digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

AT&T willing to spy for NSA, MPAA, and RIAA

arstechnica.com — In a move that has executives from movie studios and record labels grinning from ear to ear, AT&T has announced that it will develop and deploy technology that will attempt to keep pirated content off its network.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • PjsPjs, on 10/11/2007, -4/+60I was going to express a thought about a missed opportunity - but I don't want to end up in gitmo.
    • floatingpoints, on 10/11/2007, -7/+45***** gitmo. Don't ever be afraid of that place, or afraid to speak your mind. This is still a free country.
      • pintomp3, on 10/11/2007, -4/+81silly citizen, didn't you know this is a post 9/11 world? the terrorsts hate us for our freedoms, so we got rid of them. we sure showed them!
        • PjsPjs, on 10/11/2007, -22/+6you know if the Islamic east is bound and determined to bring us down, mass distribution of pirated intellectual property could make them a lot of money and provide one hell of a diversion.
        • rebrad, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Buy more iPhones. That will show them.
      • ForeverXeros, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Amen. The people are not supposed to be afraid of the government, the government is supposed to be afraid of us. We pay their salaries, we give them power, and ultimately their political fates are up to us. It's the responsibility of every citizen to stand up and speak their own opinions in their own voice. Only when every person stands up and defends their rights are those rights secured. Those freedoms that are not actively and constantly defended run the risk of being taken away. I'm not so ignorant as to think that I can be protected from terrorists completely. You can have your illusion, give me back my ***** liberties.

        You shouldn't have gotten me started, I won't shut up for hours now...
      • OwdenBowden, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2This is addressed to all the iPhone users

        Thanks to AT&T being the Governments BITCH I would watch out using the iPhone - (you never know when they will hack into it and then send you a bill for all of the illegal Movies and Music you have on it) ALL OF YOU JUST PAID $800 TO BE SPYED ON.
      • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1If you go, ask for the south west wing. There is a guard there, I will never forget... those big hands on my shoulders... even gave a reach around once.

        Seriously though, people have become too apathetic to stand up to such things. It will not be until it is too late that people start to do something, and by then we will all be getting daily buttsecks for free thinking.
    • GliTCH82, on 10/11/2007, -0/+19The solution to this problem is simple. We just need to create our own internet.
    • goffy59, on 10/11/2007, -4/+6For all those people trying to justify ATT helping the mpaa/nsa. They are different entities(or are they?), and they should stay out of each others business, otherwise you will have one big super group policing everything(like America). Oh run away the terrorists are comming lol. All the government has to say is "terrorism" and you pussies get all worked up.
      • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I pitty the terrorist that comes around here. Their ass will get so shot up.... even gang-bangers shoot better than terrorists. The rednecks around me will light em up like a Christmas tree. One shot, two or three kills. I know what will come next, Earl will shove one of their b0mbs up their asses and run and then he'll post it on youtube.
    • cbuddha42, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Wait, can they really deploy this technology on their backbone? Wouldn't that be in violation of their peering agreements?
      • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Nope. They can monitor, shunt, reroute, mangle any traffic that passes into their network. If other ISP's have a problem with that, they will have to somehow route around AT&T. That would be pretty hard to do. Internap would become popular, but then would become the next target for monitoring.
  • theNazz, on 10/11/2007, -5/+236That's one great reason not to own an iPhone.
    • Chicken, on 10/11/2007, -22/+14Thats one OF THE great reasonS not to own an iPhone.
      • thatsmyaibo, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8I agree with you but I fail to see why those words are capitalized. ONE would have worked...but OF THE? Why the emphasis on those words?
        • Chicken, on 10/11/2007, -8/+5Because there are many great reasons not one great reason.
        • stklaw, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7I get the idea.
          But you made it look like spelling/grammar bashing
      • UnstableMind, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4Also, "Thats" is incorrect. The original author was correct in saying "That's", which is a conjunction of "That is".
      • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+149 67 6e 6f 72 65 20 74 68 6f 73 65 20 74 68 61 74 20 66 6f 63 75 73 20 6f 6e 20 79 6f 75 72 20 73 70 65 6c 6c 69 6e 67 2e 20 20 49 74 20 75 73 75 61 6c 6c 79 20 6d 65 61 6e 73 20 74 68 65 79 20 64 69 64 6e 27 74 20 68 61 76 65 20 61 20 64 65 63 65 6e 74 20 61 72 67 75 65 6d 65 6e 74 20 6f 72 20 63 6f 6d 65 2d 62 61 63 6b 2e
    • Gee1004, on 10/11/2007, -37/+2If you are not a ***** pirate, who the ***** cares. That's really smart not to buy an iPhone because you want to steal.
      • RTourn, on 10/11/2007, -1/+16"Those Who Would Sacrifice Liberty for Security Deserve Neither." -Franklin,
    • Four20, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9agreed, I will be getting an openmoko myself
    • diggmaddy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7I second Four20. Had it not been AT&T, I would've bought an iPhone by now, but with AT&T, NO WAY. Openmoko is THE phone for me.
    • monkzero, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3just a matter of time till we see an iphone app that displays how screwed you are for doin what you did.
  • turnthepage, on 10/11/2007, -67/+10Here's a novel idea: Don't pirate intellectual material.
    • pintomp3, on 10/11/2007, -1/+43here's another novel idea: stop spying on everyone.

