20 ms·

We Have 24 Hours to Save Online Privacy Rules

370 points by DiabloD3 10y ago

paxcoder 10y ago
The title and the article are missing "United States" somewhere.
- verandaguys_alt 10y ago
  Speaking as a non-American, this is partially-valid point, and a very frustrating one. While the only people who can affect the decision are Americans (members of congress won't, and fundamentally shouldn't listen to calls and emails sent by foreign nationals), this is an issue that affects much of the internet-using world by virtue of such a large volume of international internet traffic going through lines on US soil. In this case, it would make sense for there to be a framework whereby international citizens can provide input, but I doubt there's a way to do this without setting a precedent which could seriously compromise the integrity of their federal decision-making bodies (any further).
  - herbst 10y ago
    To to my understanding they can not legally sell information about me as I have local laws protecting me from that. Sure I doubt they really care but this seems to be a us thing to me
rustynails 10y ago
Please don't forget to visit the EFF shop to support this organisation through memberships or merchandise, https://supporters.eff.org/shop https://supporters.eff.org/shop If the Internet has a heart, it's the EFF.
pg_is_a_butt 10y ago
We have 13 seconds as well... you're all idiots.
mgreg 10y ago
These rules are/were certainly a step in the right direction for the protection of consumer privacy and should be saved; the attention on consumer privacy is welcome. What's fascinating is that other online privacy areas that I would argue are much more invasive and threatening to consumer privacy are completely ignored. I'm referring, of course, to the ecosystems of Google, Facebook, the new Verizon (AOL, Yahoo), and the many other companies looking to amass as much consumer data as possible for profit. These FCC rules feel a bit like the FCC was patting themselves on the back for fixing a drip in the bathroom faucet while ignoring the broken pipe to the water main. From a business perspective I can also see why ISPs would be so upset about their businesses having to abide by these rules while their competitors (again, Facebook, Google, et al) are left to collect data unbridled. The all sell ads after all.
- wolfgang42 10y ago
  The EFF discusses this on one of the linked pages[1]: > Myth 3: The FCC’s privacy rules put Internet service providers at an unfair disadvantage when compared to Internet companies like Google who can profit off of consumers’ data. > Fact: Google doesn’t see everything you do on the Internet (neither does Facebook, for that matter, or any other online platform)—they only see the traffic you send to them. And you can always choose to use a different website if you want to avoid Google’s tracking. None of that is true about your ISP. You probably only have one, maybe two options when it comes to ISPs offering high-speed Internet, and your ISP sees everything—they have to, in order to send your traffic to the right place. That’s why we need the FCC’s privacy rules: ISPs are in a position of power, and they’ve shown they’re willing to abuse that power. > Plus, if you’re worried about creepy third-party tracking online, you can use free tools to protect yourself; the only way to protect your privacy from your ISP is to pay for a VPN. > Extended Version: > To begin with, it’s worth remembering that ISPs and companies like Google or Facebook see entirely different parts of your Internet activity; namely that Google or Facebook only see the traffic you send to their servers, while ISPs see all your traffic. Even when you take into account the fact that Google and Facebook have creepy third-party trackers spread across the web, they still only see a fraction of what your ISP sees. Being able to see all of your traffic gives your ISP an unprecedented view into your life (everything from what you’re shopping for, to who you talk to, to what your politics are, to what you read), which not even Google or Facebook can achieve. > There’s also another big difference between Comcast and Google: choice. While Internet users can choose between numerous online services for search, email, and more—including services that feature built-in privacy protections as a selling point—most consumers have few if any options when it comes to choosing an ISP. According to the FCC’s 2016 Broadband Progress Report, 51 percent of households have access to only one high-speed broadband provider. If that provider decides to sell their data, they can’t vote with their wallets and choose another ISP. > There’s one last difference: Internet users can prevent companies like Google from spying on them as they surf the web. If you want to do something online without being tracked, you can use a variety of free tools that even powerful companies like Google cannot overcome. But nothing short of paying to use a virtual private network—essentially having to pay a fee to protect your online privacy—will protect you from your ISP. [1]: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/three-myths-telecom-industry-using-convince-congress-repeal-fccs-privacy-rules#myth3 https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/three-myths-telecom-in...
tfussell 10y ago
What I've been curious to learn and haven't heard discussed is how this data will become available. Will I be able to call up Comcast and pay $X for a particular user's browsing history after this passes?
- wolfgang42 10y ago
  You (J. Random Person) may not be able to, but advertising companies probably will be able to. For example, from https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/five-creepy-things-your-isp-could-do-if-congress-repeals-fccs-privacy-protections https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/five-creepy-things-you... : > According to Ad Age, SAP sells a service called Consumer Insights 365, which “ingests regularly updated data representing as many as 300 cellphone events per day for each of the 20 million to 25 million mobile subscribers.” What type of data does Consumer Insights 365 “ingest?” Again, according to Ad Age, “The service also combines data from telcos with other information, telling businesses whether shoppers are checking out competitor prices… It can tell them the age ranges and genders of people who visited a store location between 10 a.m. and noon, and link location and demographic data with shoppers' web browsing history.”
