Slashdot Mirror


ISPs May Be Selling Your Web Clicks

Mozzarella writes "Could our ISPs be selling our click data without us even knowing it? It seems like the practice is happening a lot more than we realize, and can be tracked for each user. Complete Incorporated's CTO David Cancel told Ars Technica that his company (an internet research firm) licenses click information from ISPs for 'millions of dollars' to figure out how we use the web. From the article: 'He did not give a specific figure about what this broke down to in terms of dollars per ISP user, although someone in the audience estimated that it was in the range of 40 per user per month — this estimate was erroneously attributed to Cancel himself in some reports on the event. Cancel said that this clickstream data is 'much more comprehensive' than data that is normally gleaned through analyzing search queries.'"

110 comments

  1. Your Internet soul was sold years ago by BristolCream · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is little new here. Companies such as http://www.hitwise.com/ have been purchasing raw traffic data for years. They place a box at switch level and monitor everything about everyone and the sell on the reports for profits. The last time I had a quote from them it was in the region of $28k to monitor footfall to a single site for a year. Access to the full data set can run into the hundreds of thousands.

    1. Re:Your Internet soul was sold years ago by cswiger · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, you can get free tools like analog or webalyzer, or commercial things like Unison, which process a webserver logfile and generate all kinds of reports like search terms, OS & user-agent breakdowns, aggregated over various time-intervals, without installing an inline traffic sniffer.

      But there's a difference between a website analyzing the traffic sent to it, particularly if reasonable notice in the site's privacy policy is there, and reselling that data to third parties, or gathering data from all sites going by an MAE or ISP NAP without any permission or notification. The former is something which most people take for granted when they decide to browse to a site, but the latter is not something which most people assume is OK.

      Fortunately, using SSL is a pretty good defense against man-in-the-middle attacks, so long as the server keys have not been compromised-- trying to analyze HTTPS traffic only gives you source and dest IPs, but no info about the specific URLs being hit, cookies, search keywords, and so forth.

      --
      "The human race's favorite method for being in control of the facts is to ignore them." -Celia Green
    2. Re:Your Internet soul was sold years ago by BristolCream · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm not talking about statistics collected at site level. Hitwise place a box at switch elvel with consumer ISP's, tracking everywhere they go and eveything the do. Seriously. Read all about here.

    3. Re:Your Internet soul was sold years ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      What is needed is an anonymous network beyond the government watched Tor and simple proxifiers. A new network is needed. A few people have created an anonymous, deniable, virtual Internet using OpenVPN and Quagga. anoNet has all the luxuries of the Internet (http, ftp, IM, IRC, p2p, search, etc.). They also have full DNS and IP/AS registration to keep things sane. Unlike the Internet all registration is anonymous and private. This network is not a warez network at all, merely a group of people who want a different network, founded on privacy.

      http://www.anonet.org/

    4. Re:Your Internet soul was sold years ago by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      There's also the whole "who cares?" factor.

      The only possible use for this information is to better target advertising. And frankly, I like targeted advertising a lot more than un-targeted advertising, so I'm all for it. It costs me nothing, doesn't hurt me in any way, but potentially could stop me from having to see tampon ads. All for it.

    5. Re:Your Internet soul was sold years ago by kestasjk · · Score: 1

      Well I care.. How about an opt-in version of this system where users can opt-in to have everything they do monitored, and get targeted ads (and perhaps a discount) as a bonus?
      I'm going to make a wild guess that ISPs don't make it opt-in because they know no-one would, because people do care about privacy.

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    6. Re:Your Internet soul was sold years ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Note the bit at the bottom of the page you linked:

      "Hitwise only extracts aggregate information from ISP networks and no personal information is seen or captured by Hitwise in accordance with local and international privacy guidelines. Hitwise's methodology is audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers on an annual basis."

      The simple fact is, nobody cares about what you personally look at, that information isn't worth anything. When you scale it up to the level of what 100 million people have looked at, then its starts to be valuable.

      I wouldn't be too concerned.

    7. Re:Your Internet soul was sold years ago by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      I'm going to make a wild guess that ISPs don't make it opt-in because they know no-one would, because people do care about privacy.

      Nah, people are lazy when there's no obvious impact. That's why IE is the dominant browser - it's default, and the reasons to switch aren't meaningful to most people, if they even know they can switch.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    8. Re:Your Internet soul was sold years ago by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      The simple fact is, nobody cares about what you personally look at, that information isn't worth anything.

      I wouldn't say that. The statistics of your personal clicks contains information about your habits and interests. That information is quite valuable for anyone doing targeted advertising.

