InfoWorld

Code injection: A new low for ISPs

[Commentary] Comcast and other Internet service providers “experimenting” with data caps inject JavaScript code into their customers’ data streams in order to display overlays on Web pages that inform them of data cap thresholds. They’ll even display notices that your cable modem may be eligible for replacement. And you can't opt out. Think about it for a second: Your cable provider is monitoring your traffic and injecting its own code wherever it likes. This is not only obtrusive, but can cause significant problems with normal Web application function.

Latest cyber security bill riddled with Net neutrality loopholes

The latest cyber security information sharing bill being considered in the Senate strikes many as overly broad and in need of revision.

In fact, say some it's worded vaguely enough that it could be used by Internet service providers to sidestep network neutrality provisions in the name of public safety.

The wording of the bill -- like with so many of its predecessors that went down to defeat -- is being carefully scrutinized for possible side effects, including being used as a backdoor way for ISPs to undermine net neutrality. For example, throttling Netflix could be classified as a countermeasure as long as a good excuse could be found.

A letter jointly authored by a number of civil liberties groups and sent to the bill's sponsors, Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), outlines a number of ways the bill could be abused.

In addition to worries that the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) could lead to a militarization of the cyber security program, the letter also expresses concerns about how provisions in the bill "could be construed to modify or alter any Open Internet rules adopted by the Federal Communications Commission. Net neutrality is a complex topic and policy on this matter should not be set by cyber security legislation."

Facebook's big problem: Ethical blindness

[Commentary] When you agreed to Facebook's terms and conditions, did you know you were agreeing to become a subject in a psychology experiment? We just learned that Facebook permitted an academic research team to conduct an experiment on a huge number of Facebook's users back in 2012.

The researchers adjusted the contents of Facebook timelines for nearly 700,000 users so that either positive or negative news dominated. They found that positive news spread positive responses, and negative news spread negative responses.

[Phipps is an independent open source consultant and a director of the Open Source Initiative]

5 no-bull facts you need to know about the 'no-Internet-fast-lane' bill

[Commentary] The Washington Post reported that a new bill is about to be put before Congress that would require the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to prohibit Internet "fast lane" schemes, where ISPs charge extra for faster access to premium content.

The possible long-term effects of such proposals are sparking fierce debate. Most argue there is an obvious need for some kind of government regulation -- but what kind? And how likely is it that this particular bill -- dubbed the "Online Competition and Consumer Choice Act," and sponsored by Senate Judiciary Committee chair Patrick Leahy and Representative Doris Matsui -- can make a difference in the ongoing struggle between ISPs, customers, and government authorities over network neutrality?

Here's the five most crucial things you need to know about the bill right now.

  1. The bill doesn't actually give the FCC any new powers
  2. An outright ban on "pay-for-play" may be tough to draft, or enforce
  3. The FCC won't be taking the "nuclear option" (reclassifying Internet service providers as common carriers) anytime soon -- if ever
  4. Other bills are in the works that could gut the FCC's regulatory powers over broadband
  5. Don't expect the bill to get very far to begin with

IT is bracing -- but not preparing -- for the Internet of things

Although 71 percent of IT professionals queried in a recent survey believe the so-called Internet of things will affect both users and the workplace, 59 percent said they were not doing anything specific to prepare for it. As usual for new technology, security is a huge concern, at 86 percent. In fact, 43 percent plan to isolate new Internet-enabled things to a separate network, and only 23 percent plan to allow them onto the corporate network. Network management vendor SpiceWorks surveyed 440 IT pros in North America, Europe, the Middle East, and Africa about IoT. IoT involves potentially billions of network-connected devices, tools, medical equipment, and appliances. More devices connected to the Internet means more data generation and greater demands for bandwidth and IP addresses. Thus, SpiceWorks concluded that IT is preparing for IoT more than it may realize as it addresses individual projects.

Another privacy threat: DNS logging and how to avoid it

AT&T is dredging domain name server (DNS) records, the lookup table that converts domain names and selling the results to would-be advertisers -- unless AT&T customers pay for it to stop.

DNS logging is widespread, even in places where you might not expect it. Every time you use a DNS, it records your IP address (and thus your approximate location), the domain name you looked up, the current time, and the name of your ISP.

Many organizations that run DNS servers are beginning to learn that there's money to be had in those logs. Google, of course, has known that since the beginning of time.

But a new service from Golden Frog offers zero DNS logging -- for a price. The company just launched an encrypted, zero-logging DNS. Golden Frog says on its site, "We developed our zero-logging VyprDNS service to increase user privacy and defeat censorship across the world."

VyperDNS is built into Golden Frog's virtual private network service called VyperDNS. When you connect with VyprVPN, all DNS activity is handled on Vypr/Golden Frog servers. VyprVPN has 700 servers, located in more than 40 cities around the world.

How can the FCC preserve an open Internet while gutting Net neutrality?

[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler apparently sees no contradiction between permitting pay-for-priority agreements while purportedly defending an open Internet, but the country's venture capitalists -- not to mention more than 100 online companies including Google, Amazon, and Facebook -- beg to differ.

So does one of Chairman Wheeler's own commissioners, who called for a delay of the scheduled May 15 vote. Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said she has "real concerns" about Chairman Wheeler's proposal, which "has unleashed a torrent of public response" and needs time for further input. The FCC's expected network neutrality ruling is already scaring venture capital firms away from media-heavy startups. They fear that if the FCC allows Internet service providers (ISPs) to charge extra fees to content providers, it will increase operational costs and make it more difficult for startups to operate on small budgets.

