Is Comcast Intercepting Packets?
nihilist_1137 writes: "According this page, comcast is intercepting your packets to gain knowledge of your whereabouts and then reselling it to marketers." According to the linked message, "This allows them to not only log all http requests, but to also log the response. Maybe they want to profile their customer browsing history for
subsidiaries or resale to marketers. Maybe they want to do their part in
The War on Freedom. Maybe they just want passwords to porn sites. Apparently they aren't using it to maximize bandwidth, because it's not configured to serve cached data."
Isn't tapping internet connections the same, legally, as a phone tap?
Probably, but this probably isn't "tapping internet connections." I'll bet you dollars to donuts that when Comcast gets called on this, they'll explain how they're only "capturing and keeping limited information" with "aggregate identification only" so that they can "optimize their network configuration" or something like that. The phone company doesn't tap converstations, but they sure as hell have a database of which line called which number, when, and for how long.
They might even be telling the truth. Not that we care - who wants to be the first to write an app that makes random requests to random domains constantly so as to screw up their database?
Now wait a second. Before we all flip out and start bashing ComCast, lets realize a couple things.
Number one, this guy just got transitioned. A lot of people all over the country have been going through the same thing, and not everyone is seeing the same thing as him. As 'hostman' from the MESH (Michigan Engineering Software and Hardware http://misc.eecs.umich.edu/) discussion email list wrote:
"This whole thread got me a bit peeved, so I went home and ran a few tests. I was unable to find any evidence of the packet modification described. It is possible the described issue is not an issue here in A^2, as we 'transitioned' from MediaOne's service, not @Home..."
Secondly, your ISP has the right to monitor traffic to ensure quality of service. Just because the caching part of the server is not currently running, it does not mean that they aren't phasing it into the system. At this point it's just speculation. They might even have more rights to monitor what you're doing, depending on your service agreement. Read it.
Lets get some REAL evidence of what's going on other than this hear-say. Someone show us some modified packet headers, and someone else reproduce those results, and MAYBE I'll believe it then.
IANAL, but I'd say you have just about as much expectation of privacy as you do sending unencrypted voice over the public telephone network, which is to say a substantial expectation.
Data on a switched network between two large ISPs is no easier to intercept than voice going between two large phone companies. In fact, I daresay it would be easier for me to tap my neighbor's phone than his cable modem (I could do it with a pair of pliers and some wire); it would, however, be illegal and IMO wrong for me to do so.
Bottom line: even though it may be *possible* for nefarious people to tap your phone, put bugs in your living room, or even implant a chip in your brain, you can still have an expectation of privacy. Not wrapping your house in tinfoil does not mean you're giving up your right to privacy, because your home is not a public forum. The wires between you and a web server do not constitute a public forum by any stretch of the imagination (even if the server happens to be hosting a public forum). Not using HTTPS does not consitute an abdication of privacy.
If you run a packet sniffer and look at other people's data, good luck convincing a judge that you weren't doing something bad under Section 2511 because the data wasn't encrypted.
"Hey, his front door wasn't locked, so I didn't really steal his TV..."
"Hey, the guy didn't use The Club, so this really isn't Grand Theft Auto..."
"Hey, she was wearing that short skirt; she deserved it..."