dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
18124
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs to swampboy

Premium Member

to swampboy

Re: Discussion about log retention

said by swampboy:

In case you haven't been following this case, Teksavvy already admitted they notified 42 customers in error. This kind of error could get YOU sued for no valid reason. I guess you know legal costs are a bit higher than ISP service and in a civil case it's a crap shoot if you win or lose. The little guy will likely lose unless they can get a large team of lawyers and experts on their side. Still think you want to take a gamble on log retention?

Teksavvy already admitted they notified 42 customers in error. This kind of error could get YOU sued for no valid reason. And in this instance TSI is checking and re-checking everything they do.

This is *EXACTLY* the reason TSI (an indeed all ISP's) should not be hanging onto logs for more than the barest minimum amount of time. Just imagine what will happen when IP address trolling becomes routine - most ISP's will simply will slap things together with minimal effort and review and *numerous* false positives will creep into the results reported to the trolls - with hundred/thousands of lives potentially financially crippled.

Just imagine how riled up people will get with their ISP's and MP's when falsely accused and forced to pay $20k .... and their son/daughter can't afford to go to university as a result.

Gotta wonder if the 39.62%* of the people who voted in the last election for Harper (or just 24.2% of eligible voters*) really wants this to happen.

* Source: Elections.ca
Ree
join:2007-04-29
h0h0h0

Ree

Member

said by MaynardKrebs:

Just imagine how riled up people will get with their ISP's and MP's when falsely accused and forced to pay $20k .... and their son/daughter can't afford to go to university as a result.

This is assuming they get the $20k they want.

As others have said it's quite likely that ignoring their extortion attempt will be the end of it. In the off-chance that it goes to court, it's also quite likely that people will find themselves paying something close to the minimum of $100 instead of the maximum of $5k (or the $20k they're quoting).

And if people do go to court and wind up owing peanuts, that should be the end of all this foolishness since it won't be profitable for them anymore.

So I agree people will be riled up if they're forced to pay $20k (whether they're falsely accused or not), but I'd bet against that ever happening.
Fuzzy285
join:2012-12-12

Fuzzy285

Member

said by Ree:



As others have said it's quite likely that ignoring their extortion attempt will be the end of it. In the off-chance that it goes to court, it's also quite likely that people will find themselves paying something close to the minimum of $100 instead of the maximum of $5k (or the $20k they're quoting).

No and no. If they sue you, one of these scenarios will likely play out:

a) you don't file a defense, they get default judgment for the $20K. A writ of execution can then be issued directing the Sheriff at the county where you live to seize and sell your property to enforce the judgment. They might also attempt to garnish your wages.

b) you grab the first lawyer you can get and file a defense. Unfortunately you only manage to refute the commercial infringement part of Voltage's claims. The judge finds against you in the amount of $500 for non-commercial infringement. You still have to pay your lawyer about $3,500 so you are on the hook for $4,000.

c) you get an experienced IP lawyer and mount a simple but effective defense. After a couple of court appearances the judge dismisses Voltage's claim against you. Your legal bills: $7,000.

d) you mount a very effective defense but are countered by Voltage's lawyers. A good deal of expert testimony is demanded. The case drags through the courts for months. Regardless of who prevails, your legal bills are now in the tens of thousands.

In none of these scenarios do you walk away paying $100. It's just not going to happen, because showing up to court will immediately put you in the hole $3,000, and it would be very, very unlikely for the judge to award you costs, unless Voltage's lawyers are complete idiots and bungle this horribly.
Who7
join:2012-12-18

1 recommendation

Who7 to TSI Marc

Member

to TSI Marc
Here is a bit more reality....

The Conservatives were under intense pressure to change the law and some items changed are very positive. Basically Crappywood screamed that they will not make any more films in Canada unless there was more protection for their racket. Conservatives also left a gaping hole for all of this to go away. By NOT requiring log retention, they made it very easy for ISP to protect their customers. VERY, VERY, EASY.

