Theme

Welcome · log in · join	food

Home

Reviews

Speed Test

	All Forums		Hot Topics		Gallery

Search similar:

Forums → O Canada! → Canadian →

Canadian Broadband → Info: Length of time Canadian ISPs retain IP address logs

uniqs
12344

« Logs, is there a reason for them at all? • speed reduction by isp »
page: 1 · 2 · next

rocca Start.ca Premium Member join:2008-11-16 London, ON	rocca to hm Premium Member 2012-Dec-26 12:53 pm to hm Re: Info: Length of time Canadian ISPs retain IP address logs said by hm : And I'll use Start as an example for surpassing the need of data retention. Or maybe you could use Start as an example of how a simple customer request asking about our retention policy was answered by the CEO within an hour, who was completely forthcoming with the current policy and committed to shortening that period upon review. I'd imagine that if I was on the other side of that conversation I would think it was pretty cool to see how responsive and customer-focused that company was. Just say'n.
	actions · 2012-Dec-26 12:53 pm ·
hm @videotron.ca	hm Anon 2012-Dec-26 2:39 pm Oh i'm not knocking the openness on that part. Just answering people is above what a lot of other ISP's are doing, as we are seeing. But you are surely not the only one keeping data for a year. It wouldn't surprise me to see an ISP hanging on to data for even longer than this. As I said, these will just be some examples. These aren't written complaints or anything. Just going to call for info. It's not like PIPEDA spells thing out either. What is also troubling is that certain ISP's think that parts of their privacy policy are secret and for internal use only. Videotron did this (was in a press release), and it seems Ebox is similar but worse in many ways. So yeah I have a few ISP's I will be using as examples. But if privcom tells me I can put these in writing as a complaint w/o being a customers of the various companies, then I will. Because Quite frankly, how are people suppose to know stuff if things are kept secret or the ISP owner refuses to answer (you are not in this boat).
	actions · 2012-Dec-26 2:39 pm ·
dillyhammer START me up Premium Member join:2010-01-09 Scarborough, ON	dillyhammer to Toastertech Premium Member 2012-Dec-26 3:53 pm to Toastertech said by Toastertech: Start Communications - 12 months, working on a system to possibly get rid of logs My understanding is that they are reviewing the process to see if the length of time can be shortened, not gotten rid of. I'm on auto-pilot at the moment, I'll let the next court date come and go at least, and see what flows from that. I'm hoping I and the rest of us may be pleasantly surprised, though I'm not holding my breath. Mike
	actions · 2012-Dec-26 3:53 pm ·
Who7 join:2012-12-18	Who7 to rocca Member 2012-Dec-26 4:16 pm to rocca said by rocca: said by hm : And I'll use Start as an example for surpassing the need of data retention. Or maybe you could use Start as an example of how a simple customer request asking about our retention policy was answered by the CEO within an hour, who was completely forthcoming with the current policy and committed to shortening that period upon review. I'd imagine that if I was on the other side of that conversation I would think it was pretty cool to see how responsive and customer-focused that company was. Just say'n. Well.....yeah.....after you disparaged my baby face good looks by calling me a troll! LOL! As you can see from all the posts, there is a pretty good business model brewing for a company that takes customer privacy to the next level. Now imagine all these people taking your industry leading privacy solution to multi-thousand member sports forums and social media. After all, that is how I learned about TSI and left Rogers after almost 2 decades.
	actions · 2012-Dec-26 4:16 pm ·
MaynardKrebs We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17	MaynardKrebs to Toastertech Premium Member 2012-Dec-26 5:01 pm to Toastertech Actually, the questions ought to be in multiple parts: 1) Current log retention policy & proposed log retention duration 2) Does the ISP currently do DPI? 3) What is the ISP's stance on government mandated DPI, Bill C-30? ie, do they conceptually support it, are they opposed, if opposed how much opposed .... blow with the wind or will they support a public fight against C-30? 4) What is the ISP's position vis-a-vis what their 'partners' (Bell/Rogers/Shaw/Telus) will do to sell out the customers of the indie ISP? These are questions which help us gauge the commitment of the ISP to privacy.