      btw, i'm assuming you mean copyrighted material. what the mpaa and riaa puts out is hardly intellectual material.
    • RpgActioN, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18Should I pirate anti-intellectual material, then?
      • Bob042, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17Yeah, so you're good for most of popular music.
      • javaroast, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Yes, so you would also be good to pirate the parent post by turnthepage
    • jpatch, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5One novel idea: Don't put AT&T advertising on articles blasting them for selling their customers out to the 'Feds and the **AAs
    • qubesquare, on 10/11/2007, -0/+33'pirate'? I can't get guitar tabs because me learning to play my favorite songs some how steals money from artists(says RIAA). What kind of crap is that???? MPAA, RIAA, and all big media is suing us back into the stone age.
      • ScrewedThePooch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Someone needs to file a class-action lawsuit against these ***** and put them out of business. Everyone should just counter-sue the **AA for invasion of privacy and gestapo tactics. Sooner or later, they'll run out of money due to a ***** business model. Then we will be free from these assholes.
    • princessangry, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5how is it 'intellectual' property when most of it comes from idiots from hollywood and people like paris hilton and britney spears. I hardly call them intellectual!
      • ScrewedThePooch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Anyone who decides to get a record label with the **AAs could hardly be considered intelligent. Their property is not intellectual, it's just protected by outdated laws.
  • asforme, on 10/11/2007, -1/+106There goes the iPhone bittorrent app.
  • floatingpoints, on 10/11/2007, -12/+123Yet you ***** idiots clamor and drool over the iPhone.

    I don't know what's worse, AT&T doing government favors (keep in mind they're currently under investigation for the NSA spying) or the idiot iPhone consumers who turn a blind eye to what AT&T does.
    • pintomp3, on 10/11/2007, -4/+19we've been handing over freedom for security, might as well get an iphone out of the deal.
    • HerrEisenheim, on 10/11/2007, -4/+33Who cares about the iPhone? The reality is a majority of all the traffic on the internet still flows through AT&T pipes. Go ahead and run a traceroute to just about any site. Hell, you have to go through AT&T tubes just to get to Google.com. The government knows this too—that's why they go after AT&T. Control the backbones, and you control everything. It doesn't matter if your ISP is Comcast, AOL, whatever—the goal is to create technologies that can be deployed at any node to filter and log material. Even if you have a Blackberry on Verizon, when you go to Google.com your data probably goes through at least one AT&T or AT&T & friends backbone.
      • Bando, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8The internet needs a new spine it seems. Something like a wireless meshnet would be a way around. Don't let big brother be our gateway, we make our own.
        • thesarlacc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+23I was going to start building my own internet backbone, but then realised that I'm not a billionare.
      • Fartag, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Argh! HerrEisenheim, I was trying to click thumbs up on your message but retardedly missed. Please +2 to your digg score.
    • koko775, on 10/11/2007, -12/+1What? ***** you! Don't call me an idiot (by proxy). I don't turn a blind eye to AT&T. I ***** hate them! What's your problem? Are you mentally incapable of seeing digg as a bunch of different people with differing opinions? Just because AT&T is crap doesn't mean the iPhone isn't an amazing(ly expensive) piece of hardware. A phone by any other network would smell as sweet -- well, probably sweeter, since it wouldn't be AT&T.
    • MacParrot, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6It's amazing that any of you really believe you have privacy on the internet. Or on your telephone (land-line or cell). Everything you do and everything you say or write that has the capability of being monitored at some point WILL be monitored no matter what you or the public drones you elect say.

