Slashdot Mirror
CenturyLink Blocked Its Customers' Internet Access in Order To Show an Ad (arstechnica.com)
CenturyLink briefly disabled the Internet connections of customers in Utah last week and allowed them back online only after they acknowledged an offer to purchase filtering software. From a report: CenturyLink falsely claimed that it was required to do so by a Utah state law that says ISPs must notify customers "of the ability to block material harmful to minors." In fact, the new law requires only that ISPs notify customers of their filtering software options "in a conspicuous manner"; it does not say that the ISPs must disable Internet access until consumers acknowledge the notification. The law even says that ISPs may make the notification "with a consumer's bill," which shouldn't disable anyone's Internet access.
Coincidentally, CenturyLink's blocking of customer Internet access occurred days before the one-year anniversary of the Federal Communications Commission repeal of net neutrality rules, which prohibited blocking and throttling of Internet access. "Just had CenturyLink block my Internet and then inject this page into my browser... to advertise their paid filtering software to me," software engineer and Utah resident Rich Snapp tweeted on December 9. "Clicking OK on the notice then restored my Internet... this is NOT okay!"
Coincidentally, CenturyLink's blocking of customer Internet access occurred days before the one-year anniversary of the Federal Communications Commission repeal of net neutrality rules, which prohibited blocking and throttling of Internet access. "Just had CenturyLink block my Internet and then inject this page into my browser... to advertise their paid filtering software to me," software engineer and Utah resident Rich Snapp tweeted on December 9. "Clicking OK on the notice then restored my Internet... this is NOT okay!"
Every day it seems I see more and more real news articles that look like they belong on The Onion.
Just remember that when providers find new and innovative ways provide services that make them more money.
In many countries, the wiretapping and modification of private communication is illegal, and such activities could result in massive fines and/or prison time for those involved. Food for thought.
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
Slashdot will resume after this commercial break.
Equifax. Get Unlimited Credit Score reporting. Easy to access, no service refusal for anyone.
That is NOT OK.
We're in the phase of a civilization where people get ridiculous, right before the collapse.
It happened a while back, Interrupting my experence on the internet forcing me to make a decision if i wanted a porn block or not (fuck no).
it does not say that the ISPs must disable Internet access until consumers acknowledge the notification. The law even says that ISPs may make the notification "with a consumer's bill," which shouldn't disable anyone's Internet access.
First, what they did actually complies with Subsection (1)(b)(ii)(A). We may not like their approach, but it does comply with the law. Go read the law, it is a rather sparse 5 pages.
Coincidentally, CenturyLink's blocking of customer Internet access occurred days before the one-year anniversary of the Federal Communications Commission repeal of net neutrality rules, which prohibited blocking and throttling of Internet access.
Second, the proximity to the anniversary of the NN deregulation is both specious and disingenuous. If you know anything about how corporations work you know that legal compliance is an exercise in minimization. The CenturyLink corporate counsel (probably more than one) had to weigh in on this and conclude that this was done in a way that both met the requirements of the law and also did not expose the company to additional liability. It probably had to clear multiple similar hurdles.
So, just like I do when a programmer implements a spec and I look at the product and say, "wow that was wrong," my first thought is always, "the spec must be defective." Granted, there are times where the programmer just makes the wrong choice, but more often than not, the spec really is deficient. If it was a whole team of programmers that produced the wrong thing then the only sensible conclusion is that the spec was faulty.
In this case, the army of lawyers came to a conclusion on a course of action that is making people say, "wow, that cannot be right.". Based on my earlier reasoning, the law is poorly written.
I was in the mist of rebooting my Tivo Roamo box, and it simply wouldn't complete its network setup. I spent a good 30 minutes diagnosing my home network. It was getting its IP address via DHCP fine, was pingable, etc....
Its only when I went to the URL that the Tivo was telling me to visit that I ran into the "ad" (I'm in Utah). Sure enough, as soon as I acknowledged the ad, my Tivo was able to connect to the Tivo service. I found it more than a bit annoying that CenturyLink blocked my Internet access and forced me to read an ad for basically web filtering software. I don't have a copy of the ad anymore, but from what I remember, it was mostly talking about blocking porn.
So this blocked more than simple web browsing.