	actions · 2012-Dec-26 5:01 pm ·
rocca Start.ca Premium Member join:2008-11-16 London, ON	rocca to hm Premium Member 2012-Dec-26 7:09 pm to hm said by hm : Quite frankly, how are people suppose to know stuff if things are kept secret or the ISP owner refuses to answer (you are not in this boat). Absolutely and I would not be surprised if the CRTC expanded their review on something like the 'wireless code of conduct' to all telecommunications providers in the future.
	actions · 2012-Dec-26 7:09 pm ·
hm @videotron.ca	hm Anon 2012-Dec-26 8:50 pm said by rocca: said by hm : Quite frankly, how are people suppose to know stuff if things are kept secret or the ISP owner refuses to answer (you are not in this boat). Absolutely and I would not be surprised if the CRTC expanded their review on something like the 'wireless code of conduct' to all telecommunications providers in the future. Yup. Also, I just may try and involve the CRTC after new years as well as Privcom. Privcom stated on many occasions that the CRTC is just as involved in all this as they are and are in complimentary roles. Privcom also stated the CRTC has more power than they do when it comes down to the privacy aspect of telecom. So I have a lot of questions to ask them after new years. Now it's all a matter of who I get on the phone.
	actions · 2012-Dec-26 8:50 pm ·
Toastertech Premium Member join:2003-01-05 Canada	Toastertech Premium Member 2012-Dec-27 9:01 am Updates, see original post
	actions · 2012-Dec-27 9:01 am ·
Toastertech	Toastertech to MaynardKrebs Premium Member 2012-Dec-27 9:06 am to MaynardKrebs MaynardKrebs, well put, if you do not mind I will include these questions in any inquires to ISPs going forward. said by MaynardKrebs: Actually, the questions ought to be in multiple parts: 1) Current log retention policy & proposed log retention duration 2) Does the ISP currently do DPI? 3) What is the ISP's stance on government mandated DPI, Bill C-30? ie, do they conceptually support it, are they opposed, if opposed how much opposed .... blow with the wind or will they support a public fight against C-30? 4) What is the ISP's position vis-a-vis what their 'partners' (Bell/Rogers/Shaw/Telus) will do to sell out the customers of the indie ISP? These are questions which help us gauge the commitment of the ISP to privacy.
	actions · 2012-Dec-27 9:06 am ·
Who7 join:2012-12-18 1 edit	Who7 to rocca Member 2012-Dec-27 7:15 pm to rocca said by rocca Absolutely and I would not be surprised if the CRTC expanded their review on something like the 'wireless code of conduct' to all telecommunications providers in the future. Which of course would take it out of the political sphere. As a Conservative supporter, I can $cream in con$ervative ears...but absolutely vacuum in CRTC ears. Big mistake was not limiting damages to simple loss of commercial value. I can see where someone downloaded a $5000 piece of software or an entire library of movies would pay the piper, but hardly a $1 business model to a 12 year old downloading a tune. Of course, if the courts only award $100 damages, you can do something about that by charging $200 per IP for "administration". Worse yet, politics being what it is, the next government will just leave it in place and blame the other guy.
	actions · 2012-Dec-27 7:15 pm ·
scorpido Premium Member join:2009-11-02 Abbotsford, BC	scorpido Premium Member 2012-Dec-30 9:52 am Logs? What logs? We don't keep logs as it is just another server to have to maintain.
	actions · 2012-Dec-30 9:52 am ·
Who7 join:2012-12-18	Who7 Member 2012-Dec-31 1:46 pm Back on topic...... That's it? All we can come up with is info on three providers?
	actions · 2012-Dec-31 1:46 pm ·
Riplin join:2002-05-13 canada	Riplin Member 2012-Dec-31 1:53 pm I already told you why would an isp want to divulge this info to you voluntarily. It only empowers you. That's the last thing they want. They want you to be a sheep, part of the herd. You know.. If it gets bad enough I'll just drop off the net and use anon wifi everywhere.
	actions · 2012-Dec-31 1:53 pm ·