      I assume everything I do on the net will be filtered and classified and stored in one way or another. Doesn't stop me from saying what I want anyway but to get so indignant about this is silly. Your expectation of privacy should have went away the moment you went online.
    • CryoNine, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"or the idiot iPhone consumers who turn a blind eye to what AT&T does."

      It doesn't affect me. I'm not a terrorist nor do I plan to pirate anything. It's not like you're avoiding AT&T just by skipping out on their service anyway... do you understand how the internet works? ;)
  • guest2117, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5pirate intellectual material
    • Traiklin, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4to bad a lot of the pirated material isn't intellectual.

      That's the part they just don't seem to get.
  • holyskeleton, on 10/11/2007, -5/+150***** THE RIAA/MPAA.
    • pintomp3, on 10/11/2007, -2/+37/nsa/att
    • BenBenMan, on 10/11/2007, -0/+24Wouldn't you get a nasty disease?
    • PatrickBrown, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10I see this often and I wonder how many of those that post or dig it actually discontinue purchasing material related to the RIAA or MPAA. I would guess not many.

      Yes, you will say ***** them but turn around and support them through music and movie sales. Sacrifice your pleasure to pursue the greater good? No sir, you will not... unfortunately.
      • Farnn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11Or they don't buy their stuff and just download it.
        • MacParrot, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Pirating the material ass a protest is just a convenient excuse not to pay for it. If they really meant "***** the RIAA/MPAA" they wouldn't consume ANY of the material that supports those groups.
        • ScrewedThePooch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3How else are we supposed to make them lose money? According to them, this is the best way.
      • JamesWilson, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3VCDQuality
        Newzbin
        Binsearch.info
        theisohunt.com
      • mcnasby, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I stopped supporting these two organizations for the most part two years ago. I have not bought one album since 2003. I have not bought one DVD since 2003. The only time I go to the movies is if it's an experience I would never be able to receive at home (eg. Harry Potter 3D @ the IMAX). I have also successfully turned all of my friends on to bittorrenting, as well as getting my parents to ask me to download a movie if they want to see something (vs. renting it at Blockbuster). I hope more diggers are doing the same. We are tech savvy ones with the power to download and affect the well being of these companies. Like JamesWilson: Continue to spread knowledge :).
    • s1mph0ny, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2it's the snitches that suck though.

      Any idea if this kind of thing would allow you to get out of a contract?
  • ro0ke, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11I guess I'll stay off their network, too.
    • SnowflakePillow, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Good luck. If you read the article you'd know why that's impossible.
    • theeEqualizer, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8Yep. Pay attention. You are already on their network now.

      If you're a windows user, click on start, then run, then type in the run box "cmd" then hit enter. Then you will be at a command prompt. Then just type the following: "tracert www.google.com " and then hit enter on your keyboard. Then watch as it traces the route from your PC to one of google's servers. Then you'll see that by the fourth or fifth hop, you will hit ATT's backbone and you'll go through AT LEAST two of their routers. You can trace route to ANY destination and get the same results. yahoo.com, youtube.com, the onion.com, cnn.com... you name it.