  - tfussell 10y ago
    That's what I figured. I wonder if a request from a sole proprietorship would be sufficient to get an ISP to respond to such requests.
    - Chaebixi 10y ago
      My guess is they'd just use price as a gatekeeper, rather than spending time to do a background check of their customers. I doubt any of these data feeds are cheap.
      - 1001101 10y ago
        I'd love to see this process get hacked - What's the CEO of {your_favorite_ISP} been perusing on the web? Sounds like a good opportunity for a crowdfund.
FKcongress 10y ago
The current congress will pay for this. Not only they decided not to implement trump's new insurance policy, so hard working Americans will continue to pay 3 times more for the same insurance, but they also voted for this miserable law to allow companies sell customers data (SPYING).
levi_n 10y ago
https://resistbot.io/ https://resistbot.io/ makes it real easy to contact your representatives in a manner they are more likely to see.
- Sk1pp 10y ago
  This only gave me the option to send to my senators (when starting), this issue is currently headed to the house. EDIT: from the FAQ looks like there is a house command but it is only active to more "experienced" users. EDIT EDIT: https://resistbot.io/privacy.html https://resistbot.io/privacy.html worth reading before you use, there are some clauses in there that are a little sketchy.
- sparky_z 10y ago
  This service seems short-sighted to me. It might trick a few representatives the first time around, but if it actually succeeds in bringing in a high volume of low-effort responses it will only devalue itself the way email is currently devalued (possibly along with some collateral damage to the credibility of the class of high-effort correspondants it is disguising its users as). The way to improve politics isn't to make political engagement as casual and low effort as possible.
  - therealdrag0 10y ago
    It seems like to SOME extent it is. Seems like part of lobbyist influence comes from planting seeds in legislators minds, as their full-time job. Most people have an opinion but can't be bothered to lobby for their own interests because they have their own full time job. We need transparent ways for representatives to poll what constituents want. Really there should be a state sponsored electronic voting system for stuff like this. #ArmChairPhilosophy
- dogas 10y ago
  I disagree. The best option is to call. You likely won't talk to the rep themselves, but you will either leave a message or talk to one of their staffers. It will bubble up to them. If a rep gets a ton of calls against a particular piece of legislation, they may change their position for fear of not being re-elected. https://callyourrep.co/ https://callyourrep.co/
Spivak 10y ago
Is there anything practical I can do if I already know my representative is going to vote against the bill?
- pboutros 10y ago
  It isn't over till it's over. Many reps/senators would have voted in favor of SOPA/PIPA, but were dissuaded from doing so by the sheer volume of people calling about it. Public pressure is a real thing. Call your rep!
- Chaebixi 10y ago
  Contact your state reps. Even if the federal rules go, state-level rules can help mitigate the damage locally, and perhaps even nationally [1]. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/26/technology/internet-privacy-state-legislation-illinois.html?emc=edit_nn_20170327&nl=morning-briefing&nlid=78869192&te=1 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/26/technology/internet-priva...
jessaustin 10y ago
One wonders if this asinine legislation might also be supported by VPN providers?
- SparkyMcUnicorn 10y ago
  PIA took out a full-page NYT ad indicating strong opposition: https://i.imgur.com/GJYYNle.jpg https://i.imgur.com/GJYYNle.jpg I'm sure there are VPN providers that support it, though.
  - fauigerzigerk 10y ago
    This form of protest is of course very good marketing as well.
exabrial 10y ago
Unpopular comment alert: This is a good thing. Guys, I don't think the "Federal Communication Commission" should be passing consumer protection regulations. What's to stop Amazon, Netflix, etc from selling a service where an advertiser sends them an IP and they get back your name and interests? These regulations need to be passed at a much broader level. I think the FCC should focus on anti-competitive behavior on ISPs right now, and leave these sorts of matters to another regulatory body. And besides, with TLS (and DNSCurve if you're paranoid), I'm not sure this regulation means much anyway.
- devindotcom 10y ago
  The FCC has no authority over media and retail companies - they DO have authority over ISPs in some aspects. They have passed consumer protection regulations relating to the transmission and storage of data before. The practices you describe (with Amazon etc) are none of the FCC's business. Anti-competitive behavior and privacy violations by non-telecoms businesses falls under the authority of the Federal Trade Commission. It means something, because the idea is to protect the vulnerable from predatory practices, not to prevent the technically proficient from what they see as easily avoided practices.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- unethical_ban 10y ago
  Where should consumer protection exist? As one agency? That means they need to staff people with dozens of fields of expertise, and it gives politicians (Republicans) one throat to choke when they want to "kill big government". Why not let the agencies that administer different fields and businesses have a "consumer protection" section?
jumpkickhit 10y ago
I'm assuming this will pass. Will we ever be able to remove it one it's in effect? Or is that likely to never be an option.
ReedJessen 10y ago
The "Calling you now" widget to contact my congress person doesn't seem to work for me. Is this just my problem of is it down for everyone?

