat = bandwidth mayhem

It has happened before.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?