      Right now, they've got it sewn up. There is no way around ATT's network. They built the infrastructure. They may as well own the internet.
      • fprintf, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I have to put my tinfoil hat on now... I just did this and not only do I immediately hit AT&Ts network (ha, I am on AT&T DSL) but then it goes to some unnamed IP addresses on its way there...

        1 - 4 snip
        5 12 ms 11 ms 12 ms bb2-g1-0-0.wlfrct.sbcglobal.net [69.183.224.2]
        6 22 ms 21 ms 21 ms ex2-p5-1.eqabva.sbcglobal.net [151.164.40.53]
        7 21 ms 22 ms 21 ms 151.164.251.242
        8 23 ms 22 ms 23 ms 209.85.130.12
        9 22 ms 22 ms 23 ms 72.14.236.200
        10 26 ms 24 ms 25 ms 72.14.232.25
        11 23 ms 22 ms 22 ms yo-in-f147.google.com [64.233.169.147]

        I am sure they are watching me on 72.14.236.200!!
    • edzilla, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3I'm so happy I don't live in the US. Not only do I have a 25mo connection, but I am also not spied upon!!
      • MacParrot, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Go to any web sites in the US? Congrats, you're being spied on. Really believe your own govt isn't doing the same? Congrats, you're incredibly naive.
        • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Go to any web sites outside the US? Congrats, you're also already being spied on.

          The internets were never designed to be private.
  • PDAIsAOk, on 10/11/2007, -0/+132In other news, AT&T is set to develop and deploy technology that will attempt to keep people from wanting to use their network services.
  • Mc_Carter, on 10/11/2007, -3/+19***** at&t
  • Anth, on 10/11/2007, -0/+72AT&T, you just lost your common carrier status. I hope you enjoy the consequences.
    • RidesAPaleHorse, on 10/11/2007, -0/+28Exactly. I wonder if they've thought through the consequences to this decision. Once you start policing the data on your network, you lose your Common Carrier status and become responsible for anything your subscribers do.
    • KungFuJesus, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1That won't affect it's common carrier status, common carrier is phone not internet. For Internet they're an "Information Service Provider" and thus don't have to deal with common carrier restrictions
    • darkphoenix939, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2ok for anyone who has been using at&t they have been doing this for a while...esp with usenet if you use a standard usenet port and no ssl the pars will never fix them selfs because of to many network errors
    • tempusrob, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11You think with all they're doing for the gov't that there will be consequences? You should know better by now. :[
  • crappylinks, on 10/11/2007, -17/+10this story is a month old - not ancient, but it was discussed quite a bit a month ago. No digg.
    • GliTCH82, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8How about Digg it again so the people that didn't see it before can see it now? This is too important of a story for people to miss. I can understand if you don't want to Digg a dupe about some funny pic or something but this is a little different.
  • Yage2006, on 10/11/2007, -10/+7Switch ISP's easy fix :)
    • greekgoat91, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5how bout AT&T as a phone service provider? iPhone is locked to them.
    • blackfog, on 10/11/2007, -0/+16Kind of hard to switch ISPs when you only have one option for "high-speed" internet. GG net neutrality
    • HerrEisenheim, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18Switch ISPs? What differences does it make when majority of everything you do flows through AT&T pipes no matter who your ISP is?
    • cfulp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I have Cox internet. Yet when I tracert, I go threw 2 at&t servers. They own a large portion of he internet backbone. Changing ISPs, will not prevent me from having to go threw there pipes. Unfortunately.
    • Shandooga, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Yeah, but only until those evil bastards buy it, too.
    • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Every ISP does this. Even the ones that don't have to route through AT&T at some point. We are all 0wned. ;-) Start using more encryption. https://www.microchp.org/privacy/


