full-disclosure - Comcast using IPS to protect the Internet from their home user clients?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <00ab01c406ee$d5812410$1214dd80@corp.emc.com>
From: exibar at thelair.com (Exibar)
Subject: Comcast using IPS to protect the Internet from their home user clients?

As long as ComCast specifically states what they are filtering beforehand,
when and why they cut the user off after the fact, then I wouldn't have a
problem, that way the user could make an informed judgment call as to
whether or not to keep them as a provider.

   ComCast isn't known to communicate very well.  I've heard of cases where
they cut people off for downloading too much, without telling them how much
is too much, etc etc.

  Perhaps censorship was too strong of a word.  If they advertise "unlimited
internet access for $49.95" then then better damn well provide "unlimited
internet access" and any restrictions plainly and distinctly posted so the
consumer can make an educated choice.

  Ex

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Randal L. Schwartz" <merlyn@...nehenge.com>
To: "Exibar" <exibar@...lair.com>
Cc: "Frank Knobbe" <frank@...bbe.us>; "Chmielarski TOM-ATC090"
<Tom.Chmielarski@...orola.com>; <full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 4:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Comcast using IPS to protect the Internet
from their home user clients?

> >>>>> "Exibar" == Exibar  <exibar@...lair.com> writes:
>
> Exibar> I know the "feeling" behind what you typed, but you really
> Exibar> don't mean what you typed.  Filtering should not be done by
> Exibar> the ISPs, they should provide a pipe, and that's it.
>
> But they also have the right/responsibility to enforce an AUP, and to
> play "good net neighbor".
>
> In this case, they are disconnecting users who are violating AUPs
> or causing them to collectively no longer play "good net neighbor".
>
> It's not censorship.  It's especially not "censorship" when it's a
> private company (you can always take your business elsewhere).
>
> "Freedom of the press" doesn't mean you get to use everyone's press
> for free, or that everyone gets a free press.  Comcast is entirely
> within their right to cut people off as clients or from the net or
> both.  It's their wires.
>
> -- 
> Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777
0095
> <merlyn@...nehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
> Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
> See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl
training!
>
>