Understand this, the courts will not issue blanket orders to keep logs because of privacy issues. They will only issue court orders for log retention if there is a serious criminal matter. The Conservatives will NOT change the legislation to mandatory log retention dates because it is wildly unpopular and makes them look like police state enablers. They will cite privacy laws as their defense to the industry of "we can't do that".

So Marc, I asked my lawyer, now you ask yours and stop playing the "we did our best". You are playing the victim card but in reality, your self serving log retention policy is enabling the trolls to victimize your customers. Or ex-customers.
Fuzzy285
join:2012-12-12

1 edit

Fuzzy285

Member

Bah, TSI should be glad to be rid of those pesky customers who didn't secure their routers and/or engaged in the unthinkable crime of watching a Voltage movie. Thus proving that Bell and Rogers were correct all along in their traffic shaping policies. Well, live and learn.
Who7
join:2012-12-18

Who7 to TSI Marc

Member

to TSI Marc
I'ts up to us to rectify the situation with our $$$$$$.

I just sent an e-mail to broadlinenetworks, asking them about their log retention policies. I will post what they say in this forum.

Just for the record.....unlike TSI, I NEVER heard of that firm before but, given what is happening, unless TSI comes around and starts taking our privacy seriously, I'm moving.
voxframe
join:2010-08-02

1 recommendation

voxframe to TSI Marc

Member

to TSI Marc
Marc, I'm glad you're listening to what's being said here. What's honestly not sitting well with me is you're not talking.

This is now really not sitting well with me and higher ups.

As a carrier, using TSI fiber to feed us, we're now taking steps to eliminate you guys from the equation. We've been accepted for both an ASN, and our IPs should be issued on the 26th. At this point we will make the arrangements to migrate onto our own IPs and off the block we have from you guys, specifically because everything that's happened lately, and the silence in this and other discussions.

No we're not going to kill our fiber feed from you guys, but at least we will be the only ones in control of our client's information and addresses. Won't prevent anyone from tapping off our entire feed from your end, but that would be expected anywhere we got our feed anyway.

Granted this is only a drop in the bucket, it's still another brick in the wall. I know you're busy, I know you're ripping your hair out, and from one sysadmin to another, I can't imagine the position you're in. But I need to make a move on the chess board and this is the only one that won't get my tail torn off.

QuantumPimp
join:2012-02-19

QuantumPimp to syntaxerr0r

Member

to syntaxerr0r
Before Watchmen Rorschach:

People happy being controlled being dominated.

Handing over the knife. The Responsibility.

But when it's used against them ... do they get what they deserve?
peterboro (banned)
Avatars are for posers
join:2006-11-03
Peterborough, ON

peterboro (banned) to TSI Marc

Member

to TSI Marc
I haven't read the whole thread because...well...I'm lazy and it's Christmas Eve...and a bottle of JD is staring at me with that come hither look. I hate it when it does that.

But as a private for profit enterprise your lawyers surely told you there is recent case law from the Federal Court in which both good faith and bad faith awards for damages for violations of PIPEDA are as high as $5000.00.

You got a request for 2000 IPs. Just a few mistakes can add up. Shorter logs = good business practice. You don't need an MBA for this but I'll send an invoice for one none the less.
wingedhorsey
join:2012-12-22
Montreal, QC

wingedhorsey to MaynardKrebs

Member

to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

said by wingedhorsey:

(*) In general, at least 95% of people are sane.

Then 'splain how Harper got elected.

He'll will soon be bringing you the TPP - Trans-Pacific Partnership - which will *criminalize* just about all 'copyright infringement', including removal of fair use rights and no 'format shifting' even for disability use. He's also the same guy who wants DPI at every ISP.

Let me guess... Perhaps, the alternatives were even more insane ? Sometimes, the only choice is to pick a subjectively lesser evil in an attempt to avoid something which would be even worse. But I certainly disagree with Harper on this issue.
Fuzzy285
join:2012-12-12

Fuzzy285

Member

I don't think anybody should be lobbying for zero retention logs. 2-4 weeks would be fair to meet the needs of law enforcement and would even give a chance to rights holders to defend their position, while minimizing larger fishing expeditions.