      Possible scenario: You visit some web site with advertisement. When your browser's request to load the advertisement comes in, the advertiser notes that it's from an ISP he has a contract with, thus it connects to the ISP to check the profile currently connected with the requesting IP address, and then selects an ad specifically tailored to that profile, i.e. to you. They could even select different ads for the same product based on the profile.

      I think that's the advertisers' wet dream: Know exactly whom you target for each individual ad presentation, and make the ad as specific for him as possible. It's certainly not worthless to them.
      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    9. Re:Your Internet soul was sold years ago by jo42 · · Score: 1

      Advertising sucks goatse's backside.

  2. Is this legal? by Raul654 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If this is being done without users' consent, then it strikes me as being dangerously close to wiretapping, which is illegal.

    --


    To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
    --E.C. Stanton
    1. Re:Is this legal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      > If this is being done without users' consent, then it strikes me as being dangerously close to wiretapping, which is illegal.

      It's a good thing government agencies are only interested in inefficiency, pork-barrel contracts, and bloating their own budgets.

      The cheap solution to implementing a surveillance state is to outsource. $AGENCY doesn't need to wiretap your connection; it needs only to purchase the relevant data from the ISPs.

    2. Re:Is this legal? by Seumas · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This wouldn't matter to me if the data was anonymized so that it was impossible to correlate the data beyond "all of these are by the same individual", but no way to identify by IP address or anything else.

      The problem, as we saw with the data AOL released last year, is that there is most certainly identifiable data in the clicks, such as phone numbers, credit card numbers, usernames, passwords, real names, social security numbers, medical information and other private data.

    3. Re:Is this legal? by vandon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If this is being done without users' consent, then it strikes me as being dangerously close to wiretapping, which is illegal.

      Remember that EULA you clicked 'I agree' on without reading?
    4. Re:Is this legal? by HomelessInLaJolla · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Even if the information isn't immediately personally identifiable it is fairly easy, through analysis of the cross-section of a few related databases, to make it so. It's just math and most cookies have some uniquely identifiable characteristic. Perhaps they can't tie information A with person B, but it isn't too difficult to tie information A to information C to information D and then cut the database down to people who have A, C, and D. Iterate if necessary.

      --
      the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
    5. Re:Is this legal? by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 4, Funny

      Remember that EULA you clicked 'I agree' on without reading? I agree.
    6. Re:Is this legal? by module0000 · · Score: 1

      I agree that without our consent, this does sound like wiretapping...however... This is what scares me, I clicked "I agree" on my 38-page SBC DSL contract without reading the fine lines. As negligent as that is...I'm sure there are quite a few of us who have done the same thing. I'd love for a lawyer to pick it apart, and find where we agreed to this.

      --
      Trackball users will be first against the wall.
    7. Re:Is this legal? by scribblej · · Score: 2, Informative

      I use ComCast.

      When you sign up, they have a disk you are supposed to use to get started.

      It's a damn internet connection. I don't need a disk for that. nor will I use one. Plus, I'm on Linux, which they don't support.

      The practical upshot of this is, I've never seen a contract. I called them up to activate service over the phone. No EULAs, no clicking, no "I agree," nothing.

    8. Re:Is this legal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's a good thing government agencies are only interested in inefficiency, pork-barrel contracts, and bloating their own budgets.

      The cheap solution to implementing a surveillance state is to outsource.


      Because corporations have no interest in inefficiency, pork-barrel contracts, and budget bloat, right?

    9. Re:Is this legal? by TuballoyThunder · · Score: 2, Informative
      You probably agreed to quite a few things.

      By using this service you are agreeing to
      • Operator Acceptable Use Policy
      • Cable Modem Service Subscription Agreement
      • Time Warner Cable and Affiliated ISPs Subscriber Privacy Notice
      and, from the Operator Acceptable Use Policy

      e) In addition to the foregoing, Operator and ISP each shall have the right at any time to add to, modify or delete any aspect, feature or requirement of the ISP Service, including but not limited to content, equipment and system requirements. Operator shall have the right to add to, modify or delete any provision of this Agreement and/or any Terms of Use established by Operator and/or the Subscriber Privacy Notice at any time. An online version of this Agreement, the Terms of Use, and the Subscriber Privacy Notice, as so changed from time to time, will be accessible at http://help.twcable.com/ or another online location as designated by Operator. Operator will notify Subscriber of any significant change in this Agreement, the Terms of Use or the Subscriber Privacy Notice. Upon any such change, Subscriber's continued use of the ISP Service will constitute Subscriber's consent to such change. If Subscriber does not agree to any such change, Subscriber immediately shall stop using the ISP Service and notify Operator and ISP that he/she is terminating the subscription to the ISP Service.
    10. Re:Is this legal? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The problem, as we saw with the data AOL released last year, is that there is most certainly identifiable data in the clicks, such as phone numbers, credit card numbers, usernames, passwords, real names, social security numbers, medical information and other private data.