370 points by DiabloD3 10y ago

paxcoder 10y ago

The title and the article are missing "United States" somewhere.

verandaguys_alt 10y ago
Speaking as a non-American, this is partially-valid point, and a very frustrating one. While the only people who can affect the decision are Americans (members of congress won't, and fundamentally shouldn't listen to calls and emails sent by foreign nationals), this is an issue that affects much of the internet-using world by virtue of such a large volume of international internet traffic going through lines on US soil. In this case, it would make sense for there to be a framework whereby international citizens can provide input, but I doubt there's a way to do this without setting a precedent which could seriously compromise the integrity of their federal decision-making bodies (any further).
- herbst 10y ago
  To to my understanding they can not legally sell information about me as I have local laws protecting me from that. Sure I doubt they really care but this seems to be a us thing to me

rustynails 10y ago

Please don't forget to visit the EFF shop to support this organisation through memberships or merchandise, https://supporters.eff.org/shop https://supporters.eff.org/shop If the Internet has a heart, it's the EFF.

pg_is_a_butt 10y ago

We have 13 seconds as well... you're all idiots.

mgreg 10y ago

These rules are/were certainly a step in the right direction for the protection of consumer privacy and should be saved; the attention on consumer privacy is welcome. What's fascinating is that other online privacy areas that I would argue are much more invasive and threatening to consumer privacy are completely ignored. I'm referring, of course, to the ecosystems of Google, Facebook, the new Verizon (AOL, Yahoo), and the many other companies looking to amass as much consumer data as possible for profit. These FCC rules feel a bit like the FCC was patting themselves on the back for fixing a drip in the bathroom faucet while ignoring the broken pipe to the water main. From a business perspective I can also see why ISPs would be so upset about their businesses having to abide by these rules while their competitors (again, Facebook, Google, et al) are left to collect data unbridled. The all sell ads after all.