I suspect Voltage are pushing this case so as to either extinguish torrenting as a means of sharing/distributing content or turning it into a cash cow to them via lawsuits. Right now those willing to do so can funnel their traffic, including torrenting, via an anonymous VPN. It is anonymous because it keeps no logs, so the troll hits a dead end, regardless of how much it monitors.

If you push for zero retention of logs for ISP's, there'll be a justified outcry from law enforcement and others, who will join their voices to that of copyright trolls. You'll then see mandatory retention for logs, anonymous VPN's based in Canada would have to shut down or move out of the country, etc, etc.

We should strive to keep things fair to all parties involved, it's the Canadian way. Or was.

TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium Member
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON

TwiztedZero

Premium Member

said by Fuzzy285:

I suspect Voltage are pushing this case so as to either extinguish torrenting as a means of sharing/distributing content or turning it into a cash cow to them via lawsuits.

If thats the case, then Voltagetrolls should go after the bit torrent client authors and their distributors and leave the ordinary citizens alone. Endof.

anon234
@teksavvy.com

anon234 to TSI Marc

Anon

to TSI Marc
Could TSI state their policy is to release information only in criminal matters? As I understand it, infringement is a civil matter so, well.. you know
34764170 (banned)
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

34764170 (banned) to TwiztedZero

Member

to TwiztedZero
said by TwiztedZero:

If thats the case, then Voltagetrolls should go after the bit torrent client authors and their distributors and leave the ordinary citizens alone. Endof.

Completely retarded. So then screwdriver manufactures should be sued because they can be used to kill people.

Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium Member
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON

Tx

Premium Member

said by 34764170:

said by TwiztedZero:

If thats the case, then Voltagetrolls should go after the bit torrent client authors and their distributors and leave the ordinary citizens alone. Endof.

Completely retarded. So then screwdriver manufactures should be sued because they can be used to kill people.

lol i was going to comment on his earlier and i said forget it... bit torrent wasn't created to facilitate piracy but so many people like to read in to the propaganda and believe everything they read.

Thought it was funny because first thing that came to mind was guns :/ Of which is a perfect example.

leave4priva
@teksavvy.com

leave4priva to TSI Marc

Anon

to TSI Marc
TSI Marc - don't think of this as a legal question, think of it as a business problem. If you decide TSI should keep logs and especially if this legal action sets a precedent, I will be moving my business to the first decent ISP to offer privacy. There are technological solutions that free you from the need to keep logs. The law is on your side if you choose not to keep logs. Why do you want to keep logs? Who do you think your customer base is? How do you think TSI got to be such a big name ISP? If it wasn't for the downloaders where would TSI be? Who do you think will jump ship first to the first ISP willing to provide the service they are looking for?
greenrosetta
join:2011-06-05
Squamish, BC

greenrosetta to TSI Marc

Member

to TSI Marc
TSI Marc;
Thank you for the open dialogue in regards to log retention, from a customer point of view I would prefer if you only kept logs for 48hrs. Better than none and just enough to service your business needs, anymore would be detrimental to your business due to trolls from the USA. The trolls are just another political picture that is transpiring in our homes from coast to coast.

Please stand up for all those who have supported you, in the long run this will set precedent. With all the attacks on the Internet, Online Spying Bill/TPP/SOPA/PIPA/UN Takeover. Teksavvy and Open Media are the last Frontier.

apvm
join:2003-02-14
London, ON

apvm to Tx

Member

to Tx
I am with Tx all the way since he seems to be knowledgeable and knows what he is talking.
voxframe
join:2010-08-02

voxframe to greenrosetta

Member

to greenrosetta
said by greenrosetta:

TSI Marc;
Thank you for the open dialogue...

Sorry but I hate to say it. There's been NO open dialogue here. Lot of un-answered questions, uneasy people, and bantering going back and forth... But zero open *two-way* dialogue here.

