PDA

View Full Version : Congress Votes to Allow IP's to Collect Data Without Your Permission


Katie
03-29-2017, 07:42 PM
http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/29/technology/internet-privacy-outrage/index.html?iid=hp-stack-dom

This feels pretty gross. I want to be able to opt out of having my browsing history collected and sold.

ProphetofGanja
03-29-2017, 07:54 PM
That's ****ed up

FredWolfLeonardo
03-29-2017, 08:02 PM
Perhaps it has been offically legalized, but I suspect it has been actually going on for quite a while.

TheSkeletonMan939
03-29-2017, 08:06 PM
I believe that if the 'common carrier' classification of ISPs is removed, then the FTC will be able to scrutinize how they handle private data.

snake
03-29-2017, 08:32 PM
If I were an ISP, I'd use this to advertise privacy, unlike other providers.

This is pretty terrible. I expect all net security to be compromised within the decade. It wouldn't surprise me if SOPA/PIPA got passed today.

CyberCubed
03-29-2017, 08:33 PM
What's the problem here? As long as you're not doing any illegal activity, you should have nothing to fear. I'm sure nobody in Congress cares what your favorite porn site is.

CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy
03-29-2017, 08:44 PM
What's the problem here? As long as you're not doing any illegal activity, you should have nothing to fear. I'm sure nobody in Congress cares what your favorite porn site is.

You are, at times, unbearably naive. C'mon, you're an 80's kid. You're supposed to understand privacy issues.

CyberCubed
03-29-2017, 08:46 PM
I have nothing to hide on my computer, in fact, nobody should. Do I care that Congress knows what websites I visit? Does that make a difference?

If you assume they're going to steal personal data like credit cards or stuff like that, you'll know about it and it can't be done. Nobody is going to steal your identity and get away with it. As I said, unless you're engaged in some sort of bizarre illegal activity, in which you SHOULD be caught, most people should have nothing to hide.

Autbot_Benz
03-29-2017, 08:49 PM
we all know what Cubed's Browsing History is anyway its Melissa Beniost :lol:

Bry
03-29-2017, 08:50 PM
This is awful news for pretty much everybody, but I wonder how many 4/8channers who voted Trump (and helped this happen in the process) are sweating buckets right now. :tlol:

TheSkeletonMan939
03-29-2017, 08:50 PM
"Let's see here, Mr. Cubed... thank you for coming to this job interview. Let's take a look at your Internet history... boy, you sure spend a lot of time on that Technodrome site... that's nice... wait... w-what is this??? 'A Day Inside May'? Why... I don't understand..."

CyberCubed
03-29-2017, 08:54 PM
I don't think you people know what illegal activity is. The people who visit porn sites aren't going to jail.

Andrew NDB
03-29-2017, 08:55 PM
It's gonna add jobs. It's gonna be yuge.

TheSkeletonMan939
03-29-2017, 08:56 PM
This is awful news for pretty much everybody, but I wonder how many 4/8channers who voted Trump (and helped this happen in the process) are sweating buckets right now. :tlol:

Many, from what I saw. :lol:

snake
03-29-2017, 09:46 PM
This is awful news for pretty much everybody, but I wonder how many 4/8channers who voted Trump (and helped this happen in the process) are sweating buckets right now. :tlol:

This was happening no matter who won. Don't be naive.

Powder
03-29-2017, 09:58 PM
This was happening no matter who won. Don't be naive.

This.

:blanksta:

ssjup81
03-29-2017, 11:49 PM
"Let's see here, Mr. Cubed... thank you for coming to this job interview. Let's take a look at your Internet history... boy, you sure spend a lot of time on that Technodrome site... that's nice... wait... w-what is this??? 'A Day Inside May'? Why... I don't understand...":lol:

That aside, that is pretty sucky. Imagine employers checking their employees' net history and finding an excuse to fire them. Recent season of South Park played around with this subject.

You know, thinking about it, concepts in like Minority Report is beginning to sound a little less convoluted...

DestronMirage22
03-29-2017, 11:53 PM
Dang, hope this isn't just the start of something worse.

Powder
03-30-2017, 12:55 AM
Dang, hope this isn't just the start of something worse.

How could it possibly not be?

ToTheNines
03-30-2017, 05:30 AM
http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/29/technology/internet-privacy-outrage/index.html?iid=hp-stack-dom

This feels pretty gross. I want to be able to opt out of having my browsing history collected and sold.

Did the House not vote on this? I'm surprised it passed either way. There's a few Republicans that I can't believe voted yes. Part of me thinks this is all political theater and just setting up Donnie to be the good guy and veto.

If I were an ISP, I'd use this to advertise privacy, unlike other providers.

This. Hopefully someone steps up.

What's the problem here? As long as you're not doing any illegal activity, you should have nothing to fear.

I know people like to joke that you're similar to Trump, but jeez... you're more authoritarian than Hillary and Donnie put together.

I'm sure nobody in Congress cares what your favorite porn site is.

Totally untrue.

TheSkeletonMan939
03-30-2017, 10:35 AM
Did the House not vote on this? I'm surprised it passed either way. There's a few Republicans that I can't believe voted yes. Part of me thinks this is all political theater and just setting up Donnie to be the good guy and veto.