      That's not the only problem. Let's say for the sake of argument that you don't use adblock and you do load images from, say, doubleclick that have unique URLs. If that URL exists in your search data, then even if your IP has been cleared, and replaced with some other identifier that groups the clicks together (without grouping clicks the information is fairly useless) they can tie all of that activity to you, and your IP (from their logs.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:Is this legal? by Thaelon · · Score: 0

      FUD.

      Clicks don't contain any such information.

      --

      Question everything

    12. Re:Is this legal? by slowbad · · Score: 1
      Done without consent? But do you really believe any website when they implicitly state they won't ?

      Go over to Google News, create an alert, submit/confirm your email address and then consider this:
      "Google will not sell or share your email address"

      Does that mean a class action suit against them every time they comply with a government request?

    13. Re:Is this legal? by Joebert · · Score: 1

      This is what scares me, I clicked "I agree" on my 38-page SBC DSL contract without reading the fine lines.

      Alas, gone are the days when they made all the important stuff real small & stuck it at the bottom so you could find it easily.
      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    14. Re:Is this legal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Google will not sell or share your email address"

      Does that mean a class action suit against them every time they comply with a government request?


      Depends what you mean be request. You are not allowed to have a contract that violates the law. Since you can be obliged by law to hand over information to comply with a court order, a contract saying that you won't comply with the law isn't valid.

      So saying that "Google will not sell or share your email address" implies at a minimum unless required to do so by law.

      However, you would have a case if they handed over information for a mere request that was not backed by force of law.

    15. Re:Is this legal? by nacturation · · Score: 1

      FUD.

      Clicks don't contain any such information. A click is the term used to describe the request of a particular URL. Of course an OS-level mousedown event doesn't contain that info, but any search on Google for which the URL is logged will reveal what you were searching for.

      eg: http://www.google.com/search?q=inoperable+brain+tu mor
      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    16. Re:Is this legal? by jackv · · Score: 1

      The danager with keyword matching , which is what these systems are based on , is the contextual aspect. Yes, someone has typed in a particular site , but what did they do on it and also where they the ones on it?

  3. Apologies to HAL 9000 by athloi · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Good lord, it's full of... porn"

  4. What if we... by pchoppin · · Score: 0

    just stop using the mouse?

    No more clicks.

    --
    Take your mod and shove it!
  5. Yes by memeplex · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It is WITH user consent via the 99.9%-unread EULA. Compete could license data from say, NetZero, also funded by Charles River. Or maybe from Alexa toolbar-collected data, since the Alexa Research team all went to Compete around the year 2000. Read the EULA.

    1. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alexa doesn't buy or sell usage trails.

  6. Cancel or Agree? by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    And to think all this time I thought cancel meant something else.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Cancel or Agree? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cancel = the ISP Can Sell your data?

  7. Insert joke here by thib_gc · · Score: 2, Funny

    Insert joke about a click business represented by a guy named Cancel here.

    1. Re:Insert joke here by fbjon · · Score: 2, Funny

      I won't Allow that.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    2. Re:Insert joke here by pklinken · · Score: 0

      CTO David 'Click' Cancel ?

    3. Re:Insert joke here by Joebert · · Score: 2, Funny

      It has Abbot & Costello written all over it.

      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
  8. Who's buying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For curiosity's sake, who is buying this info from ISP's? Spammers?

  9. So, who's going to be the first to... by msauve · · Score: 2, Funny

    write a randomizer (using wget?) to pollute their data?

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:So, who's going to be the first to... by memeplex · · Score: 0, Troll

      With all due respect, their business is not evil. They're creating value for their customers by providing pretty straightforward market data. This helps businesses like yours find potential customers. If you're really that worried about Big Brother, cancel all your subscriptions and go live in a cave.

    2. Re:So, who's going to be the first to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With all due respect, their business is not evil. They're creating value for their customers by providing pretty straightforward market data. This helps businesses like yours find potential customers. If you're really that worried about Big Brother, cancel all your subscriptions and go live in a cave. If you had a point to make, perhaps then you shouldn't have been downloading so many pictures from fatnakedlatinowomen.com and assmama.com. Sorry I don't think we can really take a guy that downloads that much porn seriously. Now all I can think of is what kind of pervert you must be and how everything you say must be colored by your sexual inadequacies. You poor wretched thing.

      Oh what was that you say about Big brother, oh who cares, your just another sicko with a keyboard. Oh you say we should just listen to what you have to say and not care about that one time you downloaded a pdf on breast implants for men? Oh and did you actually know what age those girls were, you know on that European website you go to every Monday night after a long day at work around 10:55 just after your wife goes to bed? They said they were all 18... ya right! Does your wife know about that? Hmm... maybe she should.

