Omr
join:2004-01-10
M1S-1B3 | reply to shawnb6
Re: CBC TV request for people to talk on camera about this issue
I believe the ellacoya boxes have internal storage capabilities ie. a built in HDD. |
|
puzz1ed
join:2005-02-20
Markham, ON
| reply to R0CKY
Re: chrish, 2008-03-28 10:04:44
Perhaps they can use it to start charging by protocol or usage pattern. 
Obviously, if you're using VPN software from 9 to 5 you should be on a more expensive business service etc. The possibilities are endless. |
|
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
| reply to Guspaz
As fatness just pointed out... It's entirely possible they're holding the data as, if they're intending on possibly running billing on use, they'd have to almost for sure store it for proof of billing.
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC | reply to fatness
I don't, so I admit that I'm making an assumption here. What I want to convey is that the DPI throttling system, if used as intended, does not do those things.
If Bell is doing that, it's unrelated to the throttling. |
|
fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
2 edits | reply to Guspaz
How is it known that they are:
not capturing/storing HTTP Post form data?
only examining data?
not storing data? |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
 ·Colbanet
| reply to fatness
said by fatness  :said by Guspaz :Problem is that Bell does not "Collect, use, or disclose" any private data. At least, nothing that the government considers private information. Guspaz, I have a question: how is that known? Because PIPEDA seems to have an extremely narrow definition of "personal information", and would seem to not include things like what website you visit or what files you download. To capture traditional personal information, the only reasonable way would be for them to capture/store HTTP POST form data.
Are they capable of grabbing that data? Probably. Are they? Probably not.
As long as they're simply examining data, anyhow, and not storing it, they're not collecting it, and they're not disclosing it. You could argue that they're using it, but they're not using personal information to help them throttle, they're using application fingerprints, which are decidedly not personal information. |
|
fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
·EarthLink
Host:
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help?
Rants, Raves, and ..
| reply to Guspaz
said by Guspaz :Problem is that Bell does not "Collect, use, or disclose" any private data. At least, nothing that the government considers private information. Guspaz, I have a question: how is that known?
--
Female monkeys often utter loud, distinctive calls before, during or after sex.. |
|
Candoo3
join:2005-01-24
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to Comment
said by Comment :
It would be annoying, but all Bell would send you (if anything) would be a form letter saying they do not collect any PERSONAL information nor "read your raw data". (They only look at the formatting of it.)
In contrast, BT (British Telephone) is in the midst of a kerfuffle because they did collect "personal information" by recording the addresses of the sites INDIVIDUAL subscribers were visiting.
And BT also DENIED that they were doing this, until they were caught.
»www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/27···er_2007/ |
|
jfmezei
Premium
join:2007-01-03
Beaconsfield, QC
·ELECTRONICBOX
| reply to Guspaz
>Problem is that Bell does not "Collect, use, or disclose" any
>private data. At least, nothing that the government considers
>private information.
Problem is that the boxes used to throttle are capable of collecting private information. What you do, what applications you use and how much data you transfer is private as far as Bell is concerned (it has no business knowing that).
Unless Bell canada is audited at regular intervals, there is no way of knwoing what Bell does with those boxes and whether it collects data or not. |
|
ultracat
join:2008-01-30
Toronto, ON
·TELUS
·Bell Sympatico
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to Comment
Yeah, but once you get that response from Bell then you turn around and give an appeal to the privacy commissioner and complain that they are in fact inspecting my data. Then let Bell deal with the privacy commissioner. It's just one more irritant (and not a false accusation either, if you ask some people) : ) |
|
Comment
@teksavvy.com
| reply to ultracat
said by ultracat :For those looking for a link to read: » www.privcom.gc.ca/information/02···08_e.aspbtw - this would be a GREAT letter writing campaign to conduct against Bell. Imagine if Bell had to all of a sudden handle 21,000 or whatever written requests for privacy disclosures! It would be annoying, but all Bell would send you (if anything) would be a form letter saying they do not collect any PERSONAL information nor "read your raw data". (They only look at the formatting of it.)
In contrast, BT (British Telephone) is in the midst of a kerfuffle because they did collect "personal information" by recording the addresses of the sites INDIVIDUAL subscribers were visiting. |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC | reply to ultracat
Problem is that Bell does not "Collect, use, or disclose" any private data. At least, nothing that the government considers private information. |
|
therustyspoo
join:2008-04-06 | reply to shawnb6
Re: CBC TV request for people to talk on camera about this issue
rogers ultra lite:
25$ for 2GB
twice that
50$ for 60 GB
im dont download or play games alot. Neither am i rich. But does 2 GB sounds fair?? |
|
ultracat
join:2008-01-30
Toronto, ON
·TELUS
·Bell Sympatico
·TekSavvy Solutions..
