Jump to content

Brace Yourselves, People. Six Strikes and You're Out.


CenSin

Recommended Posts

Over the course of this week, major internet service providers (ISP) will be rolling out something they term the six strikes system or copyright alert system. This has been in development for more than a year in collaboration with the entertainment industry and was actually supposed to roll out much earlier. The basic idea is to monitor the internet connections of everyone (which might amount to warrantless wiretapping depending on how they do it) and send out alerts to the users when something "piratey" is detected. They do not need proof, and to fight an accusation will cost you $35. What happens after the sixth time depends on the ISP, but termination of service is an option for some providers. (Verizon is apparently not going to disconnect users.)

 

Commentary by the internets suggests that ISPs may be willing to allow false positives as it gives them an excuse to throttle the bandwidth of their customers, not to mention profit from the hearing process (where they pay nothing, but you have to pay $35 to get a shot at arguing your case).

 

In the news:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I'm not afraid. I have Verizon FiOs. I'll continue doing whatever I'm doing, not to say I'm doing anything "piratey." <<, >>. I do most of my stuff on private trackers anyway.

 

Also, you may see interest in this article:

 

http://torrentfreak.com/six-strikes-anti-piracy-scheme-starts-130225/

I just read it.

BitTorrent trackers may be safe for now, but monitoring company MarkMonitor was advised to start eyeing these sites as well.

 

I have Verizon FiOS too, but after a few strikes Verizon will reduce the speed to 256kbps for several days, which is a pretty strong deterrent. Maybe getting business class service will allow opting out of the six strikes system, but I'd rather pay for a VPN for much improved privacy. They're already monitoring everything else anyway.

 

And as I've mentioned before, the $35 fee to fight an accusation really creates a perverse incentive to let false positives by.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just read it.

 

I have Verizon FiOS too, but after a few strikes Verizon will reduce the speed to 256kbps for several days, which is a pretty strong deterrent. Maybe getting business class service will allow opting out of the six strikes system, but I'd rather pay for a VPN for much improved privacy. They're already monitoring everything else anyway.

 

And as I've mentioned before, the $35 fee to fight an accusation really creates a perverse incentive to let false positives by.

I've thought about using a VPN, but they most likely will not hold the FiOs speed I usually get when downloading something. As it is, I do subscribe to Usenet which is currently not being said to be monitored, so that should save me as well. Verizon and all these ISPs will be looking for connections to those most used public trackers like The Pirate Bay, Kat.Ph, etc. I don't use those, so there's a good chance I'll be safe. If something does come by, I'll pay that small fee just for the hell of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've thought about using a VPN, but they most likely will not hold the FiOs speed I usually get when downloading something. As it is, I do subscribe to Usenet which is currently not being said to be monitored, so that should save me as well. Verizon and all these ISPs will be looking for connections to those most used public trackers like The Pirate Bay, Kat.Ph, etc. I don't use those, so there's a good chance I'll be safe. If something does come by, I'll pay that small fee just for the hell of it.

I wonder if it would be faster if I bought 2 or more VPN services and used a hardware or software configuration to split the load between the two. Stuff like P2P achieves its speed mostly by multiplexing (downloading different pieces from multiple users simultaneously) anyway, and the aggregate bandwidth of multiple VPNs would achieve speeds just under my raw bandwidth limit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if it would be faster if I bought 2 or more VPN services and used a hardware or software configuration to split the load between the two. Stuff like P2P achieves its speed mostly by multiplexing (downloading different pieces from multiple users simultaneously) anyway, and the aggregate bandwidth of multiple VPNs would achieve speeds just under my raw bandwidth limit.

Thats a good idea, and it may work, but what about the cost? Does that matter to you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe, if I could find a good VPN that isn't too expensive, I'll look into subscribing to one.

You could get a few—each for $5/month. A lot of cheap ones would be better than one expensive one because you'd get redundancy and the bandwidth is additive. Plus, it would allow for more flexibility like a layered VPN.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've thought about using a VPN, but they most likely will not hold the FiOs speed I usually get when downloading something. As it is, I do subscribe to Usenet which is currently not being said to be monitored, so that should save me as well. Verizon and all these ISPs will be looking for connections to those most used public trackers like The Pirate Bay, Kat.Ph, etc. I don't use those, so there's a good chance I'll be safe. If something does come by, I'll pay that small fee just for the hell of it.

 

I agree. In general with VPNs there is a definite lag time in upload and download speed. This is one of the disadvantages of virtualization technology and it can be attributed to limitations on the NOS's installed on the given proxy servers where internet access (and web hosting or virtual networks)  is achieved. Such as Windows Server 2008 R3. The advantages of using virtualization technology (at least in the IT industry itself, not speaking for the consumer end of this vast industry) outweighs the problems with performance, as it makes for a much more secure network for many benificial reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. In general with VPNs there is a definite lag time in upload and download speed. This is one of the disadvantages of virtualization technology and it can be attributed to limitations on the NOS's installed on the given proxy servers where internet access (and web hosting or virtual networks)  is achieved. Such as Windows Server 2008 R3. The advantages of using virtualization technology (at least in the IT industry itself, not speaking for the consumer end of this vast industry) outweighs the problems with performance, as it makes for a much more secure network for many benificial reasons.

VPNs in this scenario are mostly for stuff that don't require too much responsiveness. Lag isn't going to make much of a difference in web browsing or torrenting. The real-time stuff like video conferencing and VoIP would use their own security protocols and sit outside the VPN tunnel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VPNs in this scenario are mostly for stuff that don't require too much responsiveness. Lag isn't going to make much of a difference in web browsing or torrenting. The real-time stuff like video conferencing and VoIP would use their own security protocols and sit outside the VPN tunnel.

 

Hmmm.... Speaking of which, I just did have a problem at helpdesk today with VolP which I was totally stumped on, was'nt hearing voice on either end on the IP phones after call pick up. I do know that for some reason the network administrator told me that he actually did attempt to traffic VolP over the VPN IPSEC inside the VPN tunnel to the remote location. I was baffled because I was still able to ping all of the hosts and the the CUCM server. I'm wondering if it could have to to with some NAT breaking it up. Guess I'll have to sleep on it and see what the admin's plans are in the morning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.