Slashdot Mirror


Comcast Sued Over Internet Data Gathering

saikou writes: "Slashdot already had an article about Comcast using transparent cache systems to track their cable modem users' browsing habits (purely for improvment of their networks, of course) and now here's the follow-up. Newsbyte posted yesterday a story about the lawsuit, demanding $100 per day of tracking for each customer. I guess even if it will work out, customers might get oh, say, $10. With rest being a fee for the lawyer(s) :)" Update: 05/25 12:37 GMT by T : burgburgburg points to a New York Times article about the case, and reminds you of two previous mentions of the controversial user-tracking effort (one, two).

3 of 94 comments (clear)

  1. Um, stupid? by tomstdenis · · Score: 1, Troll

    Need I remind you that if you use Comcast as your ISP you are using *their* networks. Its not like they don't have a right to maintain it anyways they want. Unless the TOS specifically says "We will not log your activity" this lawsuit should be thrown out.

    Tom

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    1. Re:Um, stupid? by tomstdenis · · Score: 1, Troll

      Wow, angry much?

      You should learn something about the real world of computer security. Then come back to me with this insane little attitude.

      If you think anything over the internet is private you are living in a dream world. The only reason anything is private [hence expectation of privacy] over the phone is because access is heavily restricted and the government said so. There is no real reason to expect privacy over the phone other than the laws in place.

      What I mean is that unlike say a VoIP using a cipher to encrypt the transmission, a regular phone sends your conversation in plaintext. So if it wasn't for the laws inplace you'd really have no expectation of any privacy whatsoever.

      Over the internet anyone can run a hub, a server, a proxy, an ISP, etc. When you access "slashdot" you are going through probably 10 to 15 different hops [I go through more then 30 hops myself]. Each one of those hops could belong to a different private company each of which have the right to log activity. I mean I don't pay Sprint but I do use their servers [they are in the path from me to /.]. So why shouldn't they be able to keep tabs on non-customers and customers alike?

      I mean you think your local telco doesn't keep tabs on what calls you make [to whom and when]? The power from this logging only comes when it is abused. Telco's don't readily give out your call information to anyone just like ISPs shouldn't.

      That doesn't mean ISPs shouldn't log stuff if they want to though, it just means they should be responsible with it.

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
  2. Re:Sure but then you have 0 privacy. by tomstdenis · · Score: 1, Troll

    All it takes is all ISP to add "you give all right to privacy when you connect with us , and all your data can be sold to anybody wanting them." and then what ? You would be satisfied ? Sorry but you are excetly like the proponent of "opt out". privacy should always an "opt in" to be given up. I hate to think i have to watch every single of my step, watch every single word I type. A bit like a dictature.

    Welcome to the real world Neo.

    Sorry to burst your bubble but what you do with *their* network *is* their business.

    I mean next you will say Walmart shouldn't be allowed to have cameras in their own stores.

    Hey, seriously people if you are going to troll about computer security get a clue.

    Tom

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.