Slashdot Mirror
Comcast To Stop Tracking Users' Web Habits
jdavidb writes "According to this article, Comcast will no longer keep track of what its users view online." Good.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
You can find the article here: http://digitalmass.boston.com/news/2002/02/13/comc ast.html
As if AT&T isn't tracking users too?
The Washington Post has this article about how Rep. Ed Markey is looking into Comcast's collection of personal internet usage info. Hey, this guy must read SlashDot!!
Markey, D-Mass., in a letter to Comcast President Brian Roberts, wrote that he was concerned about "the nature and extent of any transgressions of the law that may have resulted in consumer privacy being compromised."
Also, Comcast has a new press release in response to the fracas.
Light cup, beer drink, thin so chain, neck turtle fat, man I won't say it again
In response to previous claims of Comcast intercepting packets, the company pledged today "to immediately stop recording the Web browsing activities of each of its 1 million high-speed Internet subscribers." This after the Associated Press announced on Tuesday that the company "has started recording the Web browsing activities of each of its 1 million high-speed Internet subscribers without notifying them of the change."
Big Kudos to the moderator (timothy) who was willing to take a chance on an anonymous bugtraq tip. I just got off the phone with Comcast tech support, and they said, essentially, that if this information had never leaked out, they would still be monitoring my internet usage.
Just looking at the original article right here, I was very suprised by all the "This is not news posts" that got modded +5.
Quite simply, this is news, and this is not a simple proxy server either, according to Comcast tech support. Slashdot took a big risk in posting this story, and I think everyone that hollered about the original story being a bust owes a big apology to timothy.
Anyways,
It's good Comcast has finally seen the light (or have had it thrust in their faces), but I am still looking for a new ISP. I think this image really explains why:
Curious jumps everywhere
High ping times
I'm afraid Comcast just isn't cutting it any more. Since my area is a Comcast monopoly, I tihnk its time that we pressured our public officials to break up this monopoly.
As I told the rep: "I hope you realize that if a competitor, ANY competitor, breaks up your cable monopoly here, you will lose all your market share."
And he said:
"Yeah, I know"
As if this hasn't been covered enough... But ISP's inherently track users. Pretty much every request is logged, its part of the business, get used to it. However, its not the tracking thats the problem, its what they do with it. If all that information does is sit in a log file until subpoena'd (or until the end of time, whichever comes first) then it does no harm. But ComCast was sharing (read: selling) the information to its valued associates. That's a big dirty no-no.
I am a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
I'd like to know what that means. Storing in this case may just mean archiving, or at least long-term storage of the data. The story doesn't say they'll stop tracking the usage, only that they won't store it. Not being overly suspicious, it was just the verbage used seemed kind of broad to me.
Idiot, n. A member of a large and powerful tribe whose influence in human affairs has always been dominant
We don't need that. Web surfers already have something like that on a personal, local level. It's called web cache.
One of the benefits of going through a caching proxy is that the cache is centralized, and available to everybody. This can amount to a huge upstream bandwidth savings for an ISP.
If ten customers go directly to CNN.com, the ISP will download CNN.com from its upstream provider ten times--the fact that customer A visits the site doesn't help customer B, since their browser caches are private. For that matter, if customer A switches between Netscape and IE, he will have to download the page again, since each browser maintains its own independent cache.
With ten customers going through a transparent caching proxy, the ISP caches the page once, and serves it from the cache ten times. This is a huge savings on upstream bandwidth, and improves performance for everybody. CNN.com sees less load on their server, visitors load the CNN website faster, and customers visiting MSNBC.com have more upstream bandwidth available.
Personally I am ALL FOR caches... Just make them optional so that I can turn it off in the very rare situations that it breaks someting.
There are several protocols that allow the end user to automatically detect the cache servers that they need to use.
I have used and deployed several squid proxy-caches http://www.squid-cache.org/ that I was able to prove reduced the required border bandwidth utilization in organizations by around 20%. Of course this means that the caches and the hiarchy needs to be thought out in advance. Network planning 101...
http://www.ircache.net/ for an existing cache hiarchy that you can freely connect with.
--
Time is on my side
It is quite possible for a transparent proxy to log the plaintext of a SSL transmission through an active man-in-the-middle attack. Check out http://http://www.monkey.org/~dugsong/dsniff/ . According to the site, it works by exploiting weak bindings in ad-hoc PKI. I have no idea if this still works on modern browsers, but if it does, then even using SSL will not stop comcast from collecting data.
Unfortunately "anonymizers" aren't too anonymouse these days...
, 00 .html
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,50371
Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
They don't HAVE news servers anymore. Some people can still log onto the old @Home news servers, but that will end Feb 28th. They said it was due to warez, piracy, etc. I think it was not wanting to maintain the servers and have the use load on their cheesy new network. So, Comcast means no newsgroups. Glad I switched to a pay news server a LONG time ago.
Apparently, comcast is currently blacklisted with spamcop.
details here.
On second glance, it seems they've had a long history of being blacklisted.
Mmmm, -funroll-loops