Loss of Privacy

Keeping you informed on recent losses to privacy and civil rights worldwide.

Browsing Posts in Net Neutrality

In a new report from the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) warns that Internet service providers (ISPs) may use data caps to impose higher prices on home users.

ISPs have argued that consumers could benefit from caps or “usage-based pricing,” because consumers who use small amounts of data would pay less than customers who use a lot more, similar to how the cellular market works. But there isn’t enough competition in all cities or towns to prevent ISPs from abusing data caps, the GAO wrote.

“Although few fixed Internet customers are affected by UBP [usage-based pricing] at this time, the number could grow to the extent that fixed Internet providers increase their use of UBP and data use grows,” the GAO wrote. “Providers could implement UBP in a way that benefits consumers—for example, by offering low-data, low-cost plans for customers who do not want to pay for an unlimited data plan they do not need. However, providers—especially those facing limited competition—could use UBP as a means to increase their profits which could result in UBP having negative effects, including increased prices paid by consumers, reductions in content and applications accessed by consumers, and increased threats to network security.”

Comcast is already testing usage caps and plans to roll it out nationwide to consumers.

In this trial, XFINITY Internet Economy Plus customers can choose to enroll in the Flexible-Data Option to receive a $5.00 credit on their monthly bill and reduce their data usage plan from 300 GB to 5 GB. If customers choose this option and use more than 5 GB of data in any given month, they will not receive the $5.00 credit and will be charged an additional $1.00 for each gigabyte of data used over the 5 GB included in the Flexible-Data Option.

For those who are concerned, there is something you can do to tell the FCC this is a problem.


After learning where your state stands on municipal broadband, you can file a complaint with the FCC.

Some tips in writing your complaint include the fact that the average cord cutter uses 328 GB of data per month just with Netflix and referencing some other statistics from this site.

Download (PDF, 2.51MB)

flattr this!

Sen. Al Franken says Sen. Ted Cruz ‘s comparison of net neutrality as ‘Obamacare for internet’ is completely wrong.

Al Franken’s speech from four year’s ago on net neutrality is still relevant. The heart of it is around 11:30.

Franken made a PSA earlier this year explaining net neutrality. He’s been fighting for four years.

flattr this!

A group of companies and websites recently came together for “Internet Slowdown Day” to symbolically show people what the internet would be like if new net neutrality rules get passed. Net Neutrality is a bit hard to follow so Jimmy did a brief demonstration that will hopefully make it very clear.

flattr this!

Namecheap’s message to the FCC: Don’t flush our rights down the toilet! Net neutrality is here to stay.

Song performed by Bobby Jo Valentine.


Don’t take away our net neutrality
The internet was made for you and me

We need it for communication
The Youtube and the Facebook nation
For sharing selfies night and day

Hey – hey – hey

Don’t flush our rights away
Don’t make the people pay
Wall Street shouldn’t have a say – ay ay
It’s not gonna be OK

How expensive is it gonna be
To stream our favorite movies and TV

Or get an online education
Without any limitation
So it’s time for us to say

Hey – hey – hey

Don’t flush our rights away
Don’t make the people pay
Wall Street shouldn’t have a say – ay ay
Don’t flush our rights away


flattr this!

Power exists to be used. Some wish for cyber safety, which they will not get. Others wish for cyber order, which they will not get. Some have the eye to discern cyber policies that are “the least worst thing;” may they fill the vacuum of wishful thinking.

This is Dan Greer‘s keynote speech at Black Hat 2014. The transcript is worth reading as well.

As if it needed saying, cyber security is now a riveting concern, a top issue in many venues more important than this one. This is not to insult Black Hat; rather it is to note that every speaker, every writer, every practitioner in the field of cyber security who has wished that its topic, and us with it, were taken seriously has gotten their wish. Cyber security *is* being taken seriously, which, as you well know is not the same as being taken usefully, coherently, or lastingly. Whether we are talking about laws like the Digital Millenium Copyright Act or the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, or the non-lawmaking but perhaps even more significant actions that the Executive agencies are undertaking, “we” and the cyber security issue have never been more at the forefront of policy. And you ain’t seen nothing yet.

Not only has cybersecurity reached the highest levels of attention, it has spread into nearly every corner. If area is the product of height and width, then the footprint of cybersecurity has surpassed the grasp of any one of us.

Greer’s speech was broken down into 10 sections: Mandatory reporting, net neutrality, source code liability, strike back, fall backs and resiliency, vulnerability finding, right to be forgotten, Internet voting, abandonment, and convergence.

Papers, Please has a nice breakdown of some of the more pertinent privacy and identification issues.

flattr this!