Big Telecommunications has lobbied hard -- and successfully so far -- not to be treated as common carriers. So Mozilla came out with its own version of net neutrality rules that proposes the FCC treat only some portions of broadband networks as common-carrier services. In a blog post, Mozilla Senior Policy Engineer Chris Riley suggests the FCC create separate rules for how ISPs manage traffic for end users and websites and for Web-based service providers, such as Dropbox.

Mozilla's proposal, which Riley says is "grounded in a modern understanding of technology and markets," would keep broadband providers' relationship with customers as lightly regulated as it is today and might be more politically feasible since it doesn't require any changing of the current law and precedents that are out there.

Two-timing Netflix will speed the downfall -- and rebirth -- of a free Internet

[Commentary] No sooner do I -- along with 99.9 percent of the other tech pundits on the planet -- mildly tweak Netflix's nose about its deal with Comcast, it does it with Verizon.

Part of me wants to hear Netflix justify this move, considering all the criticism it's generated, but part of me wants to tune it out, lest my brain feel like it's undergoing a bikini wax as those words enter my head. However, I remain optimistic. Because these deals are verging on the Dr Evil-style malevolence the Federal Communications Commission is waiting for.

If we all suffer through enough of this crap with some near-future content consequences, the Avenging Angel that is FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler will reach into his dungarees, locate his backbone, down a Xanax smoothie, and fight the good fight against an ignorant legislative political engine, even if that engine is being continuously showered with money -- er, entirely legitimate campaign funding by superslick pro-fast-lane lobbyists.

When Chairman Wheeler crushes that opposition, he'll turn pipe provisioning into a tightly regulated public service. That'll slow down our infrastructure upgrading process, since pipe providers would be able to rob us of only a few billion rather than a gut-wrenching, degenerately greedy pile of billions, and we'll have our content-neutral Internet back. Then maybe the Zuck will get bored with "Batman" comics and deploy a neutral, super-high-speed wireless drone network to impress his bros online. Here's hoping.

Forrester: Businesses having trouble getting with the digital times

Although businesses acknowledge the disruptions digital technology will bring them, digital is still not driving business strategy, concludes a report entitled "The State of Digital Business in 2014".

While 74 percent of business executives surveyed say their company has a digital strategy, just 15 percent believe their company has the capability to execute the strategy. "Despite the threat of disruption, digital is not yet driving business strategy in 2014. Only 34 percent of executives in companies with more than 250 employees see digital technology as a major driver
 of business strategy.

Forrester expects this number to climb significantly as more and more firms feel the impact of disruption in their markets," the report states.

Forrester believes every business needs to transform into a digital business, in which digital technologies are exploited to find new sources of value for customers and increase operational agility. Successful digital business transformation requires a CEO's full support to drive investment priorities.

But few CEOs set a clear vision for digital, Forrester said. Outside of the business's digital team, few executives understand their firm's digital strategy.

4 no-bull facts you need to know about the FCC's Net neutrality proposal

[Commentary] No, the Federal Communications Commission's newly proposed rules for network neutrality don't spell the end of the Internet as we know it. But some of the concern about the proposed rules are valid, in big part because the rules don't address certain issues.

Here are the four key takeaways you need to know:

  1. Fast-lane charges stink, and the FCC knows it. On Feb 19, it released a statement saying it intended to revise the rules. Many of the changes involve issues of net neutrality that have come to the fore recently, such as state laws blocking the creation of municipal broadband or the arbitrary blocking of legal content.
  2. The FCC is planning to do little about it in the short run. The FCC's open-ended, let's-see-what-happens approach means any regulation designed to protect consumers from arbitrarily tiered pricing will happen in the FCC's own sweet time.
  3. The FCC may not do anything about back-end deals. When FCC officials were asked at a briefing whether deals like the Comcast/Netflix peering arrangement would come under scrutiny under the new rules, the short answer was no. The rules, in other words, are still focused on ISP-to-consumer connections, not arrangements between ISPs and content providers.
  4. This potentially affects everyone.

Relax, the US hasn't lost the Internet

[Commentary] Much of the reaction against the US Commerce Department's decision to let its contract with Internet governance organization ICANN (Internet Corporate for Assigned Names and Numbers) lapse in September 2015 has been decidedly bellicose and over the top.

Fox News accused President Barack Obama of giving away the Internet, the Wall Street Journal's headline announced "America's Internet Surrender," and former House speaker Newt Gingrich tweeted that "Every American should worry about Obama giving up control of the Internet to an undefined group. This is very, very dangerous."

While the WSJ might rail against "the surprise announcement," the US government's role in coordinating the Internet's domain name system through the NTIA, an agency of the Commerce Department, was always temporary. Indeed, this transition was long overdue in the eyes of many, who say US involvement created political friction and hindered ICANN's development.

As ICANN's board chair Stephen Crocker said, "The US has long envisioned the day when stewardship over [domain names] would be transitioned to the global community. In other words, we have all long known the destination. Now it is up to our global stakeholder community to determine the best route to get us there."

Let's quiet the hysteria, drop the hyperbole, and figure out how to make this thing work. As Politico said, "This announcement definitely doesn't reflect a global takeover. UN black helicopters aren't coming for your servers.... [This is a] smart, strategic move by Commerce to formalize, on its own terms, a process of increased globalization that has been going on for some time."