1 edit | reply to root9
Re: chrish, 2008-03-28 10:04:44
said by root9 :Correction: Bell has NO legitimate case to throttle via DPI [deep packet inspection] due to Canadian privacy laws and other related laws unless it's a direct attack on their servers or equipment. Neither does any ISP in Canada. It's called self-defense for ISP only. This is why Rogers moved their email and homepages to USA and to get around these laws. It's why Bell uses MSN as email partner. And so they can watch users private communications. Users can request such DPI protection from an ISP "in writing". Answer from ISP must be in writing as well. It can not be a part of User Agreement or initial contract. As a user or person living in Canada you must be notified in writing that such may be taking place by any company. Unless there is a warrant signed by a judge with damn good reason to do so. You have the right to request any and all information being gathered by any company. This includes their partners or resellers. They must provide it! Same as you have the right to visit Hydro-1 Power company and request information pertaining to you. You then have the choice of wiping such information from any and all records of said company. I suggest that all Indie ISP's and users request this information in full, make a full copy and or have it wiped. It is up to the user to provide their own protection. In cases where offered a user may request protection by or from ISP. Thank You, Senior Network & Systems Analyst For those looking for a link to read:
»www.privcom.gc.ca/information/02···08_e.asp
btw - this would be a GREAT letter writing campaign to conduct against Bell. Imagine if Bell had to all of a sudden handle 21,000 or whatever written requests for privacy disclosures! |
|
travisc
join:2001-11-09
Port Perry, ON | reply to Comment
I'd be interested in seeing this as well. |
|
Comment
@teksavvy.com
| reply to root9
said by root9 :Correction: Bell has NO legitimate case to throttle via DPI [deep packet inspection] due to Canadian privacy laws and other related laws unless it's a direct attack on their servers or equipment. Neither does any ISP in Canada. Users can request such DPI protection from an ISP "in writing". Answer from ISP must be in writing as well. As a user or person living in Canada you must be notified in writing that such may be taking place by any company. You have the right to request any and all information being gathered by any company. Strange that no one has mentioned these "points" of yours - perhaps you could substantiate with a few links to the relevant statutes. |
|
root9
join:2005-04-08
Kitchener, ON
2 edits | reply to chrish
Correction:
Bell has NO legitimate case to throttle via DPI [deep packet inspection] due to Canadian privacy laws and other related laws unless it's a direct attack on their servers or equipment. Neither does any ISP in Canada. It's called self-defense for ISP only.
This is why Rogers moved their email and homepages to USA and to get around these laws. It's why Bell uses MSN as email partner. And so they can watch users private communications.
Users can request such DPI protection from an ISP "in writing". Answer from ISP must be in writing as well. It can not be a part of User Agreement or initial contract.
As a user or person living in Canada you must be notified in writing that such may be taking place by any company. Unless there is a warrant signed by a judge with damn good reason to do so.
You have the right to request any and all information being gathered by any company. This includes their partners or resellers. They must provide it! Same as you have the right to visit Hydro-1 Power company and request information pertaining to you. You then have the choice of wiping such information from any and all records of said company.
I suggest that all Indie ISP's and users request this information in full, make a full copy and or have it wiped.
It is up to the user to provide their own protection. In cases where offered a user may request protection by or from ISP.
Thank You,
Senior Network & Systems Analyst |
|
puzz1ed
join:2005-02-20
Markham, ON
| reply to Kokanee483
Re: CBC TV request for people to talk on camera about this issue
As reporters, they have to remain objective. Entering into the fray of discussion here would undermine that. I'd suggest emailing or sending the OP a PM if you have something you'd like addressed more directly.
Incidentally, as I type this, the OP was last on 20 minutes ago. |
|
Kokanee483
join:2007-02-23
Gloucester, ON | reply to shawnb6
Anyone else ever notice that these media type fellows always just make a post, but then never stick around for the feedback? There were quite a few well written responses that I fear will never make it back to the thread originator.... |
|
JWP
@teksavvy.com
| reply to shawnb6
Shawn,
Do not look upon this battle with Bell as a single issue – throttling. There is more to it than that…..
Bell has been losing customers to smaller ISP’s because of their business ethics and their off shore tech support. Rather than address the concerns of their customers they want to eliminate the competition. Take a look at the six month ratings for Teksavvy and Bell on dslreports for more insight.
Bell whines that they are forced to provide independent ISP’s access through their network structure and that the independent ISP’s should be forced to install their own network structure. The problem here is Bell’s network structure was bought and paid for over many years by the monopoly we the tax payers let them enjoy. Since we paid for it should be owned and operated by someone other than Bell and Bell should pay for access like every one else. |
|