rednekcowboy join:2012-03-21	rednekcowboy Member 2012-Dec-31 2:49 pm said by Riplin: I already told you why would an isp want to divulge this info to you voluntarily. It only empowers you. That's the last thing they want. They want you to be a sheep, part of the herd. You know.. If it gets bad enough I'll just drop off the net and use anon wifi everywhere. Actually, according to PIPEDA, they don't have a choice in the matter. They have to not only provide the answers on how long they store your personal information, but also have to show it to you if you request them to do so.....
	actions · 2012-Dec-31 2:49 pm ·
Toastertech Premium Member join:2003-01-05 Canada	Toastertech Premium Member 2013-Jan-7 10:17 pm Updates Teksavvy - 3 months, future unknown at this time Start Communications - 12 months (update - currently under review »IP logging retention ) 27 Dec 12 Bell Canada - so far the answer from the Bell Direct forum page, is that the information falls under the Bell Network and Security teams and is not available to Bell Direct 27 Dec 12 (Update one week later no further information from Bell as of yet) 7 Jan 13 Received contact information for Cogeco will try there for some answers.
	actions · 2013-Jan-7 10:17 pm ·
hm @videotron.ca	hm Anon 2013-Jan-8 7:23 am said by Toastertech: Updates ... Bell Canada - so far the answer from the Bell Direct forum page, is that the information falls under the Bell Network and Security teams and is not available to Bell Direct 27 Dec 12 (Update one week later no further information from Bell as of yet) 7 Jan 13 Received contact information for Cogeco will try there for some answers. Bell Direct told you that? Seems to me the answer to this would fall under the hat of Bell's Privacy Officer, not Bell Network and Security. However, this raises a question since they stated this to you. Does Bell security maintain logs longer that what Bell privacy mandates and over-rides Bell privacy? If so, under what circumstances? Since this was just a general question tossed at Bell and nothing private, you should paste the whole conversation here.
	actions · 2013-Jan-8 7:23 am ·
scorpido Premium Member join:2009-11-02 Abbotsford, BC	scorpido Premium Member 2013-Jan-8 9:18 am Bluwest Inc. www.bluwest.com (Wireless Internet Services) in the Greater Kitchener/Waterloo and surrounding area. No logs what so ever. In fact your masked behind a 1 public IP as all the network IP's are internal unless you request a public (which is free)
	actions · 2013-Jan-8 9:18 am ·
rocca Start.ca Premium Member join:2008-11-16 London, ON	rocca Premium Member 2013-Jan-11 3:48 pm As promised, we have reduced our retention/automated purge process. It is now at 90 days.
	actions · 2013-Jan-11 3:48 pm ·
Who7 join:2012-12-18	Who7 Member 2013-Jan-11 7:58 pm said by rocca: As promised, we have reduced our retention/automated purge process. It is now at 90 days. Where is the one week? This is no different from TSI so why would I or any other TSI customer change to you?
	actions · 2013-Jan-11 7:58 pm ·
Who7	Who7 to scorpido Member 2013-Jan-11 8:00 pm to scorpido said by scorpido: Bluwest Inc. www.bluwest.com (Wireless Internet Services) in the Greater Kitchener/Waterloo and surrounding area. No logs what so ever. In fact your masked behind a 1 public IP as all the network IP's are internal unless you request a public (which is free) Perfect. A trolls nightmare.
	actions · 2013-Jan-11 8:00 pm ·
rocca Start.ca Premium Member join:2008-11-16 London, ON	rocca to Who7 Premium Member 2013-Jan-11 9:36 pm to Who7 We feel that 90 days is a good balance of customer privacy, public safety and internal system / billing requirements. Sorry if you thought this was some competition to lure customers away from other ISP's because it wasn't. It is about responding to the question if a year was required, we said we could do it with less and reduced the period substantially.
	actions · 2013-Jan-11 9:36 pm ·
Riplin join:2002-05-13 canada	Riplin to hm Member 2013-Jan-12 10:51 am to hm said by hm : Yup. Also, I just may try and involve the CRTC after new years as well as Privcom. Good luck with that. The CRTC proved how useless they are again last night when CBC could find the Air Duct Cleaning scammers in Karachi and they couldn't
	actions · 2013-Jan-12 10:51 am ·

