[194246] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Hammett)
Wed Mar 29 06:35:56 2017
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 05:35:50 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <736DFDB0-BD45-4E76-840B-931BF58FC8BD@ianai.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Are there really no others or are the ones that are there just marketing th=
emselves poorly? Any nearby you could convince to expand?=20
Over my WISP's coverage, I have at least 13 WISP competitors, 7 broadband w=
ireline and nearly that many enterprise fiber. I admit that may be exceptio=
nal.=20
-----=20
Mike Hammett=20
Intelligent Computing Solutions=20
Midwest Internet Exchange=20
The Brothers WISP=20
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>=20
To: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org>=20
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 9:25:54 PM=20
Subject: Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineer=
s opposed to FCC privacy repeal=20
Thanks, I was a bit confused why you said it, which is apparently because I=
was confused. :-)=20
I agree we need to do a better job educating users why this is important.=
=20
And just so my opinion is clear, if there were a true market, I would not m=
ind ISPs who did this (with proper notice). Unfortunately, over half of all=
households in the US have one or fewer choices for broadband providers. I =
am one of them. What do I do if my ISP wants to collect my data? VPN everyt=
hing?=20
--=20
TTFN,=20
patrick=20
> On Mar 28, 2017, at 10:18 PM, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:=20
>=20
> It was more a plea to educate the list on why this matters vs. doom and g=
loom with a little more gloom and a little less Carmack. Instead I got more=
of the sky is falling.=20
>=20
> Note that I don't intend to ever do this at my ISP, nor my IX.=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -----=20
> Mike Hammett=20
> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>=20
> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentCom=
putingSolutionsDeKalb> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-comput=
ing-solutions> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL>=20
> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>=20
> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/mid=
west-internet-exchange> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix>=20
> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>=20
> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> <https://www.youtube.com/chann=
el/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>=20
> From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net <mailto:patrick@ianai.net>>=
=20
> To: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org <mailto:nanog@nanog.org>>=20
> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 9:12:15 PM=20
> Subject: Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engine=
ers opposed to FCC privacy repeal=20
>=20
> Mike:=20
>=20
> My guess is you do not.=20
>=20
> Which is -precisely- why the users (proletariat?) need to find a way to s=
top you. Hence laws & regulations.=20
>=20
> Later in this thread you said =E2=80=9Cwe are done here=E2=80=9D. Would t=
hat you were so lucky.=20
>=20
> --=20
> TTFN,=20
> patrick=20
>=20
> > On Mar 28, 2017, at 5:58 PM, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net <mailto:nan=
og@ics-il.net>> wrote:=20
> >=20
> > Why am I supposed to care?=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > -----=20
> > Mike Hammett=20
> > Intelligent Computing Solutions=20
> >=20
> > Midwest Internet Exchange=20
> >=20
> > The Brothers WISP=20
> >=20
> > ----- Original Message -----=20
> >=20
> > From: "Rich Kulawiec" <rsk@gsp.org <mailto:rsk@gsp.org>>=20
> > To: nanog@nanog.org <mailto:nanog@nanog.org>=20
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 4:45:25 PM=20
> > Subject: Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engi=
neers opposed to FCC privacy repeal=20
> >=20
> > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 06:45:04PM +0000, Mel Beckman wrote:=20
> >> The claim oft presented by people favoring this customer abuse is that=
=20
> >> the sold data is anonymous. But it's been well-established that very=
=20
> >> simple data aggregation techniques can develop signatures that reveal=
=20
> >> the identity of people in anonymized data.=20
> >=20
> > This needs to be repeated loudly and often at every possible opportunit=
y.=20
> > I've spent much of the past decade studying this issue and the most suc=
cinct=20
> > way I can put it is that however good you (generic "you") think=20
> > de-anonymization techniques are, you're wrong: they're way better than =
that.=20
> > Billions, and I am not exaggerating even a little bit, have been spent=
=20
> > on this problem, and they've been spent by smart people with essentiall=
y=20
> > unlimited computational resources. And whaddaya know, they've succeeded=
.=20
> >=20
> > So if someone presents you a data corpus and says "this data is anonymi=
zed",=20
> > the default response should be to mock them, because there is a very hi=
gh=20
> > probability they're either (a) lying or (b) wrong.=20
> >=20
> > Incidentally, I'm also a signatory of the EFF document, since of course=
=20
> > with nearly 40 years in the field I'm a mere clueless newbie and despit=
e=20
> > ripping them a new one about once every other month, I'm clearly a tool=
=20
> > of Google.=20
> >=20
> > ---rsk=20