This doesn't jive with TSI's "mantra" at all.
m3chen
join:2009-12-03
Toronto, ON

4 edits

m3chen to TSI Marc

Member

to TSI Marc
@TSI_Marc / All:

Here's a question for you / the judge of the current court case, as a result of this lawsuit against the un-named does, wouldn't it be possible under PIPEDA for users to send in a request to TekSavvy to see and have their private information be removed from such logs?

I / every TekSavvy customer (any ISP really) could request that their individual IP be deleted from such logs or databases because it contains data that could be used for other purposes other than what it was originally intended for (i.e. technical support vs potential court liability) and could be incorrect based on what TSI encountered in terms of its technical problems while gathering data for Voltage. This would be based on the fact that PIPEDA does allow for us (all teksavvy / other ISP customers) to request this to be done and since there were inaccuracies in the information gathering process for the trial which resulted in people being falsely notified.

Please do comment on this as I would be interested in creating a document that could be sent in every 90 days to request not only to see my data but have it corrected / removed if it did not meet PIPEDA guidelines.

BTW for those interested; PIPEDA defines IP addresses as being a part of personal information:

snippet of PIPEDA
"Your personal information includes your...

• name, race, ethnic origin, religion, marital status, educational level
• e-mail address and messages, IP (Internet protocol) address
• age, height, weight, medical records, blood type, DNA code, fingerprints, voiceprint
• income, purchases, spending habits, banking information, credit/debit card data, loan or credit reports, tax returns
• Social Insurance Number (SIN) or other identification numbers."


Snippet of "Your rights under PIPEDA"

PIPEDA requires private-sector organizations to collect, use or disclose your personal information by fair and lawful means, with your consent, and only for purposes that are stated and reasonable.

They’re also obliged to protect your personal information through appropriate security measures, and to destroy it when it’s no longer needed for the original purposes.

You have the right to expect the personal information the organization holds about you to be accurate, complete and up-to-date. That means you have a right to see it, and to ask for corrections if they got it wrong.

If you think an organization covered by PIPEDA is not living up to its obligations, you should try to address your concerns directly with the organization. If that doesn’t work, you have the option of lodging a complaint with the Privacy Commissioner.

Bibi123
@teksavvy.com

Bibi123

Anon

I notice that this is the last post in this thread, and it was a good one. Has anyone followed up on the PIPEDA angle?

d4m1r
join:2011-08-25

d4m1r

Member

said by Bibi123 :

I notice that this is the last post in this thread, and it was a good one. Has anyone followed up on the PIPEDA angle?

Indeed it is....I doubt you'll get a response from TSI directly on it (especially if he's right) so the best way to proceed would be to reformat that into an email and send it directly to TSI.

It would be appreciated if whoever does so would post back the results once TSI responds to the request. Never thought I'd say this but if PIPEDA is to be believed, it seems like privacy laws are in our favour...

TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Marc to m3chen

Premium Member

to m3chen
said by m3chen:

@TSI_Marc / All:

Here's a question for you / the judge of the current court case, as a result of this lawsuit against the un-named does, wouldn't it be possible under PIPEDA for users to send in a request to TekSavvy to see and have their private information be removed from such logs?

I / every TekSavvy customer (any ISP really) could request that their individual IP be deleted from such logs or databases because it contains data that could be used for other purposes other than what it was originally intended for (i.e. technical support vs potential court liability) and could be incorrect based on what TSI encountered in terms of its technical problems while gathering data for Voltage. This would be based on the fact that PIPEDA does allow for us (all teksavvy / other ISP customers) to request this to be done and since there were inaccuracies in the information gathering process for the trial which resulted in people being falsely notified.

Please do comment on this as I would be interested in creating a document that could be sent in every 90 days to request not only to see my data but have it corrected / removed if it did not meet PIPEDA guidelines.

BTW for those interested; PIPEDA defines IP addresses as being a part of personal information:

snippet of PIPEDA
"Your personal information includes your...

• name, race, ethnic origin, religion, marital status, educational level
• e-mail address and messages, IP (Internet protocol) address
• age, height, weight, medical records, blood type, DNA code, fingerprints, voiceprint
• income, purchases, spending habits, banking information, credit/debit card data, loan or credit reports, tax returns
• Social Insurance Number (SIN) or other identification numbers."