      Oh but don't worry, just let your Party do its job... you didn't need that local public park did you, much better to have another strip mall... you know all those jobs and think of all the money in taxes we can spend on building new schools, not to mention that the developer is very generous, if you know what I mean. Don't need too many questions getting in the way of progress. Think your taxes are too high, well well, we need to build all those prisons just in case a pervert like you gets too far out of line. Perhaps you think that Freedom is free? Well, I can assure you the ones that have it are all paid up so you'd best get with the program. Mr. Pervert

    3. Re:So, who's going to be the first to... by Dunbal · · Score: 2, Insightful

      With all due respect, their business is not evil.

          If they're really not evil then where is the harm in obtaining my consent first? Well?

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    4. Re:So, who's going to be the first to... by memeplex · · Score: 1

      If they're really not evil then where is the harm in obtaining my consent first? Well?
      No harm. They did. You clicked "agreed." If not, you have a case.
    5. Re:So, who's going to be the first to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You clicked 'agree' when you signed up for your ISP. Read their Terms of Service. Seriously.

  10. bring it on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe that I own the copyright on all data generated by my mouse clicking, who should I be sending the lawsuit to?

    1. Re:bring it on by Telanis+Blackwood · · Score: 2, Interesting

      More importantly, if it's my clicks, why don't I get paid for them? I should get compensation for the carpal tunnel generating all their clicks.

      --
      See this? This is a comment. Learn from this.
    2. Re:bring it on by veganboyjosh · · Score: 1

      i'm still trying to figure out a way to get the advertisers/businesses who buy consumer/click data to stop paying the middle man collector, as in this instance, and pay me directly for telling them where i click, what i buy, and for just watching commercials...

    3. Re:bring it on by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      who should I be sending the lawsuit to?

            Sue Google for a billion dollars. Everyone else is...

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    4. Re:bring it on by lastchance_000 · · Score: 1

      You can't - you are neither the customer nor the provider. You are the product.

    5. Re:bring it on by Joebert · · Score: 1

      It's no good if you know you're being watched.
      They want to know what you do when you think nobody is looking.

      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    6. Re:bring it on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean they are interested in the contents of my nostrils?

  11. Re:Who gives a rats ass? by spun · · Score: 5, Funny

    You all act so fuckin high and mighty - Privacy is a moot point to argue when you live in your parents basement.

    You know I'm right


    Son, your mother and I have said it before and we'll say it again: if you didn't have such a fixation on ostrich porn, we wouldn't have to monitor your net connection. When you're 18 and you have a place of your own then you can look at all the flightless bird porn you like, but not a moment sooner. Do you have any idea what it did to your little sister to come home and find you naked and covered in egg yolks with your head in a box of sand and feathers stuck up your ass?

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  12. Possible by HomelessInLaJolla · · Score: 3, Informative

    While a counterattack is possible there are two mitigating factors:

    First, philosophically, it is always the course of greater wisdom to explore extinguishing the problem using passive resistance (eg. avoiding offending services). Sadly, this is rarely effective against a determined aggressor but it does prevent unnecessary conflict by establishing a baseline of just how determined the aggressor is.

    Second, in terms of time, the information gathering industry is way ahead of us and the internet laws are written to be easily used against people who would interfere with their exploits.

    All in all, though, data pool pollution would be an effective approach if the aggressor has been determined to be resolute and the legal aspect weren't so grim.

    --
    the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
  13. ATTN: SWITCHEURS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you don't know what Cmd-Shift-1 and Cmd-Shift-2 are for, GTFO.
    If you think Firefox is a decent Mac application, GTFO.
    If you're still looking for the "maximize" button, GTFO.
    If you don't know Clarus from Carl Sagan, GTFO.

    Bandwagon jumpers are not welcome among real Mac users. Keep your filthy PC fingers to yourself.

  14. Seem reasonable. Almost by value_added · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For his part, David Cancel told Ars that he "strongly supports an increase in the methods and degree to which disclosure is communicated," not only for clickstream data but for any kind of data collected on users' personal surfing habits.

    Nicely put. I'd even go so far as to suggest it's even nicer than what we typically hear during White House press conferences.

    He stated that "all users should be informed explicitly when their data can be sold to a third party."

    The tricky part. A nice sounding pronouncement, but it sidesteps the issue of whether they are, and if so, to what extent, etc. And it overlooks what we should expect, which is typically a progression starting with a scandal, followed by a Mistakes Were Made apology, followed by calls to action and the scattered efforts of those affected but who otherwise have little say in the matter, and if we're lucky, a legislator giving a There Oughta Be a Law speech before some subcomittee.

