[opendtv] Re: F.C.C. Proposes Privacy Rules for Internet Providers - The New York Times
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 00:01:01 -0400
On Mar 15, 2016, at 10:07 PM, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
This means that people were not doing their job. It does not mean that
government snooping is not regulated.
This assumes people do their jobs properly and that nobody abuses the system.
Unfortunately abuse us all too common.
As opposed to ISP snooping, which Craig claims should be allowed to go
unchecked.
Let's not get carried away here Bert. They are tracking the sites you visit,
just as Google and Amazon are doing. This is far from the kind of snooping you
initially accused them of.
And I have not said this should go unchecked. I have said we should be able to
opt out, as the FCC is proposing for ISPs, for ALL services that track our
Internet usage. But the FCC does not have the authority to regulate Google and
the other Internet services that track us.
This is an inconvenient truth. One that the ISPs will likely object to, even as
Google et al applaud!
No Bert. The sharing was clearly happening and there were discussions
with the FCC about whether they would regulate it.
No, Craig. We are talking about "deep packet inspection," which is the exact
equivalent of tapping into your telephone conversations.
Sorry, but that's not true. It tracks the web sites you visit, just as Google
does.
In principle, for transitting packets (as opposed to packets directed to ISP
nodes themselves), the only part an ISP should concern themselves with is the
IP header. That header contains all the info needed to route the packet on
its merry way. And just btw, "metadata" can be gathered by tracking this
packet header alone. "Metadata" consists of who communicates with what (or
who), when. That's all "metdata" needs.
I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill.
Deep packet inspection means that the ISP is looking all the way into the
payload, and using that information for whatever the heck they please. The
equivalent of tapping into your phone conversations, which requires a court
order.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_packet_inspection
While it is technically possible to "eavesdrop," that is not what is in
question here. Thus is data mining to sell ads.
Does Google read your emails?
Who knows for certain?
Do ISPs read your e-mails? You seem to think so, but it is no more likely than
Google doing it.
Google tracks your searches, which they can do because you address specific
packets to their servers, when you do a search. Which is bad enough.
Google is looking at more than just search data. They are tracking the actual
pages you visit, not just the page their search engine connects you too. I get
ads all the time for products that are many clicks deep after connecting to a
site. This is exactly what the ISPs are doing.
But the ISP can look at everything that crosses your broadband link. Not just
packets addressed to a search engine.
Sorry, Any differences are superficial at best.
The important point is I cannot opt out if I want to fully utilize the
Internet, and realize the benefits. That being said, I don't have a big problem
with the tracking, but I have a huge problem with the intrusion of ads that are
making the use of many sites unbearable.
The metadata that the NSA and now the Telcos are collecting does not
include the content;
Nor does it require deep packet inspection.
Whatever. You're going off the "deep" end... Again.
We are moving to devices that use encryption at the hardware and
OS level to protect the device.
It's very simple, Craig. If I open a session with a server in the cloud, that
server may or may not be using encryption. As a user, I have no way of
forcing that server to use encryption, if it's not set up to do so.
So?
If I write an email, the only way I can use encryption is if the party I'm
writing to is set up with that encryption algorithm, appropriate certificate,
and so on. I cannot decide unilaterally that I'll use encryption.
You can use e-mail services that are encrypted or Apps. This e-mail message is
encrypted in transit, as are ALL e-mails that are handled by iCloud. All
iMessages are encrypted - text messages to non iOS devices may not be.
http://www.imore.com/icloud-emails-are-now-encrypted-prying-eyes-while-transit
This is exactly the same as encrypted telephone lines. Sure, you can use
encrypting devices for voice, but only if the other side is similarly set up.
So it's not sensible to tell people that everything they say on the phone can
be tapped, no problem, because they can use encryption.
It is not exactly the same. E-mail can be encrypted while in transit - see
above.
Phones are different if both ends of a connection use encryption. Thanks to
CALEA telco switches have built in back doors.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_Law_Enforcement_Act
And then there's X-Keyscore.
http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608141/internet-privacy/snowden--the-nsa-planted-backdoors-in-cisco-products.html
Arguing for the right position in these debates does not
automatically mean arguing for government regulation.
Nothing "automatic" about any of this, Craig. I said, in matters of net
neutrality and in matters of broadband privacy, just like in telephone
privacy, you would have a heck of an uphill battle to argue for greedy SOBs
to have a free for all. You will lose, Craig. The FCC should be regulating
this, every much as they do tapping into your telephone conversations.
That's your opinion. One I do not share.
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts: