nanog mailing list archives
Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal
From: Joe Loiacono <jloiacon () csc com>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 09:59:33 -0400
Lowering barriers to entry is where the next political focus should be. Joe Loiacono From: Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net> To: Cc: NANOG list <nanog () nanog org> Date: 03/29/2017 09:13 AM Subject: Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Sent by: "NANOG" <nanog-bounces () nanog org> I know most of the people in the thread have been doing this a long time, the others I just don't know anything about them. FWIW: Glass has been running an ISP for 20 - 25 years, has given Congressional\FCC testimony, etc. He's not an industry slouch either, just with a different political standing. Certainly independents need better marketing machines, but the past 10 - 15 years, they've been beaten down pretty badly with the general public flocking to the incumbents and the masochism that entails. As my ISP tries to grow, in the same conversation I've had a property manager complain about Comcast and then say they don't need me because they have Comcast. I know that's not a technical battle. Heck, I've been trying to hire a sales\biz dev guy for the better part of two years. I never get anyone reasonable responding. One guy asked what B2B was. We need those anchor enterprise, government, MDU accounts in an area to justify the expense and low ROI of single family homes. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick () ianai net> To: "NANOG list" <nanog () nanog org> Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 7:58:57 AM Subject: Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Mike: I know Mr. Glass thinks of me as a not knowledgeable network professional, but I hope you know I’ve been doing “ISP stuff” for a couple decades. I know how to work the system. There really are not any other broadband providers in my area. Hell, LTE doesn’t even work well in my house, and I am less than a dozen miles from the center of Boston. But more importantly, even if there were a second provider, how do you expect Joe & Mary User to find that provider if I cannot? (Not trying to be arrogant, just saying I am more experience in this field than the average consumer.) Broadband competition in the US is a myth, at least for most people. At best, competition is the exception, not the rule. At worst, it’s a thinly veiled monopoly. Hell, they brag about it being a duopoly where they can, as if that’s a great thing. Comcast’s chairman brags that Time Warner & Comcast do not compete in any cities. -- TTFN, patrick
On Mar 29, 2017, at 6:35 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net> wrote: Are there really no others or are the ones that are there just marketing
themselves poorly? Any nearby you could convince to expand?
Over my WISP's coverage, I have at least 13 WISP competitors, 7
broadband wireline and nearly that many enterprise fiber. I admit that may be exceptional.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick () ianai net> To: "NANOG list" <nanog () nanog org> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 9:25:54 PM Subject: Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and
engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal
Thanks, I was a bit confused why you said it, which is apparently
because I was confused. :-)
I agree we need to do a better job educating users why this is
important.
And just so my opinion is clear, if there were a true market, I would
not mind ISPs who did this (with proper notice). Unfortunately, over half of all households in the US have one or fewer choices for broadband providers. I am one of them. What do I do if my ISP wants to collect my data? VPN everything?
-- TTFN, patrickOn Mar 28, 2017, at 10:18 PM, Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net> wrote: It was more a plea to educate the list on why this matters vs. doom and
gloom with a little more gloom and a little less Carmack. Instead I got more of the sky is falling.
Note that I don't intend to ever do this at my ISP, nor my IX. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> <
https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> < https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> < https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> <
https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> < https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> <
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick () ianai net <mailto:patrick () ianai net To: "NANOG list" <nanog () nanog org <mailto:nanog () nanog org>> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 9:12:15 PM Subject: Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and
engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal
Mike: My guess is you do not. Which is -precisely- why the users (proletariat?) need to find a way to
stop you. Hence laws & regulations.
Later in this thread you said “we are done here”. Would that you were
so lucky.
-- TTFN, patrickOn Mar 28, 2017, at 5:58 PM, Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net <
mailto:nanog () ics-il net>> wrote:
Why am I supposed to care? ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rich Kulawiec" <rsk () gsp org <mailto:rsk () gsp org>> To: nanog () nanog org <mailto:nanog () nanog org> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 4:45:25 PM Subject: Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and
engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 06:45:04PM +0000, Mel Beckman wrote:The claim oft presented by people favoring this customer abuse is
that
the sold data is anonymous. But it's been well-established that very simple data aggregation techniques can develop signatures that reveal
the identity of people in anonymized data.This needs to be repeated loudly and often at every possible
opportunity.
I've spent much of the past decade studying this issue and the most
succinct
way I can put it is that however good you (generic "you") think de-anonymization techniques are, you're wrong: they're way better than
that.
Billions, and I am not exaggerating even a little bit, have been spent
on this problem, and they've been spent by smart people with
essentially
unlimited computational resources. And whaddaya know, they've
succeeded.
So if someone presents you a data corpus and says "this data is
anonymized",
the default response should be to mock them, because there is a very
high
probability they're either (a) lying or (b) wrong. Incidentally, I'm also a signatory of the EFF document, since of
course
with nearly 40 years in the field I'm a mere clueless newbie and
despite
ripping them a new one about once every other month, I'm clearly a
tool
of Google. ---rsk
Current thread:
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal, (continued)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Rod Beck (Mar 28)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Mel Beckman (Mar 28)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Rich Kulawiec (Mar 28)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Mike Hammett (Mar 28)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Patrick W. Gilmore (Mar 28)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Mike Hammett (Mar 28)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Patrick W. Gilmore (Mar 28)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Mike Hammett (Mar 29)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Patrick W. Gilmore (Mar 29)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Mike Hammett (Mar 29)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Joe Loiacono (Mar 29)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Mark Radabaugh (Mar 29)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Sean Heskett (Mar 29)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal valdis . kletnieks (Mar 29)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Mel Beckman (Mar 29)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Mark Radabaugh (Mar 29)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Dan Hollis (Mar 29)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Mark Radabaugh (Mar 29)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Mike Hammett (Mar 30)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Rod Beck (Mar 28)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Fletcher Kittredge (Mar 29)
- Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal Mike Hammett (Mar 28)