    I've often wondered what the cable companies are doing with respect to TV watching. On the one hand, it seems perfectly reasonable that they could devise a system whereby they could collect statistics on my viewing habits and sell them to Nielsen's. On the other, I'm not aware of whether they can, have plans to, or already do. Maybe someone more knowledgable can clue me in.

  15. Cancel is an Italian family name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Probably was shortened from Cancelorallow when they passed through Ellis Island.

  16. Is this IANAL but...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The practical upshot of this is, I've never seen a contract. I called them up to activate service over the phone. No EULAs, no clicking, no "I agree," nothing."

    Dammit! For a bunch of geeks you all can be dumber than the common-man you make fun of. Just how many times do you have to be told about implicit contracts? Sheesh!

    1. Re:Is this IANAL but...? by Sparr0 · · Score: 2, Informative

      One less than you have now told us. I have an implicit contract with all of my utility companies. They give me [something], I give them money in return. That's it, the bulk of our spoken and/or implicit agreement. If either of us want more out of the deal, it would need to be spelled out and signed.

  17. Windows Vista Version by mikehilly · · Score: 1, Funny
    Looks like you are clicking a link...

    Cancel or Allow Cancel to view your clicks?

    huh?

  18. The value of most of my clicks... by Butisol · · Score: 0

    What are they going to do with all my clicks at clownporn-bdsm.com? Try to sell me a second subscription?

  19. Easy to connect to cookie/ip data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bet that it is relatively easy to match the anonymous identities in this data set with other data sets from websites that collect ip/cookie data. A few common urls in a certain order... heck they prob don't even need to be in the correct order or time stamped. The cookie data may even be right in the url.

  20. This is a VIRTUAL Warentless Search! by BoRegardless · · Score: 1

    Boy if HotSpotVPN is not going to make hay off of this, I don't know what will.

  21. EULA doesn't always prevail by Infonaut · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It is WITH user consent via the 99.9%-unread EULA.

    If the EULA enforces things that a reasonable person wouldn't expect to find in a contract of this type, the unreasonable elements of the EULA may be found unenforceable by the courts.

    Whether the right to sell data relating to your Internet use to third parties something a reasonable person would expect is debatable. Someone could challenge those portions of the EULA covering click info, on the basis that they are not to be reasonably expected in an end user license covering a contract for Internet access.

    The challenge wouldn't necessarily prevail in court, but it could be made. The legal theory behind this is that when one party holds a substantial bargaining advantage over the other, and has employed contractual language that is dense and lengthy, it is unreasonable to expect that the disadvantaged party will be able to spot every element of the contractual language. After all, the company can employ a lawyer to put all sorts of bizarre language into a contract, and most consumers are not schooled in such language, nor do they necessarily have the time to go through the language of each and every EULA. Thus, if the party with an advantage employs tricky language in the EULA, that language can be considered unenforceable.

    --
    Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
    1. Re:EULA doesn't always prevail by Original+Replica · · Score: 1

      Now if this "permission to track users for purposes of selling info" clause is found in the EULA for all major ISPs, whose case does that strengthen? If everyone has it, then it is standard and thus should be reasonably expected. On the other hand, if everyone has it, then the user is at a complete disadvantage on that point. The case would probably go to the ISPs, if for no other reason than "the terrorists" excuse. They have to track everyone it's their patriotic duty.

      --
      We are all just people.
    2. Re:EULA doesn't always prevail by DragonWriter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If the EULA enforces things that a reasonable person wouldn't expect to find in a contract of this type, the unreasonable elements of the EULA may be found unenforceable by the courts.

      Whether the right to sell data relating to your Internet use to third parties something a reasonable person would expect is debatable. Someone could challenge those portions of the EULA covering click info, on the basis that they are not to be reasonably expected in an end user license covering a contract for Internet access.


      Since most of the time there is a separate "privacy policy" containing such provisions, and you have to separately acknowledge the privacy policy, and since it would be very hard to make the case that a reasonable person would not expect to find agreements as to what information would be protected as private and what information would be shared in a "privacy policy", I don't expect that that's going to be effective against most agreements.

    3. Re:EULA doesn't always prevail by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      I dont know about you but I would check for stuff like that in a ISP Contract.
      I highly doubt a court would find such contracts unenfoceable.

    4. Re:EULA doesn't always prevail by memeplex · · Score: 1

      Tell it to the judge ;^)

    5. Re:EULA doesn't always prevail by mindbuilder · · Score: 1

      In the EULAs I've seen they say they sell aggregate info about where users surf but not personally identifiable info. It just occurred to me that their trick may be that they don't consider your IP address to be "personably identifiable" info. If that's the case then I'd say that if they are selling the browsing history of IP addresses then they are in violation of their EULA because I think a reasonable person would consider their IP address as personally identifiable, especially if it were a static address.

