If it's my hardware........

Author	All Replies
Rexter YeeHaw join:2002-11-17 cloud 9	If it's my hardware........ If it's my hardware, I'll do whatever the hell I want to it. It's asinine to have the bandwidth cap programed into the customers hardware. That's like a bank keeping the key to the vault in everyone's safety deposit box. The cable modem is a bridge, and with the exception of encryption, it should only function as a bridge. It would not be so hard to limit bandwidth per IP address at the node. This whole situation is just stupid.
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 10:49:24 ·
Qumahlin Never Enough Time Premium,MVM join:2001-10-05 united state	said by Rexter: If it's my hardware, I'll do whatever the hell I want to it. It's asinine to have the bandwidth cap programed into the customers hardware. That's like a bank keeping the key to the vault in everyone's safety deposit box. The cable modem is a bridge, and with the exception of encryption, it should only function as a bridge. It would not be so hard to limit bandwidth per IP address at the node. This whole situation is just stupid. No, Limiting bandwidth at the CMTS using QoS or other traffic flow methods wastes processor cycles/CMTS CPU power. The modems were meant to be this way it is part of the docsis specs. In 1.1 and 2.0 systems the CMTS's are more "efficient" at handling pure QoS traffic control but it is still better off to limit the bandwidth at the modem. -- Forum Posts:4004
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 10:56:59 ·
Ronin4740 join:2000-05-03 Saint Charles, MO	reply to Rexter Gawd... Okay, it's your TV - Does that make it legal to hack the cable connection so you get HBO, Showtime, etc... for free? Yep, the modem is your hardware and yep you can use it to connect to the cable modem network but read the AUP for practically any cable internet service and you items which prohibit uncapping modems and/or modifying firmware. Inlcuded for reference: Charter's AUP and Customer Agreement Links »www.charter.com/site/rules.asp#aup »www.charter.com/site/customeragreement.asp Mod your firmware and/or uncap at your own risk. A simple query of the modem from the cable company's NOC will reveal your actions and may subject you to termination of service. -- DSL? Why not Cable!
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 10:59:52 ·

