FCC to vote on strict privacy rules for ISPs in late October

Discussion in 'privacy general' started by ronjor, Oct 6, 2016.

  1. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,798
    Location:
    Texas
  2. TheWindBringeth

    TheWindBringeth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Posts:
    2,089
    In addition to this: https://www.fcc.gov/news-events/blog/2016/10/06/protecting-privacy-broadband-consumers
    DSL Reports published an article which linked to a new fact sheet PDF. Which doesn't add much but it does include brief sections on these:
    I don't see anything specific on the privacy-devastating header enrichment practice. A UUID itself wouldn't appear to require opt-in.
     
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2016
  3. Anonfame1

    Anonfame1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2016
    Posts:
    198
    Im up really late so I'm going to have to research this tomorrow, but am I right in assuming this is basically dressed to look like a good thing while ultimately allowing ISPs more opportunity to spy on users/collect data?

    Ostensibly the first parts quoted would be a protection of our rights- its certainly better to have those things protected rather than have them not protected at all. At the same time, I am not up to speed on what information ISPs are currently allowed to track/collect. In my eyes, any sharing/keeping of data that isnt strictly opt-in is a violation of the 4th amendment- their job is providing service for which we pay them.

    Due to throttling and my desire to avoid the logging of DNS requests, I currently use a foreign VPN to move my trust there; while not immune to the NSA/FBI, it does at least protect me from corporate surveillance/tracking.

    Forgive my ignorance here- so many pieces of legislation, proposals, EULAs (though they dont apply to me on Linux), proprietary firmwares (UEFI, Intel ME/AMT), etc its hard to understand where we are now.

    I can see the writing on the wall- with ISPs becoming more important (and basically mandatory to interface with the world), they are going to start getting cocky with their monopolies. They see money signs and want to start going about it in a Microsoft way to track user data for more profits.
     
  4. TheWindBringeth

    TheWindBringeth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Posts:
    2,089
    I think you would view this as a rebaselining for a significantly different regulatory environment (which has already been approved). So how things worked "before" isn't of much importance. How things work "after" is what matters.

    Frankly, I'm not really sure how to assess where things stand right now. There is information at:

    https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/filings?proceedings_name=16-106&sort=date_disseminated,DESC

    including the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking under Commission Documents:

    https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-16-39A1.pdf (PDF)

    which communicates what they were thinking/proposing and includes many questions for public comment. I want to go back over that myself. However, it would appear that they have in some ways softened their plans since the NPRM. I don't think high level summaries or fact sheets are of much use in a context where nitty gritty details will make or break you. So I find myself wanting to view a fully revised and up-to-date proposal.
     
  5. TheWindBringeth

    TheWindBringeth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Posts:
    2,089
    Seems The American Association of Advertising Agencies (“4A’s”), American Advertising Federation (“AAF”), Association of National Advertisers (“ANA”), Direct Marketing Association (“DMA”), Interactive Advertising Bureau (“IAB”), and Network Advertising Initiative (“NAI”) don't like the idea of requiring opt-in for sharing of web browsing history and/or application use history:

    https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/1010145590290 (HTML view)
    https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1010145590290/Trade Association Letter to FCC.pdf (PDF)

    Hostis Humani Generis?
     
  6. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,798
    Location:
    Texas
  7. lotuseclat79

    lotuseclat79 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    5,103
  8. lotuseclat79

    lotuseclat79 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    5,103
    The Effects of the Forthcoming FCC Privacy Rules on Internet Security

    -- Tom
     
  9. TheWindBringeth

    TheWindBringeth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Posts:
    2,089
    A 219 page Report and Order was released on November 2nd and is available at the FCC site in the Commission Documents section:

    PDF: https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-16-148A1.pdf
     
Loading...