  22. Re:Seem reasonable. Almost by jfengel · · Score: 1

    Mistakes Were Made apology Usually by the guy who Takes Responsibility, in the form of issuing a press release. (As opposed to, say, resigning, being fired, going to jail, paying a fine, actually changing the underlying cause, etc.)
  23. Typo by merreborn · · Score: 2, Informative

    That's $0.40 dollars per user, not $40. The cents sign is missing from the summary.

    1. Re:Typo by bitt3n · · Score: 1

      That's $0.40 dollars per user, not $40. The cents sign is missing from the summary.

      Except for Verizon customers, who are worth $0.40 cents.
    2. Re:Typo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it's Verizon selling the data. Then there's no difference between $40 and $0.40.

  24. Re:Who gives a rats ass? by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    flightless bird porn

          March of the Penguins was so damned sexy, I get hot just thinking about it. Can't believe the rating it had. Oh and Emus! Don't get me started on Emus! Oh God! Anyway, at least now we know what the dodos died from...

          Too funny. Do chickens count?

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  25. Master Plan by Joebert · · Score: 1

    Mwahaha, my plan to distort tracking information by clicking on millions of porn links has not been in vain !

    --
    Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    1. Re:Master Plan by Adambomb · · Score: 1

      Yes because if you want to raise eyebrows, be a male clicking on porn links. They'd never expect it!

      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
  26. Re:this coupldn't be more off topic if it tried by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

    aw come on mods, that had to be at least a -3 off topic.

    it's not fair. I've had loads of +2 to +5 moderations, but never a -3, surely you can give me this one thing....

  27. Re:this coupldn't be more off topic if it tried by Joebert · · Score: 1

    I'm tryin, but someone rigged it so I have to have points to take them away.
    It's like applying for a loan at the bank all over again.

    --
    Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
  28. Naive or purposely wrong? by j_heisenberg · · Score: 0, Redundant

    What's wrong (after reading TFA):

    The data is not sold with accompanying user name or information, but merely as a numerical user value. However, it is still theoretically possible to tie this information to a specific ISP account

    only if the ISP leaks something, like a specific identifier (MAC?) or a cookie.

    Cancel said that this clickstream data is "much more comprehensive" than data that is normally gleaned through analyzing search queries

    However, it can't be tied to the user, so no target-advertising etc. can be done. (It's probably just useful for market research)

    And now this one is one from the "No" department:

    Of course, it's an established fact that if you surf the web, your surfing habits can be tracked by any site you happen to visit

    So my bottom line: big difference between a target-marketer and a market research firm.
    And the bottom line of the bottom line: is either Ars or "Cancel" on Goog's/Yahoo's/MSN's payroll?

    1. Re:Naive or purposely wrong? by kenb215 · · Score: 1

      The data is not sold with accompanying user name or information, but merely as a numerical user value. However, it is still theoretically possible to tie this information to a specific ISP account
      only if the ISP leaks something, like a specific identifier (MAC?) or a cookie.

      A URL can have information in it that either identifies you, or can help narrow it down.

      For example, a poor quality website for looking up your IP address might return it in the URL. If you look up your address, the URL would have it. If you edit Wikipedia anonymously, your user talk page, which you might edit frequently, has your IP address in it. If you go to several sites with a narrow userbase, for example a college or business's website, they could try to get all of the IPs that visit those sites and find which ones are common between them. Also, if you have a personal website, with stuff that would only be of interest to you, visiting there several times could make it easy to guess who you are in real life.
  29. Re:this coupldn't be more off topic if it tried by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

    it's not fair, is it...

    I thought I had the perfect method to get a -3 (or who knows, a -5), but still I failed. I don't know what else to do, since I refuse to resort to vulgarity (that being just silly, andd probably cheating..).

    One can get tired of 'excellent' karma after the first six months...

  30. "Reasonable" people? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

    If the EULA enforces things that a reasonable person wouldn't expect to find in a contract of this type, the unreasonable elements of the EULA may be found unenforceable by the courts.

    Where have you been the last 5 or 6 years? This sort of thing is well established in EULAs, and "reasonable" persons who are suppose to read their EULAs, can be "reasonably" expected to know that this sort of thing takes place. I don't think your argument will float.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:"Reasonable" people? by rtb61 · · Score: 1
      How about phone line interception. ADSL is electronic communications on a phone line, as far as I know it is illegal to intercept electronic communications on a phone line except for and restricted to limited quality control monitoring. Um has some one been naughty and needs to spend some time in a room with bars before invading peoples privacy again.

