  DaSneaky1Done wall to block them allPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
 ·Charter
| What public IP does it give you? This all seems well and good, but if all the traffic is being proxied through just a few public IP's, or a contiguous block/range, all this attention just made the ISP's job that much easier.
--
:: my trivial ramblings :: | |
|
 |  shearerNorthern LightsPremium
join:2002-06-18
Asia | Re: What public IP does it give you? Concur.
All the ISP needs to do is throttle connections to/from SecureIX IPs. | |
|
| | | | Re: What public IP does it give you? True. But it's one thing to throttle P2P traffic on the basis that it opens up tons of connections and brings your network to a crawl. It's a completely different thing to throttle traffic to a specific site. They'd be entering fairly dangerous legal territory in that case. They'd then be legally held responsible for anything bad done over their network since they're now monitoring what goes on in a very specific way.
The VPN solution seems pretty solid. I don't think the ISPs are willing to cross this new line. | |
|
| | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | said by shearer:Concur. All the ISP needs to do is throttle connections to/from SecureIX IPs. All secureix has to do it is change its IPs. If they get overloaded, they can have people pay a small fee ($5 per month per megabit, or $1 per 100 gigs), its a small price to make ur connection usable. | |
|
3 edits | VPN beats throttling! :)))) How can ISP do that, legally? It's a VPN service. Also, you can get the same results via any VPN service. We have just busted ISP throttling. I tried it and am getting dang close to my 6000/800 speeds. Poney up the $ for a pay VPN service if SecureIX goes down and you are in a throttle free zone anyways. Say bye bye to Cisco P-Cubes! 
In the mean time, thank you SecureIX for showing us the way!!!  | |
|
| | | Re: VPN beats throttling! :)))) How can they do that legally?
Read your TOS...an ISP can shape traffic as it needs or wants... | |
|
| | | | Re: VPN beats throttling! :)))) said by AnonProxy:How can they do that legally? Read your TOS...an ISP can shape traffic as it needs or wants... Traffic shaping is fine but complete throttling of ALL VPN services? No way... | |
|
| | | | | Re: VPN beats throttling! :)))) said by pulp46:said by AnonProxy:How can they do that legally? Read your TOS...an ISP can shape traffic as it needs or wants... Traffic shaping is fine but complete throttling of ALL VPN services? No way... You realize Rogers is a private network? And to use that network you agree to a terms of service. Rogers owns that network and do with it what they choose. If for some reason you don't like it you are free to choose someone else to provide your service to you.
So yes WAY....they can do what they want. | |
|
| | | |
4 edits | Re: VPN beats throttling! :)))) said by anon45435You realize Rogers is a private network? And to use that network you agree to a terms of service. Rogers owns that network and do with it what they choose. If for some reason you don't like it you are free to choose someone else to provide your service to you.
So yes WAY....they can do what they want.
Give your head a shake. You know how many VPN's servers there are, around the WORLD? Ya think Ted would be in a little bit of trouble shaking 'em all down when we all go to VPN to beat throttling? He can't shut down access to all legit services! Really now....  | |
|
| | | | |  mlernerPremium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5 | Re: VPN beats throttling! :)))) said by pulp46:said by anon45435You realize Rogers is a private network? And to use that network you agree to a terms of service. Rogers owns that network and do with it what they choose. If for some reason you don't like it you are free to choose someone else to provide your service to you.
So yes WAY....they can do what they want.
Give your head a shake. You know how many VPN's servers there are, around the WORLD? Ya think Ted would be in a little bit of trouble shaking 'em all down when we all go to VPN to beat throttling? He can't shut down access to all legit services! Really now.... Actually they can, those traffic shaping boxes can filter ANY traffic, all they have to do is set a filter for VPN and bam no access. Now, this may take away most of their business but don't think they wouldn't do it given this is Rogers we're talking about. | |
|
| | | Markus
join:2005-05-27
Middlesboro, KY | said by pulp46:said by AnonProxy:How can they do that legally? Read your TOS...an ISP can shape traffic as it needs or wants... Traffic shaping is fine but complete throttling of ALL VPN services? No way... Suddenlink in my area hamfistedly throttles ALL traffic, not just P2P, once you go over so many MBs in so many minutes, whether you're viewing large images, streaming video, downloading a single file via http, running torrents or anything. So don't believe for a second that other ISPs won't do the same if they can't get a handle on the bandwidth consumed by P2P apps alone.