  • aznhomig, on 10/11/2007, -0/+60So I guess it's now "***** the RIAA, ***** the MPAA, and ***** AT&T."
    • roadtrippy, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Let's not forget Microsoft and Sony.
      • GliTCH82, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2Nintendo's coo. Steve Jobs, Apple, iPhone, Ubuntu Linux iPod iTunes.
      • skyfire1, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2And Linux.
    • shiftt, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"now"? It's been "***** AT&T" for a while here
  • rhabd0mancer, on 10/11/2007, -0/+36Remember, just because your iPhone is "off" doesn't mean it isn't transmitting.
  • python2121, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8I was considering getting dsl, but I guess cable modem is faster anyways.
  • supernovasky, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Will this work against private torrents like demonoid? What about usenet?
    • Atomic1fire, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2remember the first rule
      (not sure why it matters to the pirates anyway because the government and content creators are clamping down on their activities)
      • ggeiger, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1there is no fight club
        • InferiorWang, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Way to mess up the Fight Club reference. The first rule of Fight Club is "You do not talk about Fight Club."
    • Duhitsmichael, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Demonoid isn't private.
  • RedHerringHack, on 10/11/2007, -2/+28And ***** THE NSA
  • benlindelof, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4I searched for Harry Potter on Emule and found nothing. Absolutely nothing.

    I'm sure they appreciate the free service for film and music distribution...
    • KungFuJesus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8http://www.mininova.org/search/?search=Harry+Potter

      welcome to the age of bit torrent
    • specialK16, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Ha, I also found nothing... until I typed Potter with double T...

      he, I'm such an idiot.
      • benlindelof, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1For torrents sure, I use torrentreactor.net and digitaldistractions.

        I'm just talking about E-mule. Still nothing for "Harry Potter" under the DonkeyServers. Am I spelling it wrong? Harry Potter?
    • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I heard the latest one wasn't any good anyway. They left a ton of stuff out of the movie.
  • RamboJesus, on 10/11/2007, -13/+7The way I see it, the only point of high speed Internet is braking copy right laws. It's only been a short while ago that you tube came long and made a good reason for high speed other then braking copy right laws. If I can't brake copy right laws then I'm not interested in their product and then all I need is low speed DSL.
    • DeFex, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Break spelling laws instead :)

      jk
    • KungFuJesus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2While i like to use my connection to break copyright laws as well, there's plenty of other things to use it for
    • willclarke, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10I don't think I could go back to browsing porn that slowly.
    • specialK16, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1You are forgetting faster porn. But other than that I like having a fast upload speed because I use remote desktop quite a lot.
    • yeshuadoom, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4You're a ***** dumb ass.
    • Lumet, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1High speed Internet doesn't help with four computers playing online games? That's what we use it for at my house. I like low pings.
  • damonic, on 10/11/2007, -2/+44I randomly send text and email on AT&T's network with the words "bomb", "attack", & "airplane." If we all do it, then their network data will be inaccurate and worthless.
    • HerrEisenheim, on 10/11/2007, -0/+16Just to post that on Digg.com your packets had to flow through AT&T pipes. Several of them.
      • EntangledPhysx, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Tubes, damnit! They're called tubes!! Not pipes!
    • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Exactly. Aint routing a bitch. :-D
  • Focher, on 10/11/2007, -0/+25I think it's funny that when it was revealed that AT&T was helping a government agency illegally intercept traffic from their network, the uproar was considerably less than the uproar when AT&T wants to do the same thing for the MPAA and RIAA.

    What this really tells us is that the MPAA and RIAA have no intention of adapting their business models to digital distribution. It also tells us that AT&T hasn't heard of encryption technologies that will easily defeat any attempts to monitor the underlying data traffic.
    • Aero347, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6They will beat encryption sooner or later.. sorry to say.

      Capitalism has pwned the internet and has whored it out to an excess. I'm going to develop a new set of carrier protocalls that stays in the hands of the community. I'm thinking of calling it the 73310rnet. We made the internet what it is today I say we let the bloodsuckers have it and make our stand on a technology we can all own a piece of. If the IEEE won't do it I will.
      • GliTCH82, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I'm with you man. Now get to work.
      • Focher, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Make sure you have the loopback interface working on your new network. I think it's going to be the most used one.