Snippet of "Your rights under PIPEDA"

PIPEDA requires private-sector organizations to collect, use or disclose your personal information by fair and lawful means, with your consent, and only for purposes that are stated and reasonable.

They’re also obliged to protect your personal information through appropriate security measures, and to destroy it when it’s no longer needed for the original purposes.

You have the right to expect the personal information the organization holds about you to be accurate, complete and up-to-date. That means you have a right to see it, and to ask for corrections if they got it wrong.

If you think an organization covered by PIPEDA is not living up to its obligations, you should try to address your concerns directly with the organization. If that doesn’t work, you have the option of lodging a complaint with the Privacy Commissioner.

Not avoiding this thread as mentioned previously..

I think this is your question:

"Here's a question for you / the judge of the current court case, as a result of this lawsuit against the un-named does, wouldn't it be possible under PIPEDA for users to send in a request to TekSavvy to see and have their private information be removed from such logs?"

Without going into details, the very short answer is: no.

Once this is all done, I'll gladly talk about these things more openly. I'd rather stay the course for now, It's the course that best serves those alleged of infringement IMHO.
funny0
join:2010-12-22

funny0 to voxframe

Member

to voxframe
said by voxframe:

said by ekster:

Everyone needs to realize if Teksavvy (or anyone else) starts playing the technical card and keep no logs at all, or for a very short time, the police, the entertainment companies and the politicians will just push a law to get rid of that and make a law that will force everyone to keep logs.

That's their problem. In the end we need to stand up and do something about it now before it starts. Once they start and the people scream, nothing ever happens about it, the screaming just eventually goes down. Get your foot in the door first.

why if police get a complaint and enough evidence to gte a warrant then TSI can log that ip, why should everyone be logged

I am one person of 5000 recetn disabled person to have there data disappear and let me tell you how htis goes and its bound to happen here as well in time.

A) because records were lost for 1.5 years , i was not living where i was
B) no rent receipts means i owed them 1.5 years rent money
C) the apparent address they had for me was a house sold by my father then resold to hells angels bikers whom just recently sold it...
D) aint that great you have me paying no rent at a hells angels biker house....
you want stress that will do it.
AND let me tell ya that got solved fraking quick on threat of a lawsuit.
and there is no excuse not to protect data as if it were level ten top secret
ergo no one in room can be alone with unencrypted data
when its moved you have it encrypted and moved by one person and the key for it is separate and both people with such are watched.

i doubt you guard my data and privacy in this regard so why keep 90 days of it , if you need stats you can run and keep stats BUT you wont need details of anything less then "this area this bandwidth at certain times, you dont require so n so doing this all day or that.

So my question is when my data turns up on the internet or whatever are you saving to get sued because you didnt safeguard it and what safeguards are you putting in place not to look like govt retards.
funny0

funny0 to Fuzzy285

Member

to Fuzzy285
said by Fuzzy285:

said by Ree:



As others have said it's quite likely that ignoring their extortion attempt will be the end of it. In the off-chance that it goes to court, it's also quite likely that people will find themselves paying something close to the minimum of $100 instead of the maximum of $5k (or the $20k they're quoting).

No and no. If they sue you, one of these scenarios will likely play out:

a) you don't file a defense, they get default judgment for the $20K. A writ of execution can then be issued directing the Sheriff at the county where you live to seize and sell your property to enforce the judgment. They might also attempt to garnish your wages.

b) you grab the first lawyer you can get and file a defense. Unfortunately you only manage to refute the commercial infringement part of Voltage's claims. The judge finds against you in the amount of $500 for non-commercial infringement. You still have to pay your lawyer about $3,500 so you are on the hook for $4,000.

c) you get an experienced IP lawyer and mount a simple but effective defense. After a couple of court appearances the judge dismisses Voltage's claim against you. Your legal bills: $7,000.

d) you mount a very effective defense but are countered by Voltage's lawyers. A good deal of expert testimony is demanded. The case drags through the courts for months. Regardless of who prevails, your legal bills are now in the tens of thousands.

