4 ms·

The FCC warns Internet providers they’re on the hook now for user privacy

80 points by Libertatea 11y ago

alexggordon 11y ago
> Drawing from the same law that regulates legacy phone service, net neutrality prohibits the sharing of your subscriber records with third parties unless you give explicit permission to your carrier. For those wondering about the "explicit permission" mentioned here, there are two methods ISP's we be able to use to use your information, if they indeed follow their telecommunications privacy model[0]. > “Opt-Out” – Your company sends you a notice saying it will consider you to have given your approval to use your customer information for marketing unless you tell it not to do so (usually within 30 days.) > “Opt-In” – Your company sends you a notice asking that you expressly give it permission to use your customer information for marketing. Regardless though, this article left me wanting. If you're curious about the details, Ars[1] has a great introduction to it. [0] https://www.fcc.gov/guides/protecting-your-telephone-calling-records https://www.fcc.gov/guides/protecting-your-telephone-calling... [1] http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/05/isps-really-dont-want-to-follow-new-customer-data-privacy-rules/ http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/05/isps-really-dont-wan...
- lewisl9029 11y ago
  I wonder if "third parties" in this case includes the NSA and certain other 3 letter government agencies... Oh who am I kidding, of course not.
higherpurpose 11y ago
Can we also repeal the law that gives carriers and ISPs immunity when sharing customer data with law enforcement agencies? Why in the world would they need immunity if they simply obey the law? (that says they need to give that data when properly requested) Oh, that's right - because they often violate even those laws to help the NSA or FBI or the police, and they don't want to be on the hook for it. Giving immunity like this to companies creates such terrible incentives. Hopefully after the USA Freedom Act (whether it passes or not) the civil liberties organizations will fight to roll-back that immunity as well - especially if the USA Freedom Act passes and allows carriers to keep the data for NSA.
- dimino 11y ago
  You realize that, in the context of a cyber attack, customer data is not what you think it is, right? No one's giving away your browsing history, they're giving away C2C server IPs, md5s of malicious files, etc., and guess what? The bad actors who move this data are customers too. Comcast still can't share your library books with the FBI.
  - Karunamon 11y ago
    You realize that at the end of the day, they have access to that data, and as such, should be required to safeguard it?
  - emidln 11y ago
    Well they could and they have no oversight and immunity. That's the problem.
    - dimino 11y ago
      They couldn't legally, no, as data protection laws still apply, and every proposal I've seen includes very strong language about how specific and pertinent the intel must be in order to be shared. But they could illegally, just like anyone could illegally take your car, or charge up your credit card, or any of the other numerous things that are physically possible but illegal.
  - dannyobrien 11y ago
    I think the reference was to when the telcos were granted retroactive immunity for violating the pre-existing laws governing the handover of data between 2001-2007. https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL34600.pdf https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL34600.pdf The point here is that we do have statutory and constitutional procedures that are supposed to prevent abuses of this process. If when you break those rules, you just get a "get out of jail free" card, your incentive as a company to challenge illegal requests really does diminish profoundly. If you say no to an illegal request, you get into trouble. If you say yes, precedent suggests the government will bail you out.
phkahler 11y ago
Targeted ads? How is injecting ads into/over the content I'm looking at possibly a good idea? As a common carrier they should be required to just deliver the bits, not insert their own.
jqm 11y ago
Reminds me of a dumb bumper sticker once seen on a ratty old pickup truck that said... "Don't steal! The government hates competition".

80 points by Libertatea 11y ago

> Drawing from the same law that regulates legacy phone service, net neutrality prohibits the sharing of your subscriber records with third parties unless you give explicit permission to your carrier. For those wondering about the "explicit permission" mentioned here, there are two methods ISP's we be able to use to use your information, if they indeed follow their telecommunications privacy model[0]. > “Opt-Out” – Your company sends you a notice saying it will consider you to have given your approval to use your customer information for marketing unless you tell it not to do so (usually within 30 days.) > “Opt-In” – Your company sends you a notice asking that you expressly give it permission to use your customer information for marketing. Regardless though, this article left me wanting. If you're curious about the details, Ars[1] has a great introduction to it. [0] https://www.fcc.gov/guides/protecting-your-telephone-calling-records https://www.fcc.gov/guides/protecting-your-telephone-calling... [1] http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/05/isps-really-dont-want-to-follow-new-customer-data-privacy-rules/ http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/05/isps-really-dont-wan...

lewisl9029 11y ago
I wonder if "third parties" in this case includes the NSA and certain other 3 letter government agencies... Oh who am I kidding, of course not.

higherpurpose 11y ago

Can we also repeal the law that gives carriers and ISPs immunity when sharing customer data with law enforcement agencies? Why in the world would they need immunity if they simply obey the law? (that says they need to give that data when properly requested) Oh, that's right - because they often violate even those laws to help the NSA or FBI or the police, and they don't want to be on the hook for it. Giving immunity like this to companies creates such terrible incentives. Hopefully after the USA Freedom Act (whether it passes or not) the civil liberties organizations will fight to roll-back that immunity as well - especially if the USA Freedom Act passes and allows carriers to keep the data for NSA.

dimino 11y ago
You realize that, in the context of a cyber attack, customer data is not what you think it is, right? No one's giving away your browsing history, they're giving away C2C server IPs, md5s of malicious files, etc., and guess what? The bad actors who move this data are customers too. Comcast still can't share your library books with the FBI.
- Karunamon 11y ago
  You realize that at the end of the day, they have access to that data, and as such, should be required to safeguard it?
- emidln 11y ago
  Well they could and they have no oversight and immunity. That's the problem.
  - dimino 11y ago
    They couldn't legally, no, as data protection laws still apply, and every proposal I've seen includes very strong language about how specific and pertinent the intel must be in order to be shared. But they could illegally, just like anyone could illegally take your car, or charge up your credit card, or any of the other numerous things that are physically possible but illegal.
- dannyobrien 11y ago
  I think the reference was to when the telcos were granted retroactive immunity for violating the pre-existing laws governing the handover of data between 2001-2007. https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL34600.pdf https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL34600.pdf The point here is that we do have statutory and constitutional procedures that are supposed to prevent abuses of this process. If when you break those rules, you just get a "get out of jail free" card, your incentive as a company to challenge illegal requests really does diminish profoundly. If you say no to an illegal request, you get into trouble. If you say yes, precedent suggests the government will bail you out.

phkahler 11y ago

Targeted ads? How is injecting ads into/over the content I'm looking at possibly a good idea? As a common carrier they should be required to just deliver the bits, not insert their own.

jqm 11y ago

Reminds me of a dumb bumper sticker once seen on a ratty old pickup truck that said... "Don't steal! The government hates competition".