Comments on: Should your ISP monitor your connection?

By: Steve

Steve — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 15:20:59 +0000

I found many isp in east EU spy me.

By: zen

zen — Tue, 13 May 2008 20:47:43 +0000

Hi
For those interested, take a look at ( arstechnica.com post 120080512 regarding deep packet inspection and the links from the piece. All systems can lead to function creep, whereby what was a fairly neutral piece of technology or system can take us down all sorts of avenues, just look at I/D cards. I believe ISPs should provide a system that is as hands off as possible and if more bandwidth is required to stop traffic shaping then they should be honest with the customer and we should pay for it.
Regards.

By: Neil_A

Neil_A — Wed, 07 May 2008 11:07:44 +0000

Hi Axis - it's protocols we're looking for i.e. email, VoIP, gaming, VPN, FTP, P2P etc.

I guess you can choose whatever phrasing suits. Email for me is the application - SMTP, IMAP, POP3 would be the protocols that make up that application.

We can't for example tell if you're using Firefox or IE, if that's what you mean by application?

By: axisofevil

axisofevil — Wed, 07 May 2008 10:58:49 +0000

Sorry to be so persistent:-
But the phrase “We use Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) to identify what applications our customers are using on their connection.” makes no mention about protocols - I read it as PN tries to discover which *applications* I run - which is something completely different.

Is this bad phrasing or is it something else?
It's obviously desirable that time-critical applications should get higher priority than FTP, P2P, etc.

By: Jack

Jack — Tue, 06 May 2008 15:58:15 +0000

No axis its necessary in terms of it ensures that all services run smoothly and a small majority of users downloading files dont effect other customers for example. Without the packet inspection, Plusnets systems wouldnt be able to identify what each protocol is and prioritise them accordingly. All the Ellacoya sytem is doing is seeing what protocols are being used by the customer and reflecting what the service offer (tariff) has signed up to whilst at the same time doing it to the other thousands of customers. It then ensures everyone gets a fair share of service to what they paid for. Without it the gateways would just fill up most likely to the point where packet loss starts to occur and then everyone within that gateway is effected.

By: axisofevil

axisofevil — Sun, 04 May 2008 21:24:08 +0000

I'm well aware that you prioritize traffic according to the type of traffic - and I don't think anyone would have any issues with that. But I wasn't aware that "We use Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) to identify what applications our customers are using on their connection."
That sounds very intrusive (and quite unnecessary).

By: Rick Fox

Rick Fox — Sun, 04 May 2008 11:12:12 +0000

I always find it strange when monitoring data is talked about. If the police, or even the Security Services, wanted to do this, they would require a warrant and would need to give grounds why they suspect criminal activity to be going on requiring the data monitoring. Why then is it so simple for an ISP, Phorm or whoever to just 'do it'? No offense meant to PN, BTW. I just think that the only people who should be allowed to monitor my (or anyone's) data without express permission is the government in the course of legitimate criminal/national security issues. Not an ISP, or Google etc. Personally, I'm in the 'I don't want everything I do being watched' camp. Did you guess? I don't care what info the NSA gives MI5 from Echelon about my 'phone calls and bot searches. They might find some of my scientific research 'interesting', but not much more than that. However I really object to anyone else being allowed to peruse my browsing habits. I accept that there are some levels of monitoring needed to ensure the efficient running of the network etc. These should be made clearly available to people so they know what is being watched and why. Any more than that, should be an 'opt-in' service, again with clear and contractual information as to exactly what is monitored and what is done with the data.. If I don't opt-in, I don't get monitored. Simple as that. Just my thoughts...

By: Mark

Mark — Sun, 04 May 2008 09:09:22 +0000

Axis. DPI is what allows us to ensure that time sensitive traffic is not impeded by apps such as P2P and Usenet and is how our traffic management works. Our approach is not to look at what you are downloading, frankly thats not our business, but to ensure that the correct protocols are given the proper priority on our network. We are under pressure from no quarter to go down the Phorm route and this is certainly not on our road map. For more info on our Traffic management see this link

By: axisofevil

axisofevil — Sat, 03 May 2008 20:07:17 +0000

And I thought I was being paranoid by using encryption on any P2P activity I do! If you want to "monitor" my traffic without my permission then I believe that this is illegal (as BT/Phorm have belatedly discovered).

How would you know if you monitoring my connection to save a child from something horrible or blocking me from a site I wished to visit (I have more than one PC in the house).

Have BT been pressuring PN into heading down the Phorm route?
I don't ever recall opting-in to this deep packet inspection.

I just want an ISP that delivers data. No fancy unwanted services please.

By: Rob

Rob — Fri, 02 May 2008 22:02:50 +0000

opendns.com offers a free way to control what websites are allowed or blocked with minimal config changes to your pc. It is the sort of service that your ISP doesn't force onto you but can be very useful.

I can see why ISPs would want to monitor the traffic types on their network - and it is good that Plusnet is so open what they do.