--
My Sites: www.ageofantiquity.com and www.spacebuffs.com. | |
|
| | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | said by AnonProxy:How can they do that legally? Read your TOS...an ISP can shape traffic as it needs or wants... A ISP cant tell apart VPN traffic unless it has a whitelist of VPN servers, Mr bigshot CEO will be very pissed when he cant VPN to his job. | |
|
| | should have spent all that money... ... on upgrading the congested nodes with fiber.
This traffic shaping was a huge waste of dollars | |
|
| bohn
join:2006-05-30
Scarborough, ON | Re: should have spent all that money... What money? In all the years rogers has been afloat Ted has spent a grand total of nothing. | |
|
| |  Why pay?
| |
|
| | | Re: Why pay? What's Tor? Another free VPN service? I know of several cheap ones in Europe, but not free. | |
|
| |  c0de
join:2004-10-14
Richmond, VA | Re: Why pay? said by pulp46:What's Tor? Another free VPN service? I know of several cheap ones in Europe, but not free. Please do not use Tor for your torrenting. As a Tor node operator, I can tell you how bad torrent downloads effect my node, and I have thus had to block a large number of ports and throttle my node because of torrent/Tor abuse. | |
|
| | | | | Re: Why pay? No problem c0de, I will only use SecureIx/Relakks etc... if Ted decides to throttle my area, was just curious. | |
|
| bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | Yeah, sure, abuse Tor... That's nice. That's will surely make Tor operators more likely to shutdown their nodes and reduce the capacity of the network. 
--
Prove it... | |
|
| JJVPremium
join:2001-04-25
Seattle, WA | Tor is very slow and not intended for large downloads. | |
|
| | | | Re: Why pay? Tor ---> »tor.eff.org/ free proxy service. This is better than VPN cause they can not trace the source unless you're the government. | |
|
| | | | | Re: Why pay? Thanks brian, coolness! | |
|
| | | | | i think having 5KB/sec throttled is faster than tor | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Why pay? I got 165KB/sec last night | |
|
| | | | |  kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY | Re: Why pay? Tor turns my 10Mb connection into a snail - it's literally useless here. I can't see it ever taking off until they adress their horrible bandwidth issue.
--
| |
|
|
| | | Where this could go 95%ile billing models | |
|
|
4 edits | Re: Funny. said by ctceo:Whats funny is they think that by Creating a VPN, the Intelligence agencies can not monitor your traffic. Don't give a rats ass about that, many just want no throttling.
VPN = no throttling. Simple as that and all we care about. We always assume Big Brother can see everything if he chooses to work for a LONG time on your properly secured your box. | |
|
| | | | Re: Funny. VPN doesn't mean "no throttleing"
It means, "Not throttled yet"... | |
|
| c0de
join:2004-10-14
Richmond, VA | Paranoid?
Also this technology you speak of, how would one go about a mirror image of what i do on my computer, is this a MS backdoor? Is this exclusive to certian OSes, if so I do not wish to use these products anymore. Or is this just a matter of the said agency tapping in like they do with a phone line, in which case I assume that if they are tapping your internet connection, they would not be able to get a mirror image but only be able to see what is transmitted over that line. And furthermore, if you are using AES encryption or Blowfish or some similar form of 128bit encryption, it would take even the most powerful super computers days to try and find a hash key, assuming they do not have your encryption key. Also most AES/Blowfish encryption is a much much high bit level, making it even harder for it to be cracked. So if you were using point-to-point encryption and VPN or any form of ipsec passthough, the feds would not be able to see what data was being transmitted, only that there is transmission (they wouldnt even be able to get header info or actual size value due to compression). And if they were to find the destination and find out what was coming off that end (out of the hundredes of outgoing/incoming data from different users) they would still have a hard time presenting a case proving it was you transmitting that data, even with the company testifying that you connected. | |
|
| | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | Re: Funny. It doesn't really matter... using torrent technology isn't illegal.. and downloading copyrighted material isn't criminal. It's only a civil infraction (supposedly/yet to actually be tested) and therefore, no big brother spying on you with an intent to do anything. The **AA's can sue people to infinity without any extra effort.. most people do nothing to protect themselves.. | |
|
| |  ctceoPremium
join:2001-04-26
South Bend, IN
 ·magicjack.com
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T Midwest
1 edit | No paranoia, Just fact.
