So I've started reading a book about networks, and to complement this I've been taking a closer look at my network traffic in Wireshark (really great tool, by the way.).
So I pick an ftp site that I know, ftp://download.nvidia.com/ and see what happens in Wireshark when I visit it in Firefox. At the FTP application level this is what happens,
ftpsite to me: 220 spftp/1.0.0000 Server [69.31.121.43]\r\n me to ftpsite: USER anonymous\r\n ftpsite to me: 331 Password required for USER.\r\n me to ftpsite: PASS mozilla@example.com\r\n ftpsite to me: 230- \r\n 230- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------\r\n 230- WARNING: This is a restricted access system. If you do not have explicit\r\n 230- permission to access this system, please disconnect immediately!\r\n 230 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------\r\n
But Firefox does not disconnect. So I did some more research and I found no references to "anonymous" users in either RFC 959 (FTP) or RFC 3659 (extensions to FTP). (Though there are references in latter RFCs, see RFC 2228).
The thing I find disconcerting is that I don't think I have "explicit permission" to access this system. I (or rather Firefox) just guessed a username and password and they happened to let me in (what if I guessed a different username and password that wasn't anonymous and it let me in?). If the RFC specified that a user of anonymous requires no password, or any password, then I would assume that the FTP server is granting me permission, but I assume rather people just started using anonymous as the user and it caught on...
The real problem here is that there are laws which govern such areas, and it doesn't help that that I don't understand what PART 6 - COMPUTER OFFENCES of the CRIMES ACT 1900 (NSW) is saying.