wolfgang42 10y ago
The EFF discusses this on one of the linked pages[1]: > Myth 3: The FCC’s privacy rules put Internet service providers at an unfair disadvantage when compared to Internet companies like Google who can profit off of consumers’ data. > Fact: Google doesn’t see everything you do on the Internet (neither does Facebook, for that matter, or any other online platform)—they only see the traffic you send to them. And you can always choose to use a different website if you want to avoid Google’s tracking. None of that is true about your ISP. You probably only have one, maybe two options when it comes to ISPs offering high-speed Internet, and your ISP sees everything—they have to, in order to send your traffic to the right place. That’s why we need the FCC’s privacy rules: ISPs are in a position of power, and they’ve shown they’re willing to abuse that power. > Plus, if you’re worried about creepy third-party tracking online, you can use free tools to protect yourself; the only way to protect your privacy from your ISP is to pay for a VPN. > Extended Version: > To begin with, it’s worth remembering that ISPs and companies like Google or Facebook see entirely different parts of your Internet activity; namely that Google or Facebook only see the traffic you send to their servers, while ISPs see all your traffic. Even when you take into account the fact that Google and Facebook have creepy third-party trackers spread across the web, they still only see a fraction of what your ISP sees. Being able to see all of your traffic gives your ISP an unprecedented view into your life (everything from what you’re shopping for, to who you talk to, to what your politics are, to what you read), which not even Google or Facebook can achieve. > There’s also another big difference between Comcast and Google: choice. While Internet users can choose between numerous online services for search, email, and more—including services that feature built-in privacy protections as a selling point—most consumers have few if any options when it comes to choosing an ISP. According to the FCC’s 2016 Broadband Progress Report, 51 percent of households have access to only one high-speed broadband provider. If that provider decides to sell their data, they can’t vote with their wallets and choose another ISP. > There’s one last difference: Internet users can prevent companies like Google from spying on them as they surf the web. If you want to do something online without being tracked, you can use a variety of free tools that even powerful companies like Google cannot overcome. But nothing short of paying to use a virtual private network—essentially having to pay a fee to protect your online privacy—will protect you from your ISP. [1]: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/three-myths-telecom-industry-using-convince-congress-repeal-fccs-privacy-rules#myth3 https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/three-myths-telecom-in...

tfussell 10y ago

What I've been curious to learn and haven't heard discussed is how this data will become available. Will I be able to call up Comcast and pay $X for a particular user's browsing history after this passes?

wolfgang42 10y ago
You (J. Random Person) may not be able to, but advertising companies probably will be able to. For example, from https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/five-creepy-things-your-isp-could-do-if-congress-repeals-fccs-privacy-protections https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/five-creepy-things-you... : > According to Ad Age, SAP sells a service called Consumer Insights 365, which “ingests regularly updated data representing as many as 300 cellphone events per day for each of the 20 million to 25 million mobile subscribers.” What type of data does Consumer Insights 365 “ingest?” Again, according to Ad Age, “The service also combines data from telcos with other information, telling businesses whether shoppers are checking out competitor prices… It can tell them the age ranges and genders of people who visited a store location between 10 a.m. and noon, and link location and demographic data with shoppers' web browsing history.”
- tfussell 10y ago
  That's what I figured. I wonder if a request from a sole proprietorship would be sufficient to get an ISP to respond to such requests.
  - Chaebixi 10y ago
    My guess is they'd just use price as a gatekeeper, rather than spending time to do a background check of their customers. I doubt any of these data feeds are cheap.
    - 1001101 10y ago
      I'd love to see this process get hacked - What's the CEO of {your_favorite_ISP} been perusing on the web? Sounds like a good opportunity for a crowdfund.

FKcongress 10y ago

The current congress will pay for this. Not only they decided not to implement trump's new insurance policy, so hard working Americans will continue to pay 3 times more for the same insurance, but they also voted for this miserable law to allow companies sell customers data (SPYING).

levi_n 10y ago

https://resistbot.io/ https://resistbot.io/ makes it real easy to contact your representatives in a manner they are more likely to see.