Mirroring is not OS dependent. It can be done under all but the most obscure OS's, and even then the data can be extracted, and decrypted nearly on the fly if necessary.
Decryption can be done nearly on the fly by Most governmental agencies. And here in the US, Encrypting data may be suspect and warrant inspection by such agencies. They do not need a warrant to do so either. The fourth amendment does not protect you.
Here's the abstract:
Does encrypting Internet communications create a reasonable expectation of privacy in their contents, triggering Fourth Amendment protection? At first blush, it seems that the answer must be yes: A reasonable person would surely expect that encrypted communications will remain private. In this paper, Professor Kerr explains why this intuitive answer is entirely wrong: Encrypting communications cannot create a reasonable expectation of privacy. The reason is that the Fourth Amendment regulates access, not understanding: no matter how unlikely it is that the government will successfully decrypt cipher text, the Fourth Amendment offers no protection if it succeeds. As a result, the government does not need a search warrant to decrypt encrypted communications. This surprising result is consistent with Fourth Amendment case law: it matches how courts have resolved cases involving the reassembly of shredded documents, recovery of deleted files, and the translation of foreign languages. The Fourth Amendment may regulate government access to cipher text, but it does not regulate government efforts to translate cipher text into plain text.
Courtesy: »72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:HoH···=5&gl=us
Other relative links:
»news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-530691.html
»www.tatanka.com/doc/technote/tn0035.htm
»www.swiss.ai.mit.edu/projects/ma···ant.html
This is all just the public view. If you choose to believe that the US (and maybe others) aren't already participating in this activity, under the covers, so to speak, then I'm sorry you feel that way, The truth can be painful, especially for those in denial".
Edit, VERY IMPORTANT LINK, DO NOT MISS:
»www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance···ysis.php | |
|
| | | c0de
join:2004-10-14
Richmond, VA | Re: Funny. You have some very intresting sources here. And I have no doubt in my mind that the government monitors some communications via the internet and otherwise. The keyword here being SOME. How they get the authority to monitor the activity is irrelavant if they can't decode/decypher the content of what they are monitoring. And unfortunatly for the government it is very hard and takes a very long time to decrypt well encrypted data. Now if the government gets your 'password' then you are pretty much effed in the A. But if you use proper encryption it would take even the most advanced supercomputers in the world days if not weeks to decypher the key, and even then, depending on the amount of data and other factors, they would have to begin decyphering the data using the key in a reverse process (now this can be done on the fly, but only with the correct key).
But of course, all of this is totally irrelivant if you are not doing anything illegal. So encrypt away, even if the government is suspect and if they somehow figure out how to crack the encryption key for your data, they would only find cute pictures of little kittens in mittens.
Decryption of AES can not be done "on the fly".
The real threat is not your local/fed government (unless your are actually a terrorist) it is the people that are not part of the government, you know, those hacker guys that are always stealing peoples identities and what not. This is why I prefer to encrypt my email and documents and the like on my computer and when being sent out over the internets tubes, not because big brother is watching but so that some ass hole dosent steal my identity.
Also it is silly to think that the government is watching every move of everyone, espically when it comes to terms of data storage and monitoring. it is just not feasable.