Rexter YeeHaw join:2002-11-17 cloud 9	reply to Qumahlin I understand that it's in the specs. The point that I am making is that the specs are flawed. No other HSI service, that I know of, works this way. It is the responsibility of th ISP to maintain their network on their end, not on the customers end, not on the customers equipment.
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 11:09:10 ·
Rexter YeeHaw join:2002-11-17 cloud 9	reply to Ronin4740 eh
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 11:09:55 ·
Rhobite Premium join:2002-02-24 Cambridge, MA	reply to Ronin4740 It's not legal to receive channels you don't pay for. But you have to fault the cable companies for putting trusted equipment in the hands of consumers. Granted there's not much they can do technically (I'm not talking about whether it's illegal or not) about protecting TV signals, but they can certainly enforce caps at the headend rather than the CM. It's against the AUP to sniff your neighbors' traffic, but the fact that this is even possible is 100% the fault of the cable companies. I don't even have cable HSI anymore - but it's kind of shocking that I could dust off my old SB4200, take the filter off my cable, and sniff my neighbors' traffic, without even being a subscriber.
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 11:11:16 ·
Qumahlin Never Enough Time Premium,MVM join:2001-10-05 united state	reply to Rexter said by Rexter: I understand that it's in the specs. The point that I am making is that the specs are flawed. No other HSI service, that I know of, works this way. It is the responsibility of th ISP to maintain their network on their end, not on the customers end, not on the customers equipment. There were plenty fo DSL providers who used to set caps at the customers DSL/router instead of the DSLAM. The ISP is maintaining their network just because part of the control is placed in an area the customer is not supposed to be accessing anyway doesn't exactly make it flawed. Just different. What is flawed is manufacturers not bothering to test that their modems were up to spec. Manufacturers with "leaks" giving out shelled firmware so that firmware coders know exactly what they have to work with, etc, etc. The bottom line is that as is this really does not effect much. It is easy to catch the users who decide to uncap if the ISP wants too and the "etherboot" method of install Sigma is far to challenging to the average user who has no cable making/soldering knowledge -- Forum Posts:4004
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 11:15:44 ·
nasadude join:2001-10-05 Rockville, MD Reviews: ·Verizon FiOS	reply to Ronin4740 said by Ronin4740: ...Yep, the modem is your hardware and yep you can use it to connect to the cable modem network but read the AUP for practically any cable internet service and you items which prohibit uncapping modems and/or modifying firmware. I'm not questioning the AUP of the cable companies and obviously, if you rent your modem you have no right whatsoever to modify it. However, if you buy and own your own modem, this amounts to the cable company restricting your use of your property. It's similar to the MPAA saying you can't skip commercials on a DVD you own or the phone company saying you can only make 5 phone calls an hour over our network. If they don't want people uncapping their modems, maybe they should move control of the caps to the CMTS. Or not let people use their own modems.
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 11:16:03 ·
Rexter YeeHaw join:2002-11-17 cloud 9	reply to Qumahlin said by Qumahlin: There were plenty fo DSL providers who used to set caps at the customers DSL/router instead of the DSLAM. First off I'm not so sure that this is true. But even so the key word would be "used to."
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 11:20:13 ·
Wall9 Tell Me, Did You See It Too? Premium join:2002-06-25 Dupo, IL	reply to Rexter Mod it sure. It's yours. Having uncapped HSI is not yours. What's stupid about it? You sound as if you're placing the blame on ISP's.
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 11:28:41 ·
Aggie Dan Stop... Reverse That. Premium join:2001-01-30 Frisco, TX	reply to nasadude said by nasadude: or the phone company saying you can only make 5 phone calls an hour over our network. Or... Ummm... Maybe having the cell phone company restricting the number of minutes you can use on their network? Outrageous I tell you. [/sarcasm] -- Note : The statements made by myself are my own and not the opinions of my employer or of my coworkers. 14.327 GHz Crunching Power \| The Ryan Foundation for MPS Children
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 11:52:47 ·
AthlGrond Premium,MVM join:2002-04-25 Aurora, CO Reviews: ·Comcast 1 edit	reply to nasadude said by nasadude: However, if you buy and own your own modem, this amounts to the cable company restricting your use of your property. It's similar to the MPAA saying you can't skip commercials on a DVD you own or the phone company saying you can only make 5 phone calls an hour over our network. I disagree. The cable company places no restriction on what you do with your equipment, they place restrictions on the type of equipment that is allowed connected to their network. (Mod your modem all you like, they don't care so long as you don't try to plug it in to their network.) So it's not really a restriction on what you can do with your property, it's more a restriction on what you can do with Their's.
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 11:59:53 ·
Healbot Premium join:2003-07-16 Vancouver, WA	reply to Rexter Yeah but its there bandwidth, how else can they cap you? Image 10 people using all of the node(?) bandwidth and then the people getting 50/50 come to DSLreports and bitch about how cable is so slow
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 12:24:55 ·
pit_viper 1 Shot, 1 Kill, No Remorse, I Decide join:2002-07-24	reply to Rexter said by Rexter: If it's my hardware, I'll do whatever the hell I want to it. It's asinine to have the bandwidth cap programed into the customers hardware. That's like a bank keeping the key to the vault in everyone's safety deposit box. The cable modem is a bridge, and with the exception of encryption, it should only function as a bridge. It would not be so hard to limit bandwidth per IP address at the node. This whole situation is just stupid. To use the service you agree to those terms, if you don't like it get off -- "Arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics, even if you win, you're still retarded"
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 12:52:42 ·
pit_viper 1 Shot, 1 Kill, No Remorse, I Decide join:2002-07-24	reply to Qumahlin said by Qumahlin: It is easy to catch the users who decide to uncap Exactly.....People will enjoy the speeds for a day or too while the ISP is gathering the evidence for possible legal action -- "Arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics, even if you win, you're still retarded"
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 12:55:38 ·
Clocker1000 join:2001-05-24 Sterling Heights, MI Reviews: ·Comcast ·WOW Internet and..	reply to AthlGrond I agree. It's just like the laws we have with respect to driving cars. My car can go over 100mph but I'm restricted with how I can drive it on my 'network' of roads (which I pay for with my tax dollars). The same goes for my cable modem. I can use it on the network but I better conform with the network rules. Some people just have to have something to bitch and complain about I guess. C
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 13:07:28 ·
oldframe Pipe Dreams Premium join:2003-07-26 Houston, TX	reply to Aggie Dan What are you talking about? they want you to use the hell out of their network, so they can then charge the hell out of you. -- Gotta love SBC's 6000/608 plan for $44.99!
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 13:37:48 ·
JakCrow join:2001-12-06 Palo Alto, CA	reply to pit_viper There are no grounds for legal action over cable modem hacking.
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 13:42:52 ·
Aggie Dan Stop... Reverse That. Premium join:2001-01-30 Frisco, TX	reply to oldframe If you look at the higher charges once you go over your time allotted by your package as a penalty... Then the overage charges are similar to any fines or loss of network connection that your cable company would do. Granted, the cable company takes a harsher stance. But, they are in effect the same thing. This is, of course, neglecting the prepaid cell phones. Once those run out of minutes, you're done until you go buy some more minutes. -- Note : The statements made by myself are my own and not the opinions of my employer or of my coworkers. 14.327 GHz Crunching Power \| The Ryan Foundation for MPS Children
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 13:53:43 ·
b_zen Premium join:2002-07-24 Saint Louis, MO	reply to Rhobite On to the point! The hypocrisy of the ISP's and manufacturers (to a lesser degree)... Since they can't secure it from the start (technically, or due to cost) they'll leave it in the hands of users, hardware is usually having a valuable cost on the market , then reprimand you if you find a way to set the monkey loose... The day I find a non-technical way of uncapping my modem, you bet I'll try it By the way, how do you "re"cap your modem??? -- Join BroadbandReports.com's SETI@Home Team Don't let your computer's idle time go to waste!
	to forum · permalink · 2004-02-05 13:54:32 ·

Hacking the Surfboard > If it's my hardware........