The House voted. And according to the White House website, Trump is planning to sign. (https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/03/28/statement-administration-policy-sjres-34-%E2%80%93-disapproving-federal)

I still am unclear on what the ramifications of this are. As far as I understand all they did was revoke some privacy act that wasn't even introduced until last December. I don't even know if it went into effect yet. They did NOT vote on whether to shift responsibilities of ISPs to the FTC from the FCC (though I know they're aiming to do that). Assuming I'm correct, then the FCC still has time to change the status of ISPs back from utilities/common carriers to whatever they were before, so that ISPs would no longer be exempt from the FTC Act's Section 5 (https://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/supmanual/cch/ftca.pdf).

plastroncafe
03-30-2017, 10:40 AM
Friends in IT have been suggesting VPN programs for computers and mobile devices alike, as well as encouraging others to use https:// whenever possible.

I'm a little sad I didn't make it in here before the, "both parties are the same!!!" folks, but...such is life.

Really the only good out of all of this, is going to be watching the frothing mess of impotent rage coming from the Alt-reich.

The Deadman
03-30-2017, 02:02 PM
What's the problem here? As long as you're not doing any illegal activity, you should have nothing to fear. I'm sure nobody in Congress cares what your favorite porn site is.

Thats not the point and you know it...

ToTheNines
03-30-2017, 03:01 PM
I'm looking further into this, hoping it's not all that it seems. (The CNN article didn't do a great job with citation).

An excerpt from Jeff Flake's Senate website:


Flake’s resolution, S.J.Res. 34, would not change or lessen existing consumer privacy regulations. It is designed to block an attempt by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to expand its regulatory jurisdiction and impose prescriptive data restrictions on internet service providers. These restrictions have the potential to negatively impact consumers and the future of internet innovation.

S.J.Res. 34 would provide for congressional disapproval of the FCC rule under the Congressional Review Act, a 1996 law that empowers Congress to repeal federal regulations. The resolution would also prevent the FCC from issuing similarly harmful regulations in the future.

https://www.flake.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=D739A8C2-2B70-4D7B-9FFB-4E62CA992DB4

So according to the Rs, it does not affect privacy rules, but simply limits the FCC's jurisdiction. Gonna have to keep digging on this one.

plastroncafe
03-30-2017, 03:04 PM
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/34

Passed House without amendment (03/28/2017)

(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)

This joint resolution nullifies the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission entitled "Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services." The rule published on December 2, 2016: (1) applies the customer privacy requirements of the Communications Act of 1934 to broadband Internet access service and other telecommunications services, (2) requires telecommunications carriers to inform customers about rights to opt in or opt out of the use or the sharing of their confidential information, (3) adopts data security and breach notification requirements, (4) prohibits broadband service offerings that are contingent on surrendering privacy rights, and (5) requires disclosures and affirmative consent when a broadband provider offers customers financial incentives in exchange for the provider's right to use a customer's confidential information.


https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/12/02/2016-28006/protecting-the-privacy-of-customers-of-broadband-and-other-telecommunications-services

TheSkeletonMan939
03-30-2017, 04:26 PM
"The rule published on December 2, 2016"

It's nothing. Nothing has changed.

plastroncafe
03-30-2017, 05:28 PM
Except that it should have.
The internet, and access to it, should be treated like a utility.
And now it's not.

ToTheNines
03-30-2017, 06:06 PM
"Let's see here, Mr. Cubed... thank you for coming to this job interview. Let's take a look at your Internet history... boy, you sure spend a lot of time on that Technodrome site... that's nice... wait... w-what is this??? 'A Day Inside May'? Why... I don't understand..."

Lol, missed this earlier. They'd probably call the cops upon reading the anal sex chapter.

"The rule published on December 2, 2016"

It's nothing. Nothing has changed.

FAKE NEWS.

But for real, these rules were never in effect and it seems the Federal Trade Commission is just gonna keep doing what they've been doing, rather than the FCC taking over.

But still, I wouldn't have been opposed to those new regulations. They all seemed pretty sane to me. Bummer.

ProactiveMan
04-05-2017, 01:17 AM
Friends in IT have been suggesting VPN programs for computers and mobile devices alike, as well as encouraging others to use https:// whenever possible.

That's probably good advice. The problem is VPNs can hide what you're looking at, but you can't hide the fact that you're using a VPN from your ISP. That probably doesn't matter much to you guys, but my Government is under a lot of pressure to stop people using VPNs; mostly from the entertainment industry.

HTTPS is OK, but I think your ISP can still see the URLs. The way HTTPS works is a little bit crap too, so it's more or less pwned.

EDIT: Your ISP should only be able to see the domain in the case of HTTPS, not the URLs, unless they are a certificate authority.

John Pannozzi
05-21-2017, 10:51 PM
And then there's the FCC's plans to gut Net Neutrality (https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/05/net-neutrality-goes-down-in-flames-as-fcc-votes-to-kill-title-ii-rules/).

Here's what John Oliver has to say about that:

qI5y-_sqJT0

Mayhem
05-22-2017, 03:52 AM
If you're still left in any doubt, here are some examples of what providers were getting away with BEFORE the bill was passed in 2015...

https://www.freepress.net/blog/2017/04/25/net-neutrality-violations-brief-history