Centurylink may not have been required by "law" to block access until a specific acknowledgement was given, but it was certainly required by the litigiousness of our decrepit society to do so.
Without it, you know there would be a class action lawsuit claiming someone's child was harmed by porn because CenturyLink failed to show them their filtering options. By forcing acknowledgement, they are covering their butts against such a suit.
The geniuses at Centurylink think the internet is the same thing as http on a browser. Blocking internet access and redirecting http traffic until you agree to terms breaks:
Streaming devices.
Security systems.
Cameras
Skype
VoIP
Remote access (think DVR, thermostats, and any other remotely controlled device)
So if you're away on vacation and you have monitoring systems setup to alert you of thieves or freezing temps in the house, Centurylink will break this stuff until you get home and click on a web page!
What level of management said this was OK to do?
And was this simply the cheapest alternative?
Most people don't read their bills unless there is a significant discrepancy in the amount due, so if there is no regularion saying you can't do this, maybe someone said "hey, here's a way we can ensure all our customers read the ad and this will be more likely to generate revenue".
The state did not require this. I guess you can't even be bothered to read a fucking summary.
No ISP would be stupid enough to do this unless it was legally required - which it was by Utah law. Network neutrality as regulation will bring MORE insane interpretations of how an ISP should be have like this one - not fewer.
In short if you like ISP's cutting off access for idiotic messaging from the state, then my all means push for more regulation of the internet.
As a resident of Utah, I think you missed part of the summary (not to mention the actual law). ISPs are required to notify customers that filter software is available. My own ISP just notified me through my paper bill.
So what all did they block in doing this?
Did VoIP phones stop working? Did ssh tunnels break? Did VPN connections go down? Did NetFlix get blocked? Did email access go down? If someone is on vacation, will their homes freeze if their thermostats can't connect? Will security systems fail?
Did they block access on an IP level or DNS? DId they mess only with port 80? If they tried to redirect on 443, then the browsers wouldn't display due to the certificate mismatch, but most sites are https now. Are users who set their DNS to another provider unaffected?
Depending on how they put in the notification, they may have left most non-browser stuff working, or they may have risked property damage by disabling smart home devices.
The linked story has no details.
Ahh, but article does link to reddit, where reports are that they're only intercepting port 80. I very rarely access anything over port 80. If that's accurate, then anything impacted by the change is broken. I wonder how many people haven't noticed, as all the major sites are fully https?
Isn't CenturyLink the telecom with the extensive history in secretly downsizing employees' pensions?
Flip phone web navigation uses tab order. Unless a website did something with script that would constitute an ADA or Section 508 violation, it should be possible to tab to the button to leave the captive portal.
The state did not require this. I guess you can't even be bothered to read a fucking summary.
Perhaps we should require people to read TFS and acknowledge it by clicking "Ok" before they can post. :-)
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
They just had to notify, they could have sent a letter, and email a text... there's a lot of options.
As stuff like this can mess with VPN tunnels and lead to odd errors on things that don't have an full browser.
What about remote systems that just have an internet link and some server that without an local user to log into.
Mormon porn comes in two types. One fetishizes the "temple garment" underwear. The other is swimsuit photography covered with a bubble-shaped solid color mask to help a dirty mind fill in the blanks.
Even overlooking CenturyLink's failure to realize that not just web browsers connect to the Internet, what assurance do they have that the person clicking the OK button is anyone in a position to make a decision on whether or not that household should have their filtering software? Some kid in the house could have been the first one to see and acknowledge it.
That will stop this from being possible.
Instead of the ad, all you'd seen in your browser is a security warning that someone is trying to hijack your connection - someone like your ISP.
Superbowl?? more like buy our cable tv for error free viewing. Ha with no network nuatrlay they can slow down 3rd party video and have an pop ad saying DON'T MISS OUT ON THE BIG GAME WITH COMCRAP TV!
Get no caps for TV USE / FULL HD / NO buffering.
This is FCC Chief Ajit Pai's dream come true.
What about an SLA and an outage due to this?? will they have to pay out over that? or is drive to your office and open an web bower from an local system covers there ass.
I know everyone's first reaction is to get upset about this, but given just how truly, awfully invasively this was done, coupled with the timing. I truly think we have the greatest BOFH since I don't know when on our hands here.
