It is done - RIP Net Neutrality

[nytebyte]

If the Democrats hate it, then you know it's probably a good thing.

Government regulation almost always never does what lawmakers claim it will do and is usually a back door for something else.

Like it's been said, the name of a regulation is usually the opposite of what it does.

 

[Chet Donnelly]

When I saw Facebook, Google, Apple, etc. come out strongly against repealing Net Neutrality....I knew it was a good thing to repeal.

What I don't get...is if I use a VPN, how would my ISP control what I do/watch anyways? [MENTION=73]tinfoilhat[/MENTION]

Is it time to buy stock in VPN companies?!?!?

 

[cap42]

When I saw Facebook, Google, Apple, etc. come out strongly against repealing Net Neutrality....I knew it was a good thing to repeal.

What I don't get...is if I use a VPN, how would my ISP control what I do/watch anyways? [MENTION=73]tinfoilhat[/MENTION]

Is it time to buy stock in VPN companies?!?!?

That depends on how fast ISP's could identify and limit those VPN connections. If they see you using the same IP's over and over with lots of bandwidth. They will know your bypassing their controls and lock those down.

Now there's always around something with technology. There are already VPN services that randomize your IP's but sooner or later the ISP's will catch on and prevent that and then someone else will invent something else to get around the ISP's prevention. Then round and round you go with a never ending loop.

The gotcha is when the ISP's can take legal action against you and prove your circumventing their service. Think of Napster etc.

 

[Chet Donnelly]

The gotcha is when the ISP's can take legal action against you and prove your circumventing their service. Think of Napster etc.

They'd have to subpoena the VPN provider for records of my use, no? I'd think that would be the only way to legally prove what someone is doing with their internet.

 

[cap42]

They'd have to subpoena the VPN provider for records of my use, no? I'd think that would be the only way to legally prove what someone is doing with their internet.

I'm speaking from a technology standpoint not really from a legal one. I can put a traffic sniffer/capture on any of my networks and see exactly what is going on. This technology wasn't available back in the napster days but it is around now. In today's cyber-security world this is called "man-in-the-middle". It's been around a while but not commercially available or as abundant and easy to obtain as it is today.

If I were say comcast and I know their network pretty well. I could see real time what any specific IP on my network is doing, where it's going, what protocols are in use, what those destinations are, and the biggest one take the packets you are sending and receiving and look at them as you are. If you think about it your ISP is just one large network that is connected to everyone else's. I could put a machine on Comcast's backbone and capture all the data it's customers were transmitting and physically look at it if it were my own.

To ungeekafy that a bit, If I am on the same network as you, If you were browsing facebook I can look at exactly what you are seeing as you see it. Regardless of your user account, FB security etc. It would be as if I was standing over your shoulder and looking at your screen.

 

[daturbosix]

im sure there will be a "dark web" way around stuff if it actually happens.
but i do not believe that it will actually go into effect.

however, scary if it does....

 

[SMKE EM]

I'm speaking from a technology standpoint not really from a legal one. I can put a traffic sniffer/capture on any of my networks and see exactly what is going on. This technology wasn't available back in the napster days but it is around now. In today's cyber-security world this is called "man-in-the-middle". It's been around a while but not commercially available or as abundant and easy to obtain as it is today.

If I were say comcast and I know their network pretty well. I could see real time what any specific IP on my network is doing, where it's going, what protocols are in use, what those destinations are, and the biggest one take the packets you are sending and receiving and look at them as you are. If you think about it your ISP is just one large network that is connected to everyone else's. I could put a machine on Comcast's backbone and capture all the data it's customers were transmitting and physically look at it if it were my own.

To ungeekafy that a bit, If I am on the same network as you, If you were browsing facebook I can look at exactly what you are seeing as you see it. Regardless of your user account, FB security etc. It would be as if I was standing over your shoulder and looking at your screen.

With encryption between your computer browser and the server thats not entirely accurate

You'll get packets but it'll be encrypted data unless you have the private key off the client machine. Which is why governments hate the public using encryption widespread

Otherwise you could just steal CC info from mere packet sniffing

 

[Lord Tin Foilhat]

I'm speaking from a technology standpoint not really from a legal one. I can put a traffic sniffer/capture on any of my networks and see exactly what is going on. This technology wasn't available back in the napster days but it is around now. In today's cyber-security world this is called "man-in-the-middle". It's been around a while but not commercially available or as abundant and easy to obtain as it is today.

If I were say comcast and I know their network pretty well. I could see real time what any specific IP on my network is doing, where it's going, what protocols are in use, what those destinations are, and the biggest one take the packets you are sending and receiving and look at them as you are. If you think about it your ISP is just one large network that is connected to everyone else's. I could put a machine on Comcast's backbone and capture all the data it's customers were transmitting and physically look at it if it were my own.

To ungeekafy that a bit, If I am on the same network as you, If you were browsing facebook I can look at exactly what you are seeing as you see it. Regardless of your user account, FB security etc. It would be as if I was standing over your shoulder and looking at your screen.

true for only un-encrypted traffic. Encrypted traffic is much harder for MITM attacks but still not impossible depending on resources.

 

[Lord Tin Foilhat]

They'd have to subpoena the VPN provider for records of my use, no? I'd think that would be the only way to legally prove what someone is doing with their internet.

correct. But comcast could choose to just block the VPNs from their network. They still dont know what you were doing, but now you cant do it that way anymore.

It could become a never ending battle of finding ways around privacy controls.

 

[cap42]

With encryption between your computer browser and the server thats not entirely accurate

You'll get packets but it'll be encrypted data unless you have the private key off the client machine. Which is why governments hate the public using encryption widespread

Otherwise you could just steal CC info from mere packet sniffing

Your correct in that encrypted traffic is not able to be seen without it being de-crypted first. That's another discussion in it self, but still do-able if you want to spend the resources. In this case you can still see traffic from source to destination and what protocols are in use. This can point an ISP to certain conclusions.

true for only un-encrypted traffic. Encrypted traffic is much harder for MITM attacks but still not impossible depending on resources.

:likes:

correct. But comcast could choose to just block the VPNs from their network. They still dont know what you were doing, but now you cant do it that way anymore.

It could become a never ending battle of finding ways around privacy controls.

Basically wack-a-mole

 

[CuzzinOlaf]

Didn't this become law in 2015? I think things were fine before this came law unless my cave wasn't impacted.

 

[Turbocharged400sbc]

Broadband Companies Faked Anti-Net Neutrality FCC Comments Per Report

Of the 22 million comments submitted during the public comment period, around 18 million were not genuine, a state attorney general's office says.

m.huffpost.com

New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office has revealed after an extensive investigation that the vast majority ― around 80% ― of comments made to the Federal Communications Commission about proposed changes to net neutrality laws were faked.
Around 40%, or 8.5 million comments, were funded by internet service providers in order to protect their interests. They included fabricated comments from dead people, some of which were discovered by their loved ones.


It also found that a single teenager using a computer program was able to submit millions of comments in favor of maintaining net neutrality, in opposition to big business interests.
Advertisement

 

[Intel]

Yup.. and it was pretty obvious too.

 

[Turbocharged400sbc]

that single teenager is my hero