Slashdot Mirror
Comcast Plans Cable Boxes with Integrated Wi-Fi and Snooping
Kaa writes "Short version: Comcast's cable modem/802.11g base station that is made by Linksys has capabilities to 'phone home' to Comcast and tell them how many devices are connected to your WiFi base station, how much bandwidth they are using, etc. It also has the capability to 'disable LAN segments' which, I assume, means they can kick your devices off your home network if they choose to do so. Something tells me this particular device won't make it into my house..."
Why aren't bandwidth quotas sufficient?
The "disable LAN segments" thing sounds like it could be a security risk. DOS, anyone?
And the l33t shall inherit the 34r7h.
Between this and them firing all of TechTV's staff, I see NO REASON why any geek worth his salt should use ANY SERVICE offered by this company.
Keep Austin Weird!
Um. You realize that you can leave the wifi enabled and still use your own access point, right?
Don't only blame Comcast. If LinkSys is doing this in one device, what about others?
Bwahahahah.. oh.. wait... stop... my sides hurt...
Yea, you won't complain until Comcast won't give you service unless you have "compliant" hardware
However, Comcast can't require you use their cable modem to connect to their system. That's simply against FCC rules. The FCC usually hates it when the service provider starts mandating that only their hardware be used.
(Think... If they could, wouldn't they be doing that already?)
The solution is not voting with our wallets, it's voting by legislation (another problem in and of itself). Face it whats the alternative to Cable Modems? We could use phone lines (I would rather thank Dale McBride for his fund raising initiatives), We could use Satellite (because I like having my service disrupted when a cloud looms over head), or we could use DSL (yea well, no.) Unfortunately Comcast is the only cable service provider in my area, or I would have gotten rid of them a long time ago!
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
We _are_ talking about a Government agency, right? And God knows that no Govt agency has EVER changed policy or regulations to appease a corporation...[rolling eyes]
"I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
Simple Solution: Put a smoothwall box or another router between your home network and the new cable modem (as I'm sure many of us already do). Although the wireless access would be nice to use, 802.11b/g access points are pretty cheap these days.
even simpler solution: buy one of the many many many available router/wifi AP combos out there and don't pay the extra charges that comcast wants you to pony up...
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
Since Comcast is a government-regulated monopoly (in theory) one of the only avenues of recourse might be to petition the municipal authority where you live to ban Comcast from using this stuff (espectially the "disable LAN segments" when the next contract negotiations come up.
If there is one thing to be learned from Comcast, it's that they have an IMMENSE subscriber base. Outrage is commonplace. But it's also important to not let it consume you. It seems like over at Comcast, there are like "too many chefs in the kitchen" sometimes. Every now and then, one of these chefs will do something that is extremely unpopular. It takes a little while, and then things fall back into place the way they should.
In any case, Comcast does eventually get the message, but you may have to speak somewhat louder or go down to the office yourself, or write the "right person" a letter, describing your problem.
So while you, as an individual, may have to, at some point, stand up and assert your rights in the face of an immense company such as Comcast, the important thing is to do it with conviction, to not panic, and to maintain a level-headed approach to the whole situation.
There is nothing worse than being constantly dragged into these massive online bitching sessions that explore every possible worst-case scenario from every possible angle.
The most important thing to do with Comcast is to remain calm, and chill out, while trying to stay informed. This, unfortunately, is a serious challenge, because the information that you need to know is usually buried in a veritable hastack of hatred and negative emotions. It's unfortunate, really.
Eventually, when there are options, other options, for those folks who don't live within the necessary distance from the CO, or, when Comcast learns that many very technically knowledgable users don't have a choice when it comes to broadband access (whichever comes first), then these problems are going to go away, for good. The sooner the better.
I think Comcast has come a long way towards making things more friendly for alternative OS's and do-it-yourself home networking, and I have a feeling that these two things will be around to stay. That's just my feeling.
As many other people have pointed out, this is not something that the average slashdotter is going to want to have. But this is will be a great thing for the clueless. The average person who wants to browse the web and get email, who has no clue about setting up and locking down a proper network will love this. Now all they have to do is plug it in and go, Comcast takes care of the rest. I would rather have comcast controlling the routers/waps of the clueless. Ideally, they'll do things like monitor for abuse and worm traffic, and kick offenders offline until its fixed. This is not something Comcast is forcing on its users, its a service that is going to make things better for the customer as well as for the rest of the internet. From what the article says, its entirely optional. Wouldn't you rather have the networks of the people most likely to get infected with the latest worm/spyware/whatever be monitored by somebody who actually has a clue (as much clue as Comcast has, at least..)? Stop fighting new technology just because you wouldn't use it.