How many of you would have been able to devise something this awe-inspiring if your boss came to you & said "we need try to send this notification to all our users & see if we can sell them some filtering software"?
I mean it - the person that did this deserves recognition.
Except it wasn't required. One of the co-sponsors of the bill even said so:
Bill sponsor Todd Weiler, a Republican state senator, confirmed on Twitter that the law "did not require that—and no other ISP has done that to comply with the law. They were only required to notify customers of options via email or with an invoice."
M-m-m-monster fail.
No, this was just a shitty company acting shitty to hawk their shitty software then trying to act like a law made them do it.
I'm a Centrylink customer in Utah and I didn't see this popup. However, I also use PfSense's dns resolver so maybe that had something to do with it.
My favorite of which being an old-timesy towne crier.
It wasn't stupid. It was astute. It was a (maybe unwitting) call to restore net neutrality by showing what will happen without it. Again, we must demand they be put under common carrier rules, and that there be no priority in any particular content. We can do our own filtering, thank you.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
If you're a CenturyLink customer in Utah and you haven't received any other notification of this blocking service and you don't use port 80 between now and December 31 2018, CenturyLink will be in violation of the new law as they haven't informed you of this optional service.
They're liable for a fine of $10,000
âoeNo ISP would be stupid enough to...â
ha ha oh boy, someone has never dealt with CenturyLink.
No, no you can't do your own filtering. Think of the children!
When they disable my internet without warning and suddenly my 911 calls over my VoIP line don't work any more!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
I'm in Utah and a couple of weeks ago got a text message from my cell provider explaining I could install an app that would help protect minors from harmful materials. At the time I was a bit shaken and couldn't understand why I was singled out for that. I hadn't heard of the law until now and I'm pleased to know the message wasn't a warning about my personal internet use. Whew!
We can never know for sure in this timeline, but your assertion fails on plausibility grounds.
The thing you can't quite seem to grasp is there are ways to comply with this law without blocking someone's Internet and displaying an ad. The fact that they chose this particularly idiotic method if complying with the law is the problem.....but it was done by a large corporation, so you are unable to understand that difference.
Remind me, what's net neutrality again? About.. not doing anything to alter traffic speed? A law that enforces net neutrality literally asks ISPs to do nothing. There's nothing to interpret. It says "do not f*ck around with your network", which is the exact opposite of what you're suggesting.
This problem was 100% PEBCAK. Sure, the state could have clarified was "conspicuous" means - it's not without fault. However the lawmakers weren't programmers and didn't write exception handling in their law, and some employee at CenturyLink decided to do something stupid, probably without asking their Legal department that would have then clarified the ask.
THERE WILL BE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR LIES NAZI FAGGOT PROPAGANDIST KEN DOLL
Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING. Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
Their system crashed a couple of times leaving me this nugget. /http:\/\/$host\/index.html\?wgsid=([^&]*)(?:&wgurl=(.*))*/ ) {
$wg->session_id($1);
$wgurl = $2;
} else {
$wg->session_id('NO_SESSION_ID');
}
my $url = 'http://customer.notify.centurylink.com/utah_restore_internet.html';
# Allow override for debug/testing/demo
if( $wg->is_internal_ip( $wg->remote_ip() )) {
my $uname = $cgi->param('uname');
if( defined $uname and $uname =~ /^[A-Za-z0-9]{4,16}$/ ) {
$wg->uid( $uname );
} else {
$wg->uid('accounttest');
}
}
# Perform redirect
my $uname = $wg->uid();
my $tn = $wg->wtn();
if( $@ or $wg->err() ne '' ) {
$wg->log_it( "$uname ($tn) ERROR: Self-release redirected to error.html" );
print redirect( -uri => '/error.html' );