      And for the umpteenth time you can not, absolutely not, in any way shape or form, write a condition into a contract that over rides the law (well techinically speaking if you are stupid enough you certainly can but nobody will enforce it, well except maybe for some courts in Texas)

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  31. Re:Who gives a rats ass? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "You're both so clueless. Who do you think helped insert those feathers?"

  32. Re:Who gives a rats ass? by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It isn't just about your personal privacy. The way that society protects other people's privacy can affect your personal well-being.

    The simplest example is when a group attains political dominance and is able to breach the privacy of anyone who challenges the status quo. If they can cause sufficient embarrassment or publicly humiliate anyone enough to make them unelectable, they can still appear to run open and fully democratic elections without risk of losing their grip on power.

    Society as whole will stagnate and suffer under such conditions, and even if you personally have nothing to hide, chances are that you'll end up suffering too. Although you may not realize it since most people tend to accept that life is the way it is, never wondering if a better life could ever have been an option.

  33. Click Cancel by mrbluze · · Score: 1

    Since obviously it's far too late to Delete, Abort, Retry or Ignore.

    But seriously, what we need is a widespread, free Tor that obfuscates what we browse from our own ISP. That's who we want real anonymity from!

    --
    Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
  34. oh noes by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

    MY ISP knows that I download lots of porn, read slashdot and fark. well, for starters, my ISP serves me those pages. So, um, I'd hope they are involved.

    Though in this case, if they tie names or other identifiers to the data I could see the uproar. I mean we do pay the ISP, so they shouldn't go out of our way to spread our info to others [more than it already is].

    Of course this opens the door to "unlisted" ISP accounts where the ISP doesn't log your data if you pay a premium ...

    oh shit I gave them an idea...

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    1. Re:oh noes by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Yes, you gave them the idea that they can sell you a premium "unlisted" account, then turn around and sell your data anyway. I mean, so far as I'm concerned an honest ISP wouldn't be selling my information in the first place, so why should I believe them when they say they aren't? A decent company would at least have let me know up front, or maybe offered a piece of the action. A discount for the use of my personal information would be nice, hell, my local grocery store does that much.

      Bloodsucking leeches. For some reason (maybe because a lot of ISP managers used to work at SBC or something) communications providers in this country are just, well, sleazy. I used to like Illinois Bell / Ameritech. Always played fair with me. Then SBC picked them and they repeatedly shafted me, overall to the tune of about $3,000. So when Comcast came around with their Digital Phone service in my neighborhood, I switched to them .. and they shafted me (I watched my phone bill grow from $49.95 for two lines to $90 for two lines). Now I'm back to SBC (sorry, I meant AT&T) experimenting with their VoIP offering (very impressive, actually) and I'm waiting for them to somehow shaft me again. I know they will: I just don't think they can resist the temptation. Kinda makes me want to throw up.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  35. Wrong info by Wannabe+Code+Monkey · · Score: 1

    ... tracked for each user. Complete Incorporated's CTO David Cancel...

    ... in terms of dollars per ISP user, although someone in the audience estimated that it was in the range of 40 per user per month...

    The company is Compete Inc., and the estimate was 40 cents per user per month.

    --
    We always knew Comcast was corrupt, here's the proof: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1909890&cid=34545432
  36. Re:Who gives a rats ass? by click2005 · · Score: 1

    Do chickens count?

    Yes, but only to 4.

    --
    I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
  37. I am thankful! by noidentity · · Score: 1

    Before my ISP started selling my clicks, they were piling up all over my apartment. I welcome their new plan!

  38. IP Addresses doesn't always prevail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Re:IP Addresses doesn't always prevail by mindbuilder · · Score: 1

      After a quick check of the link you provided I didn't notice the relevance. What was your point?

    2. Re:IP Addresses doesn't always prevail by mindbuilder · · Score: 1
      Oh I think I get it, I missed that you changed the subject to "IP Addresses don't always prevail". Of course an IP address isn't a reliable or totally specific identifier of a person but I'd say a reasonable person would consider it fairly personally identifiable, at least with the owner of the account. It's not reliable enough to get a judgement against a person, but perhaps reliable enough to get a subpoena.

      Also I was looking over the AT&T privacy policy and it says they sell aggregate info. I guess if you take an individuals browsing history and put it all together it's aggregate info. It also says they use "diagnostic information" to "better market the Services to you and to others". I'm not sure what services they're talking about. Perhaps privacy invading monitoring services? Their privacy contract, like most, is so full of subtle holes that it doesn't seem to say anything other than "you have no privacy". The fact that the privacy contract takes such a large number of words to say you have no privacy, could be taken as evidence that they're trying to deceive the other party to the contract (ie you), and thus the contract might be invalid.