Sk1pp 10y ago
This only gave me the option to send to my senators (when starting), this issue is currently headed to the house. EDIT: from the FAQ looks like there is a house command but it is only active to more "experienced" users. EDIT EDIT: https://resistbot.io/privacy.html https://resistbot.io/privacy.html worth reading before you use, there are some clauses in there that are a little sketchy.
sparky_z 10y ago
This service seems short-sighted to me. It might trick a few representatives the first time around, but if it actually succeeds in bringing in a high volume of low-effort responses it will only devalue itself the way email is currently devalued (possibly along with some collateral damage to the credibility of the class of high-effort correspondants it is disguising its users as). The way to improve politics isn't to make political engagement as casual and low effort as possible.
- therealdrag0 10y ago
  It seems like to SOME extent it is. Seems like part of lobbyist influence comes from planting seeds in legislators minds, as their full-time job. Most people have an opinion but can't be bothered to lobby for their own interests because they have their own full time job. We need transparent ways for representatives to poll what constituents want. Really there should be a state sponsored electronic voting system for stuff like this. #ArmChairPhilosophy
dogas 10y ago
I disagree. The best option is to call. You likely won't talk to the rep themselves, but you will either leave a message or talk to one of their staffers. It will bubble up to them. If a rep gets a ton of calls against a particular piece of legislation, they may change their position for fear of not being re-elected. https://callyourrep.co/ https://callyourrep.co/

Spivak 10y ago

Is there anything practical I can do if I already know my representative is going to vote against the bill?

pboutros 10y ago
It isn't over till it's over. Many reps/senators would have voted in favor of SOPA/PIPA, but were dissuaded from doing so by the sheer volume of people calling about it. Public pressure is a real thing. Call your rep!
Chaebixi 10y ago
Contact your state reps. Even if the federal rules go, state-level rules can help mitigate the damage locally, and perhaps even nationally [1]. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/26/technology/internet-privacy-state-legislation-illinois.html?emc=edit_nn_20170327&nl=morning-briefing&nlid=78869192&te=1 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/26/technology/internet-priva...

jessaustin 10y ago

One wonders if this asinine legislation might also be supported by VPN providers?

SparkyMcUnicorn 10y ago
PIA took out a full-page NYT ad indicating strong opposition: https://i.imgur.com/GJYYNle.jpg https://i.imgur.com/GJYYNle.jpg I'm sure there are VPN providers that support it, though.
- fauigerzigerk 10y ago
  This form of protest is of course very good marketing as well.

exabrial 10y ago

Unpopular comment alert: This is a good thing. Guys, I don't think the "Federal Communication Commission" should be passing consumer protection regulations. What's to stop Amazon, Netflix, etc from selling a service where an advertiser sends them an IP and they get back your name and interests? These regulations need to be passed at a much broader level. I think the FCC should focus on anti-competitive behavior on ISPs right now, and leave these sorts of matters to another regulatory body. And besides, with TLS (and DNSCurve if you're paranoid), I'm not sure this regulation means much anyway.

devindotcom 10y ago
The FCC has no authority over media and retail companies - they DO have authority over ISPs in some aspects. They have passed consumer protection regulations relating to the transmission and storage of data before. The practices you describe (with Amazon etc) are none of the FCC's business. Anti-competitive behavior and privacy violations by non-telecoms businesses falls under the authority of the Federal Trade Commission. It means something, because the idea is to protect the vulnerable from predatory practices, not to prevent the technically proficient from what they see as easily avoided practices.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
unethical_ban 10y ago
Where should consumer protection exist? As one agency? That means they need to staff people with dozens of fields of expertise, and it gives politicians (Republicans) one throat to choke when they want to "kill big government". Why not let the agencies that administer different fields and businesses have a "consumer protection" section?

jumpkickhit 10y ago

I'm assuming this will pass. Will we ever be able to remove it one it's in effect? Or is that likely to never be an option.

ReedJessen 10y ago

The "Calling you now" widget to contact my congress person doesn't seem to work for me. Is this just my problem of is it down for everyone?