 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. |
|
 ultracat
join:2008-01-30 Toronto, ON
·TELUS
·Bell Sympatico
·TekSavvy Solutions..
1 edit | 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. 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 |
|
  heybirder
@velcom.ca | reply to velcomrob Re: CBC TV request for people to talk on camera about this issue
As a Velcom customer, I heartily endorse your idea! |
|
 velcomrob Premium join:2006-11-28 Brampton, ON
1 edit | reply to chrish I thought about that already. The client side application will check for updates on our side and allow us to change algorithim at any time. You have NO idea how HORRIBLY slow Bell is with doing ANYTHING. They'll patch their traffic shaper 3 months after figuring out what to do. It'll take us couple hours to apply an update.
its crazy but in this circumstance thank god they're slow 
However we are still trying to resolve it outside this scramble patch. We're trying to figure out what to do in the meantime as a quickfix. |
|
 matt_m Premium join:2007-04-07 Ottawa, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to velcomrob Very cool that you guys are thinking of this and care enough to try to work around the Bell stupidity, but in the end you'd probably spend a wad of cash on development and QA, only to realize Bell found a way to detect a pattern in your scrambling that identifies in, and patches the shaper or some other firewall for it.
said by velcomrob :I understand your concern Chrish and we are as much peeved off as anyone. I can only see one reason they're doing this, loss of customers. We are working with several ISP's to try to come to a resolution on this matter as quickly as possible. We can't divulge to much information at this point (legal stuff). But if worse comes to worse we will work very hard to find a way around this problem. First off Bell shouldn't be looking at our packets (data transfer) that occurs over our network. We have several scenarios we will pressure Bell. But in the end if they want to do child's play then be it. We ill possibly create some sort of application that sits on the clients side PC and that sits in the middle of our network that will scramble packets as they are sent to your side. The application will decompress the packet and thus rendering Bell's traffic shaper useless. I'm not 100% sure it can be done yet but we are investigating different possibilities. We are speaking to our developers about it. The only limitation in this is data being transfered out to a recipient won't be encrypted. But your download speeds shouldn't be affected. Let's hope its doable. Again data being transferred our our network is private, so we will keep it private. |
|
 velcomrob Premium join:2006-11-28 Brampton, ON
2 edits | reply to chrish I understand your concern Chrish and we are as much peeved off as anyone. I can only see one reason they're doing this, loss of customers.
We are working with several ISP's to try to come to a resolution on this matter as quickly as possible. We can't divulge to much information at this point (legal stuff).
But if worse comes to worse we will work very hard to find a way around this problem. First off Bell shouldn't be looking at our packets (data transfer) that occurs over our network. We have several scenarios we will pressure Bell. But in the end if they want to do child's play then be it. We ill possibly create some sort of application that sits on the clients side PC and that sits in the middle of our network that will scramble packets as they are sent to your side. The application will decompress the packet and thus rendering Bell's traffic shaper useless. I'm not 100% sure it can be done yet but we are investigating different possibilities. We are speaking to our developers about it.
The only limitation in this is data being transfered out to a recipient won't be encrypted. But your download speeds shouldn't be affected.
Let's hope its doable.
Again data being transferred our our network is private, so we will keep it private. |
|
  Trisomy21
join:2006-04-27 Kingston, ON
| reply to Trisomy21 Oh got a reply.
quote: Thanks for the note
You've given me an idea - can you put your feelings on this topic into a short video and post it to you tube or better yet use a service like »www.yousendit.com/
We would then put it into our piece as is.
Let me know if you can do this
Best,
Shawn Benjamin
|
|