In none of these scenarios do you walk away paying $100. It's just not going to happen, because showing up to court will immediately put you in the hole $3,000, and it would be very, very unlikely for the judge to award you costs, unless Voltage's lawyers are complete idiots and bungle this horribly.

A) disabled people have an undue harm clause that protects them form more then 49$ a month in any claim welfare its like 29$
B) voltage's claim is for commercial infringement if you prove or they cant prove commercial infringement the case should be dropped , refile for the appropriate law and set of laws thank you.
C) you also file a counter claim for your fees and pain and suffering that you were not commercially infringing there UNintellectual property. YOU could also add slander and defamation of character as they are classifying and stating publically that these people are pirates, all definitions in books on pirates state they are armed robbers whom harm physically people for loot....of which none of this you will claim you have done....small claims court 120$ lawyer for it 3 grand max settlement 25000 dollars.

D)voltage doesnt want a case that drags on months , evidenced already by them wanting money to cover there current legal fees ROFL ...SEE part C) of my rebuttal.
THe whole aim is like a criminal doing a drive by a store smashing the window and grabbing all they can and riding off to do so again....

IN every scenario you should win cause its not commercial infringement they have to prove you profited which you did not.
show me again how any ip address on the net right now you can tell if its making money for the user or not....YOU CANT
BUT if i catch you at a flea market selling voltage stuff you gte this kind of case for commercial infringement.
have a nice day and learn what the difference between commercial and non commercial FILE SHARING is.NOTE also of significance is fact that voltage has yet to redraft the notice that TSI is supposed ot send to these affected ips. THEY seem not to care or there legal team is a joke. THEY cant even use the right part of the law in filing.
funny0

funny0 to Tx

Member

to Tx
said by Tx:

said by 34764170:

said by TwiztedZero:

If thats the case, then Voltagetrolls should go after the bit torrent client authors and their distributors and leave the ordinary citizens alone. Endof.

Completely retarded. So then screwdriver manufactures should be sued because they can be used to kill people.

lol i was going to comment on his earlier and i said forget it... bit torrent wasn't created to facilitate piracy but so many people like to read in to the propaganda and believe everything they read.

Thought it was funny because first thing that came to mind was guns :/ Of which is a perfect example.

not to mention bit torrent inc is owned by warner brothers , they could just sue themselves
funny0

funny0 to TSI Marc

Member

to TSI Marc
said by TSI Marc:

said by m3chen:

@TSI_Marc / All:

Here's a question for you / the judge of the current court case, as a result of this lawsuit against the un-named does, wouldn't it be possible under PIPEDA for users to send in a request to TekSavvy to see and have their private information be removed from such logs?

I / every TekSavvy customer (any ISP really) could request that their individual IP be deleted from such logs or databases because it contains data that could be used for other purposes other than what it was originally intended for (i.e. technical support vs potential court liability) and could be incorrect based on what TSI encountered in terms of its technical problems while gathering data for Voltage. This would be based on the fact that PIPEDA does allow for us (all teksavvy / other ISP customers) to request this to be done and since there were inaccuracies in the information gathering process for the trial which resulted in people being falsely notified.

Please do comment on this as I would be interested in creating a document that could be sent in every 90 days to request not only to see my data but have it corrected / removed if it did not meet PIPEDA guidelines.

BTW for those interested; PIPEDA defines IP addresses as being a part of personal information:

snippet of PIPEDA
"Your personal information includes your...

• name, race, ethnic origin, religion, marital status, educational level
• e-mail address and messages, IP (Internet protocol) address
• age, height, weight, medical records, blood type, DNA code, fingerprints, voiceprint
• income, purchases, spending habits, banking information, credit/debit card data, loan or credit reports, tax returns
• Social Insurance Number (SIN) or other identification numbers."


Snippet of "Your rights under PIPEDA"

PIPEDA requires private-sector organizations to collect, use or disclose your personal information by fair and lawful means, with your consent, and only for purposes that are stated and reasonable.