} elsif( $uname eq 'mnlabppp06' or $uname eq 'wgtest-hlrn' or $uname eq 'wgtest-mpls' or $uname eq 'wgtest-stpl') {
$wg->log_it( "Test user $uname - skipping self-release" );
print redirect( -uri => $url );
mark_wall_user_out($tn,$uname);
} elsif( $wg->is_internal_ip( $wg->remote_ip() )) {
$wg->log_it( "$uname ($tn) Internal ip quickout'ed. Not released or DB updated." );
$wg->bigip_quickout();
print header( -type => 'text/plain' );
print "Would now be redirected to $url";
} else {
if ( self_release() ) {
$wg->log_it( "$uname ($tn): Self-released" );
} else {
$wg->log_it( "$uname ($tn): ERROR: Self-release failed." );
}
print redirect( -uri => $url );
mark_wall_user_out($tn,$uname);
}
sub self_release {
# Update BigIP quickout table depending and initiate releasing customer from walled garden
my $quickout_time = shift; # Value in seconds
$quickout_time ? $wg->bigip_quickout($quickout_time) : $wg->bigip_quickout();
$wg->release();
} # End self_release
sub mark_wall_user_out {
my $tn = shift;
my $uname = shift;
my $tn1;
my $tn2;
if ( $tn =~ /:/ ) {
($tn1,$tn2) = split(/:/, $tn);
} else {
$tn1 = $tn;
$tn2 = 0;
}
my $sql = q( UPDATE state_of_utah
SET wg_out_time = NOW(), end_process = NOW(), wg_status = 'COMPLETE'
WHERE tn = ? AND notice_year = YEAR(curdate() )
);
$wg->log_it( "$uname ($tn): Self-released" );
my $result = $wg->do_db_write( $sql,$tn1 );
if ( $result->{RowsChanged} > 0 ) {
$wg->log_it( "User $uname ($tn) mark_wall_user_out update successful." );
return 1;
} else {
$wg->log_it( "ERROR: User $uname ($tn) mark_wall_user_out update failed with tn $tn1. SQL: $sql" );
if ( $tn2 ) {
# Attempt to update db table with 2nd bonded TN if first TN failed
$result = $wg->do_db_write( $sql,$tn2 );
if ( $result->{RowsChanged} > 0 ) {
$wg->log_it( "User $uname ($tn) mark_wall_user_out update successful with 2nd tn $tn2." );
return 1;
} else {
$wg->log_it( "ERROR: User $uname ($tn) mark_wall_user_out update failed with tn $tn2. SQL: $sql" );
}
}
return 0;
}
} # End mark_wall_user_out
Sorry I have no clue how to make it formated nicely.
#!/usr/bin/perl use warnings; use strict; use CGI qw/:standard/; use WalledGarden; my $CACHETIME = 3600; our %config; do '/etc/wg.conf'; my $wg = WalledGarden->new(); my $cgi = CGI->new(); my $UD = new Cache::Memcached { 'namespace' => 'excessive_use', 'servers' => $config{ 'memcached_servers' }, 'debug' => 0, 'compress_threshold' => 10_000, }; # Parse the incoming URL string my $host = $ENV{HTTP_HOST}; my $referer = $ENV{HTTP_REFERER}; my $wgurl; if( $referer =~
People could have. What if one of the affected customers had VoIP (eg. Obi) and was attempting to call 911 to save someone's life? The call would be blocked, and the attached phone would give no indication as to why.
CenturyLink should burn for this.
sig: sauer
Kendall is a known lying faggot since forever. Don't feed the idiot.
So you want to penalize them for achieving the goal of the law better than their competitors?
This isn't better. They interfered with a host of non-browser Internet connections, and did not ensure that the customer actually saw the ad. It's not like someone else in the household can't click "OK".
So, in terms of actually reaching all of their customers, this ad is not as effective as something printed on their bill. It also potentially opens them up to penalties under this law, since their customer may not see the ad.
So no, this is about the worst possible way of attempting to comply with the law.
This is just a 'fuck you, because we can' move. Never mind Tweedy Pai and the FCC. Shareholders need to short any company that risks political retribution by pulling childish crap like this.
Have gnu, will travel.
If my ISP ever does this to me, I will not acknowledge anything. I will however call them up, let them know my service has stopped working, and cancel my account with them.
Why is this news?
I've been on a shared connection with Century Link as the primary. Whenever traffic stops flowing I have to manually go outside HTTPS and as soon as I am I am redirected to a page from Century Link saying the connection has been flagged for using torrenting software to possibly download movies.
This happens at schools and the libraries here all the time and once or twice on a neighbors wifi connection.
Fact is this is how Century Link notifies people. It's not unusual for them. It's there default.
Why is anyone surprised they would do this to try and sell you porn blockers?