It doesn't look like that has a built in firewall, so this new Comcast box will still be able to detect your extra machines and drop your access.
Try to use 3 Mbit/sec for an extended length of time, and see what happens. Chances are, you'll get a nast-gram in the mail saying "You're using too much bandwidth!, 3Mbit/sec is the name of our service, not a description!".
www.facebook.com/DareDefendOurRights
www.fairtax.org
You are assuming that Comcast will permit another WiFi or router on their network. Where do you think the segment disabling will be used? RTFA para 1.4 stated that the cablehome gateways can be standalone or embeded within the DOCSIS cablemodem. For the standard home user, it will be embedded, since it is a cost issue. then comcast will rule their home LAN.
/.er
I'll post further when I log in, Redundacy does not bother me! But you should Read the PDF linked in the article. the words are not too complex for the average
This sounds reasonable, especially if Comcast fails to secure their monitoring/command system properly.
I propose it be named "Dinker," for the word used to describe machines dropping off the system. You know: "Dink, there goes one. Dink, there goes another." The bandwidth effects of such a virus would probably be minimal, but the impact on Comcast's helpdesk would be phenomenal.
Systems like this used to enforce multi-system pricing schemes are a complete farce designed to stick it to the customer with enough money or know-how to have a computer for each user in their home. Of course, they have a ready defense for this: "Oh, but this system makes sure that people who use the connection more (ie: multiple machines) are paying for it so that regular customers don't run out of bandwidth!" We all know this is a crock. I know people who can eat loads more bandwidth with one machine than 20 "average" users.
Even worse. It will allow them to snoop on your devices if you NEIGHBOR gets this device. Consider this scenario A well behaved device would never do this, but, if Comcast decides to shut down Vonage, your neighbor could "notice" that you are using Vonage and generate disruptive traffic. Provided they meerly disrupted you, rather than tapped your line, it's even within the class of FCC license granted to your receiver. You know that "must accept any interference" clause?
This may not be such a bad thing for the stupid user who does not secure their network and is sending a gazillion emails per minute via their back-doored machine.
Comcast and other cable companies have already tried the "pay per computer, not necessarily per modem" billing concept and have failed miserably. What they are realizing now (or should be realizing!) is that they need more granular control over the machines on their networks. So if that means granting them the capability to disable offending machines, then so be it.
Regardless, there are dozens of ways to circumvent this altogether if they get out of hand with it. If they manage to keep Joe P Dumbass from spreading virii and spam, have it it.
I have one device connected to my cable modem. Comcast supports this device. My router. I pay (a good amount of money) for this bandwidth. My one computer alone cannot use all of this bandwidth. But my laptop, desktop and playstation can do that. So if I choose to utilize the full amount of bandwidth comcast SELLS me I should use it how I see fit (with the exception of illegal activities). Comcast's typical billing model of PER DEVICE is mainly geared towards TV's, though they do acknowledge people get one cable box (in some areas where required) and connect the rest of the house through a cat-5 cable. It is funny though, when I tell comcast I do not want the cable box they tell me its not physically possible for me to watch Cable TV without it. Then I tell them I am presently doing that and they get the clueless deer look.
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
True. But that assumes you take the time to scan all the ports at a given IP address. Many Script kiddies will go to a certain port and scan for it. They don't have the patience to scan a single IP for all ports. I agree with parent (and I do similar things) It just another layer in a multi layer model for security. It's not the end all and be all, but it helps.
The new CableModems specific purpose is so that Comcast can sell add-on units that they also control. Think Cable DVR equipment that can also be accessed by your computer (through these protocols). With all far-reaching technologies, including this one, there is a lot of potential for abuse. However, if abuse occurs, a lot of folks will be signing up for DSL or Satellite service (where DSL is not also available).
Bottom line... this will allow comcast to sell Network Appliances. They make money, $$. If Time Warner were doing this first, I'd be much more prone to believe the "RIAA conspirists". If AT&T (no longer part of ComCast) were still involved, I might be more worried about Vonage devices.
At the same time, this will enable Comcast to sell their own VoIP (like vonnage) devices for their own telephone service. Basically, home cable-extension appliances are not new, but they are just starting to get popular. This technology will enable that sector to grow.
As commonly said here... follow the money. I see money in additional in-home networking appliances, like Cable-Radio (delphi style) - - if you don't pay for it, they can cut off that "segment".
Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
I think the biggest problem is the fact that most people won't even know they are being "watched." ISP's have a habit of leaving these details in the extremely fine print. I don't expect them to have it in bold letters on the box, but...
I know back when I had dial-up I had to try several different ISP's because they all claimed to have an "unlimited hours" plan which in most cases was an all out lie. They would say something like the industry standard for "unlimited" is 250 hours (but I leave my connection on all the time).