They’re also obliged to protect your personal information through appropriate security measures, and to destroy it when it’s no longer needed for the original purposes.

You have the right to expect the personal information the organization holds about you to be accurate, complete and up-to-date. That means you have a right to see it, and to ask for corrections if they got it wrong.

If you think an organization covered by PIPEDA is not living up to its obligations, you should try to address your concerns directly with the organization. If that doesn’t work, you have the option of lodging a complaint with the Privacy Commissioner.

Not avoiding this thread as mentioned previously..

I think this is your question:

"Here's a question for you / the judge of the current court case, as a result of this lawsuit against the un-named does, wouldn't it be possible under PIPEDA for users to send in a request to TekSavvy to see and have their private information be removed from such logs?"

Without going into details, the very short answer is: no.

Once this is all done, I'll gladly talk about these things more openly. I'd rather stay the course for now, It's the course that best serves those alleged of infringement IMHO.

seeing your data as said in above is mandated marc....its like requesting medical data and costs the end user for them to prepare it for you so reasonable might mean it costs us to get a peek....

TypeS
join:2012-12-17
London, ON

TypeS

Member

I may understand this wrong but I believe there isn't much data in the logs to begin with?

The logs everyone are debating here are IP addreses and what account numbers they were assigned to at a particular time.

The account numbers then can be linked to a the information on that account (billing, address, name, etc).

The logs and the account database are two separate entities. You're asking TekSavvy to wipe you whole account information?

d4m1r
join:2011-08-25

d4m1r

Member

said by TypeS:

I may understand this wrong but I believe there isn't much data in the logs to begin with?

The logs everyone are debating here are IP addreses and what account numbers they were assigned to at a particular time.

The account numbers then can be linked to a the information on that account (billing, address, name, etc).

The logs and the account database are two separate entities. You're asking TekSavvy to wipe you whole account information?

Totally wrong. While TSI doesn't record exactly what websites you visit themselves, they do the next worst thing....Record IP assignments which enable them to pin point which customer had a specific IP at a specific time.

For example if a 3rd party (government/police/mpaa/etc) has an IP and time stamp of when that IP accessed the content (websites/download/etc), all they merely have to do is ask TSI to look into their logs TSI and can identify you. That's why they actually DO play a role in tracking which websites you visit because if a website owner gives them your IP, TSI will know you visited that website once they look you up.

I don't care how long TSI keeps logs for, as long as they are anonymous (striped of all personal/account identifiable data), INCLUDING IP -> account assignment info.

drjp81
join:2006-01-09
canada

drjp81

Member

said by d4m1r:

said by TypeS:

I may understand this wrong but I believe there isn't much data in the logs to begin with?

The logs everyone are debating here are IP addreses and what account numbers they were assigned to at a particular time.

The account numbers then can be linked to a the information on that account (billing, address, name, etc).

The logs and the account database are two separate entities. You're asking TekSavvy to wipe you whole account information?

Totally wrong. While TSI doesn't record exactly what websites you visit themselves, they do the next worst thing....Record IP assignments which enable them to pin point which customer had a specific IP at a specific time.

For example if a 3rd party (government/police/mpaa/etc) has an IP and time stamp of when that IP accessed the content (websites/download/etc), all they merely have to do is ask TSI to look into their logs TSI and can identify you. That's why they actually DO play a role in tracking which websites you visit because if a website owner gives them your IP, TSI will know you visited that website once they look you up.

I don't care how long TSI keeps logs for, as long as they are anonymous (striped of all personal/account identifiable data), INCLUDING IP -> account assignment info.

I'm not sure somone brought this up. I'm not going through 30 pages, I'm too lazy.

I'm all for privacy, but there are simple civil if not criminal accountability reasons ISPs should maintain a log of clients VS IPs. Otherwise how could they track down spammers, black hat hackers, botnets and all sorts of people with criminal intent. While it may be desirable they be, a somewhat dumb pipe, even the phone company keeps a call log and have for decades.

I doubt TSI wants to have the reputation of being a safe haven for nefarious net users.