Would be great to be away from home and no longer able to access my network because nobody is there to find / load / click on an ad.
Just in case you thought that this won't affect you: CenturyLink owns one of the largest global backbone operators in the world, Level 3 Communications. When Level 3 and Cogent spat over peering terms, the world watches these tier 1 network operators and the internet slows down.
Not likely. The author says they lost internet access, but they likely only redirected the HTTP and HTTPS ports.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Are they the only ISP in Utah? If not, tell them to piss up a rope and switch to another provider. I'd rather send a message that way then expect any politician to do something that helps their constituents.
One of the people who responded on his Twitter account said his ssh session went dead.
sig: sauer
It wasn't stupid. It was astute. It was a (maybe unwitting) call to restore net neutrality by showing what will happen without it. Again, we must demand they be put under common carrier rules, and that there be no priority in any particular content. We can do our own filtering, thank you.
The law requires ISPs to notify customers that there is filtering software. The law does not require that all customers use the same filtering software (or any filtering software at all). CenturyLink probably used this methodology because it's already a common practice (eg. force guests to read a ToS page before getting access to the rest of the net).
Good points. They need to do all of the following to increase the probability of their filter option being seen:
1) Use technique to display ad on browser and block internet until ad is clicked
2) Put message on bill and require a return mailed form with a signed and witnessed signature of acceptance
3) Repeat Step 1 randomly once a week for 6 months to make sure all householders have a good chance of seeing it
4) Fuck it, why not repeat step two a couple more times on random bills over the next 12 months
From reading the link they aren't obviously related. After choosing OK *and* restarting everything the problem persisted. It *might* be related, but excuse me if I don't take a single isolated report, especially one where clicking OK didn't solve the issue, as proof positive.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Next time, perhaps their CEO should just go on the 6 o'clock news and read a statement while he stabs himself in the eye with a fork. That's pretty conspicuous.
But, in the spirit of not having laws mis-interpreted by sociopathic idiots, all laws against kicking SuperKendal in the nuts are hereby repealed. Sorry, it's the only way to avoid mis-understandings.
Let's see, there is a law against robbing the liquor store so Nutzy McFruitcake burns it down to make sure he doesn't rob it. Shall we make armed robbery legal to avoid future misunderstandings?
problem solved. need to start making these fuckers afraid to do shit like this.
This is incorrect. The FCC's Open Internet Order, which most people erroneously referred to as "Net Neutrality", was 400 pages, and was voted on and passed before any member of the public read it.
Why would it take hundreds of pages to say "do not f*ck around with your network"? Unless either (1) there's plenty to interpret, or (2) what the FCC wrote was not Net Neutrality.
The correct answer we have standards organizations that define how the Internet works, not legislatures.
Wonder what the public key field is for?
The thing you cannot seem to grasp is simple cause and effect. Yes they COULD have complied differently, but they did not. They complied only in reaction to what the government demanded; without that demand there would have been no action.
Hopefully that is simple enough even for the dullards here on Slashdot to grasp, now I am truly done having done my duty to inform and educate.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Sounds like hacking of a protected computer system to me.
Through the fuckers in prison. Or better yet take them out in the parking lot and shoot them.
I would actually be okay with this.
Wouldn't work, they'd treat it like a TOS agreement and just click Ok.
Donald Trump, on a crusade to make Nixon look respectable
What if one of the affected customers had VoIP (eg. Obi) and was attempting to call 911 to save someone's life? The call would be blocked, and the attached phone would give no indication as to why.
CenturyLink should burn for this.
Hello. I work at a provider support helpdesk.
Consumer internet service is not considered an "emergency communication" service in that manner. Carriers are not liable in a life-or-death way for the performance/reliability of data services. This is why if you get behind in your bill most providers will shut off your pay-TV and home internet, but keep the phone service active for while after that. Or if you're on fiber optic services and there is a power outage in your home usually only the (telco provided) phone service will be backed up by the UPS your provider installs. Data and IPTV are left unpowered. Consumer home internet is sold as an "entertainment service". If people choose to run phone services over it with a Ooma, or Vonage, etc, that's on them, but it's not our problem if you can't call out, have poor audio, or dropped calls, as long as the service is being delivered as sold. Are your speeds good? Are your ping times within acceptable standards? Then you're getting the "dumb pipe" you wanted.