hm @videotron.ca	hm Anon 2013-Jan-12 11:04 am said by Riplin: said by hm : Yup. Also, I just may try and involve the CRTC after new years as well as Privcom. Good luck with that. The CRTC proved how useless they are again last night when CBC could find the Air Duct Cleaning scammers in Karachi and they couldn't As far as I know, Canadian ISP's aren't in Karachi, Pakistan. Again, as far as I know. Though with some of the horror stories we see here, and Ebox's non-existent privacy policy, it wouldn't surprise me Started writing it up a couple of days ago. Matter of finding time to add more and finish up.
	actions · 2013-Jan-12 11:04 am ·
Who7 join:2012-12-18	Who7 to rocca Member 2013-Jan-12 1:25 pm to rocca said by rocca: We feel that 90 days is a good balance of customer privacy, public safety and internal system / billing requirements. Sorry if you thought this was some competition to lure customers away from other ISP's because it wasn't. It is about responding to the question if a year was required, we said we could do it with less and reduced the period substantially. Sorry if you think that peoples privacy is secondary to your convenience or that 90 days is some kind of "protection" to privacy. What you did is match TSI in order not to look bad in comparison. That's it. Nothing more. PERIOD. Stop spinning it as some kind of achievement when in fact, it's a marketing decision, NOT a privacy decision. (Cue your "your a troll" because someone exposes your spin)
	actions · 2013-Jan-12 1:25 pm ·
rocca Start.ca Premium Member join:2008-11-16 London, ON	rocca Premium Member 2013-Jan-12 1:53 pm It's not a convenience factor, it's a balance. I can understand if it's not sufficient in your personal opinion but we can't be everything to everyone and for those that feel they need further concealment beyond what their ISP can provide then there are plenty of easy options to accomplish that. Or you could start your own ISP, although you may quickly find that you have legitimate reasons for requiring logs. Anyway, best wishes for your quest of a zero day logging ISP. Until then, there are lots of VPN providers with various different logging policies that can do what you need.
	actions · 2013-Jan-12 1:53 pm ·
Who7 join:2012-12-18	Who7 Member 2013-Jan-12 3:00 pm Sorry buddy, but it's not "further concealment", as if anyone who cares about their privacy has something to "conceal". it's an expectation of privacy and protection against trolls who make a living off it. To even use "further concealment" speaks volumes about your perception of privacy issues. You decided as a MARKETING STRATEGY to match EXACTLY what TSI is doing. Fine. Be honest and say that. Don't try to spin it as some sort of "balance" when it comes to rights and expectations of privacy.
	actions · 2013-Jan-12 3:00 pm ·
rocca Start.ca Premium Member join:2008-11-16 London, ON	rocca Premium Member 2013-Jan-12 5:06 pm It has nothing to do with marketing, pretty sure you don't see it in publications, it's not on our web site, nor did I make a big splash about it here in DSLR. Simply, we were asked if a year was justified, we evaluated and decided a good balance was 3 months. Whether you agree with that duration or not is certainly your prerogative but all your other nonsense is just that. You like to confuse 'privacy' with being 'anonymous' as if they are the same thing and that is what prompted my choice of the word concealment. It is obvious what your own personal agenda is and only zero day logging is acceptable to you. If we had come out with a 1-day policy I'm sure you would have said we were exploiting a marketing opportunity while still not protecting against copyright notices since their requests are generally within hours of downloading. Despite your continued accusations, customer privacy is incredibly important to us and we have never revealed information in response to a copyright complaint. Further, customer privacy is protected by Canadian law for the benefit of subscribers. We do not collect any information about what our customers do, rather we only log what IP address was assigned to their account. The law however provides the requirement for ISP's to reveal that association under a court order and we are not above the law. Personally I don't care in the slightest what you do or don't download, it's none of my business. Anyway, we did what we committed to and it's a positive thing. But, undoubtedly you'll find some way to spin it into how evil we are. Peace out.
	actions · 2013-Jan-12 5:06 pm ·
MFido Montreal join:2012-10-19	MFido Member 2013-Jan-12 10:28 pm Peter, there is no way you can reach an agreement with Who ... he has a very tweaked way of seeing life
	actions · 2013-Jan-12 10:28 pm ·
Who7 join:2012-12-18	Who7 to rocca Member 2013-Jan-12 10:43 pm to rocca said by rocca It has nothing to do with marketing, pretty sure you don't see it in publications, it's not on our web site, nor did I make a big splash about it here in DSLR.[/BQUOTE : Actually you did. In this thread. As if it was some accomplishment. As for marketing issue, you doth protest too much. You matched TSI exactly. It wasn't 89 days or 91 days, it was 90 days and given what is happening now, your previous record keeping off one year was too much and unjustifiable. said by rocca Simply, we were asked if a year was justified, we evaluated and decided a good balance was 3 months. Whether you agree with that duration or not is certainly your prerogative but all your other nonsense is just that.[/BQUOTE : Oh please, stop the whining. You were out there with a year versus TSI 3 months and you decided to match them. said by rocca You like to confuse 'privacy' with being 'anonymous' as if they are the same thing and that is what prompted my choice of the word concealment.[/BQUOTE : Straw argument. The argument was, is and will be that your record keeping for three months exposes customer to the copyright trolls. said by rocca Personally I don't care in the slightest what you do or don't download, it's none of my business.[/BQUOTE : Although quick to claim that was "concealment". said by rocca Despite your continued accusations, customer privacy is incredibly important to us and we have never revealed information in response to a copyright complaint. [/BQUOTE : Never? Not yet, although you do keep records for three months and exposing your customers to copyright trolls. You can't claim "privacy is incredibly important" and keep records for three months. Nor can you claim it's some kind of legal requirement, which it isn't. Nor can you claim that it's necessary for your business when other companies do with less. THAT is the issue. Sorry to burst the bubble of what you thought or want to tout as some accomplishment.
	actions · 2013-Jan-12 10:43 pm ·
your moderator at work hidden :

Forums → O Canada! → Canadian → Canadian Broadband	« Logs, is there a reason for them at all? • speed reduction by isp »
page: 1 · 2 · next

Canadian Broadband → Info: Length of time Canadian ISPs retain IP address logs

Re: Info: Length of time Canadian ISPs retain IP address logs