For years, the tech community of Network specialist have worked to control traffic in/out of corporate/company space. Cisco engineers well know how to single out particular streams for some unique actions.
But, it is never explained to the public how this is done. And, over the years, I have witnessed, in the forums, concerns raised by individuals on PUP (any distro really) actions while not totally accurate, sometimes. Thus, sometimes, individual perceptions are not necessarily how it works. As technologist we, all, know this.
But, this announcement by US's TMobile is a "hint" how ISP level companies "see your traffic". In other words ANY traffic you create travels in a sort of shopping bag where they can look into and spot things for a purpose they choose: "Let's see, this is free, that is free, you pay for this and that ..."
Hope this is a bit of good news for its customers. And it is helpful in our understandings of "internet traffic" and it relationship to any security idea(s) one might have about our personal use.
Our internet traffic is spotted and known by our ISPs
-
gcmartin
This is just an attempt to make them sound good when all they are doing is obeying the net neutrality rules.
They have to packet sniff anyway to do virus checks - whether you like it or not - so as to protect themselves and other users from malware.
They have to packet sniff anyway to do virus checks - whether you like it or not - so as to protect themselves and other users from malware.
"Just think of it as leaving early to avoid the rush" - T Pratchett
-
gcmartin
Net Neutrality in the EU/UK
Yeah, I saw this, yesterday on another news service.
I think that telecom has read the EU's version. They see, that it has "no enforcement" specifically mentioned. So, they see a window to grandfather before it goes into effect. (One view of what they attempt.) Other mega telecoms may rush to do the same before the countries sign on.
Net Neutrality in the world
And another item has arose as India, today, meets with Zuckerberg; see this account. Notice the paragraph beginning "The principle of..."
Beware this single post may be moved, by me, to a Net Neutrality thread.
Yeah, I saw this, yesterday on another news service.
I think that telecom has read the EU's version. They see, that it has "no enforcement" specifically mentioned. So, they see a window to grandfather before it goes into effect. (One view of what they attempt.) Other mega telecoms may rush to do the same before the countries sign on.
Net Neutrality in the world
And another item has arose as India, today, meets with Zuckerberg; see this account. Notice the paragraph beginning "The principle of..."
Beware this single post may be moved, by me, to a Net Neutrality thread.
Hi GCMartin:
Pertaining to your first post, it seems to make sense that ISP's know what you're doing. You're using my service, I monitor you for at least my own needs (i.e. improving service offered, etc.).
Still, it continues to show that some big brother is watching your web activity.
Best,
Slavvo67
Pertaining to your first post, it seems to make sense that ISP's know what you're doing. You're using my service, I monitor you for at least my own needs (i.e. improving service offered, etc.).
Still, it continues to show that some big brother is watching your web activity.
Best,
Slavvo67
-
gcmartin
T-Mobile is on the defensive in the net-neutrality continuum
This has the potential of re-igniting Public awareness and maybe new US Congress actions that they have been side-stepping for the past 2 decades.
What it draws attention to is varied, but one of the most significant is that it potentially raises the credibility of the EFF in the eyes of the public and maybe US and world law makers.
Corporations, tomorrow, will be scurrying to brace for this player watching the Internet Industry.
Let's hope the public can find ways to support the EFF so that we, the public, comes out winners. (Yeah, I know what you are saying about this last comment I make.)
(Scroll down a bit after reading the article for another interesting read.)
What it draws attention to is varied, but one of the most significant is that it potentially raises the credibility of the EFF in the eyes of the public and maybe US and world law makers.
Corporations, tomorrow, will be scurrying to brace for this player watching the Internet Industry.
Let's hope the public can find ways to support the EFF so that we, the public, comes out winners. (Yeah, I know what you are saying about this last comment I make.)
(Scroll down a bit after reading the article for another interesting read.)
Isn't the wider adoption of https everywhere and the likes of Tor all part of circumvention of individual monitoring. If packets are encrypted then the man-in-middle doesn't see content, only flow. And Tor misdirects flow monitoring. Personally I don't use either other than where its already being automatically implemented (https), bothers me no more than knowing (subconsiously now) that there are camera's with face/body movement recognition on every bus, train, high street ...etc. However I'd be more concerned if I lived under a more oppressive regime.
Encryption and flow (mis)direction are a bit like anti-virus - overheads (slower speeds).
George Orwell was a optimist (1984). Electronic payments, camera's, body recognition, anti-tax evasion (money/investments) and communications/flows... and in effect we live in a open prison where the state knows pretty much everything about everyone. Provided 'prisoners' are pretty free to do what they like, when they like, then they're safer than that of being in a less monitored environment - where less appropriate actions can be implemented with easier/better chance of escaping.
Encryption and flow (mis)direction are a bit like anti-virus - overheads (slower speeds).
George Orwell was a optimist (1984). Electronic payments, camera's, body recognition, anti-tax evasion (money/investments) and communications/flows... and in effect we live in a open prison where the state knows pretty much everything about everyone. Provided 'prisoners' are pretty free to do what they like, when they like, then they're safer than that of being in a less monitored environment - where less appropriate actions can be implemented with easier/better chance of escaping.
[size=75]( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) :wq[/size]
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=1028256#1028256][size=75]Fatdog multi-session usb[/url][/size]
[size=75][url=https://hashbang.sh]echo url|sed -e 's/^/(c/' -e 's/$/ hashbang.sh)/'|sh[/url][/size]
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=1028256#1028256][size=75]Fatdog multi-session usb[/url][/size]
[size=75][url=https://hashbang.sh]echo url|sed -e 's/^/(c/' -e 's/$/ hashbang.sh)/'|sh[/url][/size]
-
gcmartin
Seems NETFLIX agrees with what some Consumer groups have been echo'ing over the past years!
And US Congress, where NETFLIX should be lounging their complaint requesting a law, has never allowed the Net Neutrality Issue to reach its floors for vote and their position. This "capping" falls in line with the debate and the behavior. And, since NETFLIX see Congress as the problem, they sent their request to FCC hopeful that they will inspire Congress to act.
Like Netflix, letters/emails must be written, by those knowledgeable and in a position to, and sent to your lawmakers demanding action of an issue that was presented to them as far back as 1996, by the then US President seeking consumer protections. Each year since, even as it has been on their docket in every sitting Congress since, they have avoided stepping up for consumers by allowing it to be brought to the floor and law crafted.
They keep ducking their responsibility to act: 20 years long overdue. And, maybe there are too few of us who understand what occurring and why a legal change is beneficial to the public
And US Congress, where NETFLIX should be lounging their complaint requesting a law, has never allowed the Net Neutrality Issue to reach its floors for vote and their position. This "capping" falls in line with the debate and the behavior. And, since NETFLIX see Congress as the problem, they sent their request to FCC hopeful that they will inspire Congress to act.
Like Netflix, letters/emails must be written, by those knowledgeable and in a position to, and sent to your lawmakers demanding action of an issue that was presented to them as far back as 1996, by the then US President seeking consumer protections. Each year since, even as it has been on their docket in every sitting Congress since, they have avoided stepping up for consumers by allowing it to be brought to the floor and law crafted.
They keep ducking their responsibility to act: 20 years long overdue. And, maybe there are too few of us who understand what occurring and why a legal change is beneficial to the public