And again if you could please point out how this "mirroring" is done I would be happy to know so that i can prevent it. Should it be a back door, then I will switch to an OS with out this backdoor for mirroring. I can not seem to figure out how they would monitor the activity on my screen (like right now) with out some sort of monitoring tool installed, as computers are a little more complex than a phone, you can not simply "tap" a computer. The data transmitted, sure, but not what happens on it.
And what would you consider an obsecure OS?
So even though you cited some very intresting articles on the topic of government monitor, you have not found or cited any on how this monitoring is acheved technically. And without the ability to monitor something technically, then there is no worry at all. | |
|
| | | | | if those Agencies don't have the "Access" to those "targets" at the first place, how could they "recover", "decrypt", "translate" those "targets"? You got to have "Access" to those data before you could "Understands" those data. | |
|
| | |  brandonSome truth included in this post.Premium
join:2003-03-31
Hurley, MS | From your snip: "...no matter how unlikely it is that the government will successfully decrypt cipher text..." | |
|
| | | |
|
curls
join:2000-12-27
Nepean, ON | A Mutually Beneficial Solution!!! I really wish the ISP's would take this forthcoming model into consideration, as it would serve the masses well:
Since a VAST majority of traffic comes from a small minority of users (the old 80/20 rule, or even 95/5 in this case), why not let the light-users of torrents get their full speeds, and implement a model as follows:
- Anything up until your roughly 10GB monthly service useage is at full speed.
- Any BitTorrent traffic between 10GB and 30GB is at 50% speed (using traffic shaping)
- Any BitTorrent traffic between 30GB and 60GB (monthly cap) is at 25% speed
- Any traffic at all over 60GB is $X/GB excess-useage charge.
That way, the light users still get their use of torrents. And the medium and heavy users get theirs as well, with priority on their first 10GB of data. Anything above that means they get throttled to help out the network and their fellow ISP users. Anything above the hard-cap of (arbitrarily) 60GB means they pay out the nose for the service AND it's slow. This will discourage the use of a standard high-speed connection to seed ALL the time, and encourage lighter use of torrents.
I think it could work. It would not be hard to implelement --> they already have a useage-meter, they already have a way to throttle you back to a set amount when they detect BT traffic... just combine the two and set some brackets!
Are you listening Mr. Ted Rogers? | |
|
| | | Re: A Mutually Beneficial Solution!!! Thats what i was thinking, but couldn't say it better myself.
I'm a bit of a pessimist though, having seen the way office politics and some corporations work... if the solution makes sense, it won't get done. | |
|
|  insomxPremium
join:2003-01-26
Canada | ISP's will take it to the extreme if you are telling them that is what people would want. I think that's ridiculous. If they just spent the money on upgrading their networks, instead of trying to make their connections more shittier, then it would be better for everyone. | |
|
| | Or. Or, ISP's can just not worry about caps and actually upgrade their bandwidth to be more on par with the rest of the world. Screw ludicrously small caps and random packet shaping and throttling. Upgrade the damn bandwidth and let fly.
DJ | |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY | Fix IP? If you always get the same IP then it's also excellent for people with dynamic IPs.
--
| |
|
lgkahnPremium
join:2005-02-15
Londonderry, NH | this makes no sense we use vpns at work... I am the network admin all a vpn does is encrypt and use a private pipe between you and the vpn endpoint.. once the packet gets there it goes out on the net like a regular packet..
ie you ----- vpn encrypted etc --- endpoint ----- regular traffic to p2p site
so unless the vpn endpt is at the p2p site this would do nothing to help with the issue???? | |
|
| curls
join:2000-12-27
Nepean, ON | Re: this makes no sense Sure it does... the ISP won't be able to tell who you are connected to, except the VPN IP address. So, the ISP can't track how many peers you are connecting to, and therefore can't tell you are using a bit torrent program -- they just see the one stream of data to/from the VPN and that's it. | |
|
| | Interesting answer Of course how long it lasts and keeps working well is anyones guess. | |
|
| | Not really working for me Running the SecureIX tunnel has improved my speeds a little but they are still only about 15% of what I was previously getting. | |
|
|
|
·
