Comcast Actively Blocking Some Internet Traffic

AP:

Comcast Corp. actively interferes with attempts by some of its high-speed Internet subscribers to share files online, a move that runs counter to the tradition of treating all types of Net traffic equally.
ADVERTISEMENT

The interference, which The Associated Press confirmed through nationwide tests, is the most drastic example yet of data discrimination by a U.S. Internet service provider. It involves company computers masquerading as those of its users.

If widely applied by other ISPs, the technology Comcast is using would be a crippling blow to the BitTorrent, eDonkey and Gnutella file-sharing networks. While these are mainly known as sources of copyright music, software and movies, BitTorrent in particular is emerging as a legitimate tool for quickly disseminating legal content.

Read the whole story: AP

Comments

[dyspeptic]

Here in Portland, OR, Comcast has just announced that they are bumping MSNBC up to the "extra plus" tier, meaning that Faux news and CNN will get a huge viewership advantage. That wouldn't also be to make Keith Olbermann harder to see, would it?

COMCAST - WORST CABLE COMPANY IN THE WORLD!!!!!!!

[Raster]

Looks like the US may have some very valuable techniques to sell to totalitarians like China so they can take Democracy suppression up a level or two. Let's hear it some more for the "Leader of the Free World"?

[TXfemmom]

All I know is that our service deteriorated when Comcast took over our provider, Time Warner, and that was a difficult task to achieve.

Then, the internet service crawled and they raised their prices. We gave them the heaveho and saved $80 a month, to boot. Quite a few people in our neighborhood must have felt the same way, as in a single month, I counted twelve network dishes which sprouted from roofs on just two streets.

At that rate, Comcast won't be able to afford to tick off the customers who remain.

[sculptor]

I find myself in the unusual and somewhat distasteful position of defending Comcast. But, since I just got a new day job and I work for a company that builds boxes that do just this kind of thing, I have an insiders understanding of this issue. So, I get the idea of seeking to make the Internet fair and balanced so those that place high demands on it don't drown out the other users. However, what I don't get is the idea of paying a fee for the right to do just that. This is what network neutrality is all about and what Comcast is doing is something that is entirely different.

[blytzd]

Is it too much to ask to get consistent from your provider. They don't like file sharing of any time becasue it maxes your bandwidth at all times. They can't handle it anymore than our power grid could handle every household running at max.

They oversold themselves.

[Jason357]

This whole thing is about free music, stealing music. Once again, a bad HuffPo headline. Comcast is NOT filtering content. They are attempting to resolve an issue that involves people committing crimes with their network. Newsflash.­...if you want a music CD, BUY IT!!!

[avergejoe]

Your TOTALLY wrong jason,

LEGAL files are blocked as well!

If I BUY the internet access,
I want FULL access
or FULL disclosure.
Then I would use a different provider.

What else are they hiding!

You folks that so easily give up all rights to solve limited problems
are destroying America!

[Marlyn]

I agree, avergejoe. In July and August of this year my ISP Cox slowed down my internet access to a trickle for two weeks whenever I tried to access Apple.com, Mac.com, Huffington Post, and even Google.

The only explanation Cox offered was that they were "aware that connectivity to certain websites was slow or nonexisten­t." They claimed it was not their fault, saying it was the DNS (Domain Name Server) that was slowing things down.

I could change my ISP to AT&T, but do I trust them either? Hell no.

[Pdubya]

INTERNET FREE OF TAX AND FREE OF REGULATION = FREE SPEACH!

blue dog dem atheist for Ron Paul


www.dailypaul.com

www.ronpaul2008.com

[askmeificare]

Comcast has every right to discern what traffic can and cannot travel through THEIR servers. If you as a customer don't like it, there's DSL, satellite or dial up.

Maybe, they are trying to stave off any potential lawsuit because the record companies cannot get reimbursed from the user. Kinda like suing an automaker because a drunk driver killed someone.

[CSDofNM]

To an extent askmeificare, you are correct (and of course you are entitled to your opinion, even if I disagree with it).

Comcast has no requirement to be a party to any illegal activity. I understand they are quite good about cooperating with law enforcement investigations. So in that sense they are doing a public service.

Where the issue gets tricky for them, is that in choosing the content, they may lose their "common carrier" immunity. BitTorrent is often used to send DVD images (such as linux distributions) over the net. The net community created the software, and shares in its distribution. But these are big files, 4Gb, ten or twenty times the size of the video files shared on the web, and maybe a thousand MP3 files. So it makes sense from a "network management" point of view, even if it may get them hauled into court on an anti-trust violation (providing access to Microsoft, but interfering with Linux, a competitor). The only thing standing in the way of such a lawsuit is their "common carrier", content neutral standing. As more uses of distributed distribution technology arrive, the problem will only get worse for them, if they try to pick and choose.