  39. And Fair Enough Too by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 1

    Second, in terms of time, the information gathering industry is way ahead of us and the internet laws are written to be easily used against people who would interfere with their exploits.
    It's akin to vandalism, ruining the work of these companies. However, If you have a problem with the specific practises of this company, perhaps it's worth attacking them from a legal front?
    --
    You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
  40. Gestapo, Mossad, KGB, CIA, FBI, NSA, XYZ care. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Excellent way to obtain political & sensitive targetting data on activists.

  41. Re:Seem reasonable. Almost by fermion · · Score: 1
    It can be argued that such data, if amalgamated, belongs to the ISP. They are the only ones that can reliably collect such information, and it can help them and other services maximize the end user experience. Complaining that they collect this data is like complaining about the people who pick the trash for recyclables and antiques.

    And there is reason to complain in both cases. If the trash digger causes a disturbance, or the ISP forces the user to install software, or causes delays by redirected all requests to a proxy, then this is a problem. Just like the problem of websites that loads images from 10 different ad servers before loading any content. In all cases the service is on the border of no longer providing a net service to the end user. For example, in the case where an ISP demands that user load spyware prior to connection, and many of the Bells once did, is self serving and provides little benefit to the user.

    The profit side really is not an iaaue. Neither is privacy as nothing is private on the internet. The analogy I like to use for situations like this is the grocery store affinity card. Grocery stores provide these cards to better personally track customers. Credit cards work almost as well, but the affinity card guantees that every purchase is registered to a specific person. To make people use the cards, the stores inflate prices on many products, and then allows a "discount" if the customer has a card. To make customers feel like the affinity card has some value, the grocery stores provides significant discounts on few items, items that would have simply been loss leaders in pre-affinity card times. Like all data tracking, most of the benefit is to the service provider, and only a marginal benifit is provided tot the customer. Yet customers seem to love this stores, and have no problem with the grocery store, it agents, and anyone who is sold the data, to know that he or she buys 8 pints of ben&jerry's, 3 packs of condoms, and 1 box of hemorrhoid creme per month. I, OTOH, don't want to deal with having to present my papers every time I check out, so i go to a store that will give me the best prices just because they have the ability to compete without a gimmick.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  42. FON by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Makes you wonder why a company would want to offer free Internet service now doesn't it ? They've got to be making there money somehow.

  43. No you didn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you sign up for Comcast and Verizon, you never click on the "I Agree". People tell me it's in the software they ask you to load. But as I never loaded that software, I can't say for sure.

  44. Encryption? by Graham+J+-+XVI · · Score: 1

    This reminds me of something I've been mulling around in the back of my mind a lot lately - I think the net needs to move towards every connection being encrypted. I mean, why are we sending URLs as plaintext in the first place? The only thing my ISP should see is a target IP address and an encrypted stream. Maybe the internet powers that be should be coming up with new IP standards (eTCP?)

  45. What about... by mikiN · · Score: 1

    caching proxies? Wouldn't they skew the collected data?

    --
    The Hacker's Guide To The Kernel: Don't panic()!
  46. Service vs product by jetxee · · Score: 1

    It's typical to all communication providers around the globe. This is what happens when you pay for service rather than for product. Any provider can always (re)invent some bazarre kind of `service', to make you pay more for the same thing. It is just a question of wording.

    P.S. Sure, they will always sell your private data to anyone with an open wallet. No matter what they pretend.

    P.P.S. Any "honest" ISP may easily become dishonest after the mere change of management.

    1. Re:Service vs product by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      P.P.P.S. Doesn't even take a change of management, just hard times.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  47. Comedy Routine? by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    Anyone else see potential for an Abbot & Costello homage here?

    "What should I do, Cancel Allowing, or Allow Cancel?"
    "Who wants to read your clicks"
    "Cancel"
    "I didn't say to cancel the dialog, I asked who was reading these."
    "I just told you, Cancel."

    The captcha word is Library, which doesn't sell your clicks.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  48. Competition can "solve" this by jdavidb · · Score: 1

    Assuming you think this is a problem (and I'll wager most of us here do), competition can solve this. Some companies can charge more for having a privacy clause in your contract. Others can compete by offering less service but at the expense of your data. Effectively you'd subsidize your internet connection by selling metrics on yourself.

    The only problem, of course, is if fraud is going on: if companies are using the data in a way inconsistent with their agreements.

  49. My click record.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    click..clickclick....click...click..clickclick

  50. your sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Cowards need not reply. If you don't care to sign your comment, I don't care to believe anything you say.


    Fuck you, asshole.