Anyway, it seems when companies pull stuff like this they think no one is going to care (maybe they don't) or even notice, I doubt Google thought people would make such a big fuss about Gmail.
*shrug*
Once we're on my side of the demarcation line (in this case the cable modem) it's not the cable company's network. It's MY network. And none of their damned business.
"Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
I certainly won't be using any of these boxes, but I can see where this would be a very good thing for the non-technical user. Unless you're one of those people who likes to borrow their neighbor's wireless network ...
Of course, it also would mean that Comcast has a database with everybody's WEP key in it somewhere -- which Comcast or the FBI/NSA/KGB/BSA/KFC/etc could use to sniff all your traffic, even that which doesn't go over the network (of course, Comcast could do that at the WAP itself, without even requring physical proximity.) And if somebody hacked into that database, it would give them a huge number of WAPs (and their addresses) that you could use with impunity -- and the encryption would even make them *seem* secure. (If a user suddenly starts spewing spam, and their WAP uses WEP, people are going to be less likely to believe that his WAP was abused.)
These people are your ISP. Don't all your packets have to go through their routers to get anywhere?
Can't they monitor all your traffic there just as well as they can at the cable modem?
Couldn't they disable any system on your network by MAC filtering?
Also why is it IP addresses for home isps are so outragiously priced when if you co-locate a server you can get a new ip for like 50 cents extra a month
Simple: because they can.
Because Comcast is saying they'll monitor/control your use of the WAP, does that mean they'll take responsibility if someone parks outside my house, cracks my WEP, and starts up a file-sharing service that gets the RIAA more pissed than hornets?
;)
At least, that's the cover story I'd give when they came knocking on my door.
Diplomacy is the art of saying, "Nice doggie!" until you can find a rock.
Because becoming an expert in this field is a full-time job. That's why IT is a profession. You're not an expert electrician or carpenter or bricklayer or plumber (and even if you are one of those, I doubt you're 2 or 3 of them) and you still live in a modern house. Why do you call in contractors to modify that house when it's only a matter of buying some lumber and pounding nails into the right places?
This is the final straw, Comcast has dared too much. They are evil and must be stopped! Boycott them for this atrocity.
The next step would be them installing Spyware/Adware on your system to track what web sites you visit and create more pop-ups.
I have a DSL router shared between several systems. My ISP is paid for my bandwidth, if I happen to choose to share that bandwidth between my several systems, they do not have a right to restrict my access as I was promised "Unlimited Access" via DSL by their marketing department.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
Direcway has recently switched over to their DW6000 adapter that has these same snooping features. I think that in the future they want to be able to charge you on a "per device" basis. I stuck a hardware firewall between the sat modem and my network. Only one outside observable IP that way. Seems to be working, so far...
You you belive that right now YOUR ISP doesn't have the abillity to monitor where you are surfing? Unless you have some very non-standard surfing techniques, they do have, and always will have, that abillity. If they are the "provider" they can watch what they provide.
Or if comcast gets a court order by law enforcement...or if a comcast employee wants to snoop around his girlfriend's connection (or maybe wants to screw over someone who flipped them the bird in a parking lot)...
That sounds good in theory but Comcast is already involved in intrusive user monitoring and arbitrary discrimination against a significant base of potential users who have no access at all for lack of cost-effective alternative. Furthermore, Comcast has a lock on sufficient market share in enough areas that they don't have to fear anything short of competition from another cable broadband provider. DSL costs 3 times as much for anything even approaching cable bandwidth if you can get it, and satellite service is expensive, slow, and unreliable. It is cable broadband or nothing for a lot of people.
The idea that Comcast will, if they are allowed the capability, commit widespread abuses againt their users is hardly FUD, it is a demonstrated fact, and lawsuits notwithdtanding, it continues apace. They are become a monster, and must be stopped. I will be leading an effort against them starting with the state Public Service Commission and State Attorney General myself. We'll see how far it gets, but it far past time this industry experienced some regulation. Minimally, they must be required to provide the services their victims have paid for, and prohibited from stealing data from their users. Their propensity to do both these things is already manifest, and not simply FUD.
Indeed. The $1 Billion M$ invested in Comcast that allowed them to purchase ATT cable networks speaks volumes all by itself. Combine that with their obvious intent to follow AOL's "never delete a user account if you have a valid account number for it, cause you can bill that account til hell freezes over and then prosecute the user" subscription model, and I think if there were an alternative to Comcast for any of their victims, those victims would be customers of that alternative already.
It is the money trail that proves the allegations are not FUD at all.
"The Internet is made of cats."