The same goes for streaming services, too. That's the thing about net neutrality. If you don't want providers to discriminate and treat OTT video streaming differently, that means the streams gets treated as just any other type of data. If your speeds are good, and you're not getting packet loss/latency issues it's not our job to figure out why your Netflix is buffering all the time.
Just a small addendum.
I'm not saying I support CenturyLink's actions here. I still think blocking your service until you view an acknowledge an ad very scummy. I'm just saying, to be all OMGWTFBBQ that third-party phone services were not working is ignoring a very fundamental distinction here in communication services. You're trying to assign liabilities to the provider they never agreed to when they signed you up.
SO SAD.
Oh wait. It's not. HA HA!
We are a company for the manufacture of Concrete Hollow Blocks making machines - Curbstone machines - Paving block machines - and Concrete Batching Plants.
If you interested in to buy our machines, you can able to reach us, below you can see the details for contact information.
For more details about our machines and for conversation please contact with us : E-mail : sales.en2@beyazligroup.com or WhatsApp : +90 549 325 66 70
Site web 1 : https://bessconcreteblockmachine.com :// vessmachine.com/
Site web 2 : http
Machines For Producing Concrete Hollow Blocks | Semi Automatic Machine For Producing Concrete Paving Blocks
Semi Automatic Machine With Good Price | Automatic Machine For Concrete Blocks | Concrete Hollow Blocks
Price For The Semi Automatic Paving Block Making Machine | Price For Concrete Hollow Block Making Machine
High Quality Paving Blocks Making Machine | Semi Automatic Machine For Producing Hollow Blocks And Paving Blocks
As a Utah resident, who read the law, and as a customer of the ISP in question who had to figure-out why the kids were complaining about not being able to game or watch YouTube via their Xbox. I state that both You and the ISP are wrong. The law required no such interruption, it specifically called for an Obvious notification of the availability. No other ISP in the state chose this route, they did what the lawmakers intended, they sent a letter with the Bill, posted the notice on their home page, and sent an email. That is all they were required to do, even Comcast got this one right.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
It did NOT make them do it. No other ISP in the state, from Massive Comcast to Google Fiber, to dozens of wi-fi providers did this. We have lots of choices in the main population area of the state and only one ISP interpreted the law in this idiotic manner. The government did not make them do it. They chose to be idiots about how they Notified us of the availability. Other ISP's just sent a letter with their bill, and followed up with an email.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
no service refusal for anyone.
Even if you're not our customer.
So, you're more inclined to draw "likely" conclusions based on your own speculation than the seemingly informed report of an actual user? Ok. That's your prerogative, I suppose.
sig: sauer
You're right. My final statement that CL should "burn for this" was wrong -- they can't be held legally liable for deliberately interrupting a service that they don't provide direct support for. My point still stands, though, that people could have died as a result of CL's actions. And, if this were the case, a civil suit brought by the affected family would be likely.
sig: sauer
See subject: For the 10th++ time you've done this today? GROW UP fool - apply your energies to more constructive things instead.
* I've noticed an "uptick" in you doing it EVER SINCE I ANNOUNCED I'm getting a Mac on the 21st to PORT my already MULTIPLATFORM program to Macs:
APK Hosts File Engine 2.0++ 64-bit for Linux h t t p : / / a p k . i t - m a t e . c o . u k / A P K H o s t s F i l e E n g i n e F o r L i n u x . z i p (remove spaces between chars & download)
APK Hosts File Engine 10++ SR-1 32/64-bit for Windows https://hosts-file.net/?s=Down... (DL link @ bottom)
(Bet THAT's it, lol - you could do the same you know vs. being a troll... think about it).
Additonally - ENJOY YOUR DOWNMOD.
APK
P.S.=> Lastly: Sorry to disappoint you, again: I'm not homosexual & though THAT may 'upset' your "StRaNgE-PhaNtaSiEs" you apparently HAVE about ME? LOL, it's fact - I'm not gay... apk
Even on the bill it would not be seen. I pay my internet connection with direct bill from the bank. I don't open the envelope and write a check out and mail it in. Why would I see an ad placed in the bill then.
This does not imply that I think they did a good thing though.
-- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.