As a disclaimer, I'm a Comcast customer, very happy with their service, and over the years a steady improvement in transfer rates gives me hope that they will grow their way out of this crisis. I live on both the Microsoft and Linux sides of the street. I have to say I download far more than I upload, and uploaders seem to be the users being targeted here. But just try getting the videos for "Starcraft 2", and you'll find out how some of the big companies are using this distributed distribution technology (you can't finish the download until you upload to share it with others). Since the game business is bigger than the movie business, but not yet quite as chok=ablock with lawyers, Comcast has a little time to sort this out. But only a little.

[Kissydee]

I would never use comcast as I hate them for many reasons other than this one (the main is charging $45 a month for what other companies charge $30 for, stuff like that). Everyone who has comcast should cancel their accounts and send a copy of this story with it. The only way companies will stop pulling crap like this is a) when congress forces them to (long shot) or b) when they lose profits.

[kfdan]

Internet bandwidth providers need to realize that their future is bound up with free flow of the net. Comcast is quite happy to attempt to control who gets what attention and at what speeds because they can charge more for that "special" service!

[CSDofNM]

I've heard a lot of whining from "net neutrality" people about this charging more for higher rates. This has always been true. I'm sure you can get a dialup account for 9.95 to 19.95 per month. You might get 5Kbps out of that (if you are lucky). A DSL conection with 100Kbps to 200Kbps, 30 to 50$ per month. Since it has twenty to forty times the performance, it should sell for $200/mo., correct? And my Comcast link, which I routinely benchmark at over 1000Kpbs, should sell for $2000/mo., correct? But of course since US taxpayers paid for ARPAnet and NSFnet and MILnet, etc, we should all get gigabyte fiber for free, correct?

Comcast provides a higher quality, higher speed service, at twenty time the cost/benefit ratio of dialup, and easily five times the cost/benefit ratio of DSL. Just try doing a Windows Vista initial software update and antivirus update. You'll be there for days and won't have use of your phone in the meantime. Good thing I have wireless internet on my cellphone.

[madprophet]

I am a network architect, (design computer networks), and I can tell you this is just the tip of the iceberg.

It is a relatively simple thing for a totalitarian government (with the tacit approval of the telecom's) to track every single thing you download and upload over the internet, and can utterly control the content that you can see.

Exactly how far are we away from this government declaring (but just to themselves)this website anti-democratic and commands the telecoms to heavily throttle down bandwidth access to the IP addresses allocated for Huffington, or simply add the IP addresses to rules within the routers and firewalls of the networks to block ALL traffic to this site.

The U.S. is indeed learning from China.

[whomung]

yes..... It's terrifying and true, and needs to be completely dismantled

[racetoinfinity]

2/3 of the country thinks we are going in the wrong "direction" - Indeed - the direction of authoritarian anti-democratic totalitarianism - downward on the spiral of development and backwards in history.

[CSDofNM]

Actually, the scenario goes like this:

Only secure addresses can be connected to any part of the internet controlled by the government, and all computers connected to such computers must be registered with the Department of Homeland Security.

DHCP is outlawed, and use of it is determined to be equivalent to treason (by giving access to "unknown and unregistered presumably terrorist computers") to government networks.

DNS can only reside on secure computers, and secure computers can only be licensed by DHS. Use of unregistered DNS (The name lookup service that translates www.huffingtonpost.comm" into "404 Page not found" - sorry, 208.45.131.146, the actual "IP address") is also treason.

Just a rumor, but supposedly part of Dick Cheney's plan to declare martial law upon the next terrorist attack in the US.

[avergejoe]

What ELSE are they doing?

[DMSmith]

Also consider that they are right now being given retractive immunity for monitoring your phone calls and traffic for the government. Something they've been doing since before 9/11.

Be affraid. Be VERY affriad.

[godlessclif]

It really started when the browsers no longer let you type in real internet addresses. That is why you have than big H for Huffpo on your address bar.

[Ginzaman]

These companies have immunity from sharing customers private information with the govt. Now they're blatently blocking people and content more and more. And then they send you mail saying our security is the best? What a joke...

[BufoAmericanus]

So, is anyone really happy with comcast?

[BufoAmericanus]

I don't know how they do it, but Comcast pretty much owns our city, and they must get pretty good ad rates (from themselves), cause Comcast advertises itself like a totalitarian dictator..­. they don't seem union friendly.

[CSDofNM]

Yes, the service is high speed, reliable, and has been conflict free for me, regardless of which sites I visit, and coming from the far left side of the spectrum, I'm reading all the stuff Bush doesn't want me to read - even the conspiracy theories about them blocking what I might want to read. I'm far more concerned with the real crimes committed by real people in this maladministration than I am about my internet service. A little pricey, but quality service usually costs more.

[whomung]

comcast throttles bandwidth.­...

Anyone using P2P for anything (like releasing an indie record to fans) knows this.....