        Seriously, unless you can decrypt the packets on the fly it would be virtually impossible to defeat encryption (and even some packet obfuscation). I seriously doubt AT&T is going to delay packets so it can decrypt them and analyze them.
    • abdrahman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0Considering that the NSA hires the best mathematicians in the US(they pay really well, and I am in fact thinking of getting a job with them), I am pretty sure that most modern encryption standards have already been broken... after all, most of them were designed by the DOD and the NSA.
      • Focher, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Broken is different than on-the-fly decryption. Perhaps some government agencies are able to do it but that doesn't mean they would share that technology with AT&T - especially so that AT&T can sell such a service to the MPAA and RIAA.
      • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The proper term is "back door". Encryption laws prevent people from using heavy encryption or obscure custom algorithms. That is because they want to be able to see it real time. If you start using double layers of encryption combined with stego and various other forms of obscurity, then it makes it harder to look at real-time.

        Also, just because you use encryption doesnt mean they can't tell what you are doing. If (n) amount of bytes are passing from node to node over port (x), they can tell exactly what you are doing. Application coders will just have to get better so that ports 80 and 443 are used and streams are padded so that it looks more like video feeds going from user to user. You can then say, "we were having a video conference, mind your own business, sir."

    • reiner15, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6I have my bittorent encrypted, still somehow I received a letter from my ISP on behalf of paramount..
      • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Just because you use encryption doesnt mean they can't tell what you are doing. If (n) amount of bytes are passing from node to node over port (x), they can tell exactly what you are doing. Application coders will just have to get better so that ports 80 and 443 are used and streams are padded so that it looks more like video feeds going from user to user. You can then say, "we were having a video conference, mind your own business, sir."
  • patrickloggins, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7At least they're trying to make it "user private" so you won't get ***** over (unless, maybe, you download a lot).

    Still..... ***** these people. The music industry at LEAST needs to go down.
    • thesarlacc, on 10/11/2007, -10/+1Oh the poor music industry...how dare artists try to make money for music they spend months making. You idiot.
      • yeshuadoom, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2The music that most RIAA artists make is terrible.
    • whistlerpro, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1BitTorrent will be monitored heavily, regardless of whether you download a lot. Web, not so much.
  • whatthefu, on 10/11/2007, -1/+22AT&T is the little tattle tale bitch of the cell phone providers.
    • MechaFenris, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3And the NSA, and the FBI, and the Dept. of Homeland Security...

      Question is, are you surprised? That's the payment for resurrecting the monopoly... Rather like the Faustian deal where you hate everyone involved. :)
      • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Did you know that KGB translates to the Committee for Homeland Security?
    • KungFuJesus, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14AT&T goes far beyond cell phones dude. They're not talking about cell phones. They're talking about the internet. Now, you may be thinking: "But I don't have AT&T as my ISP." This is irrelevant because AT&T basically owns the back end of America's internet. To post that comment your data traveled through AT&T's network. If AT&T pulls this ***** it'll affect everyone on the internet in the us pretty much
    • Bando, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0Amen. That's ok we'll get em' after school.
    • redd2600, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2SNITCHES GET STITCHES
  • julianrod, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Anyone saw the big AT&T banner advertisement on the page?
    • darkphoenix939, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14what are these banner advertisement you speak of?
  • DeFex, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11hows the microphone on the iphone anyways

    iphone > ATT > NSA
    • Branden, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Doesn't iPhone = AT&T?
      • Atomic1fire, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2yes att=at&t
        so iphone = att = nsa
        thus iphone =nsa
        another fantastic apple product
        (poking fun at the tinfoil hats and the fanboys at the same time)
  • TheMoose16, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Now I finally have a reason to start dling the horsepr0n. Surprise AT&T.
    • Duhitsmichael, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I'm sure you had a reason before. =D
    • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1That is rather prejudice. You are leaving out dogs, cats, sheep, donkeys, chickens, snakes, aligators and a myriad of other wildlife. :-)

      Velcro mittens and sheep...
  • kinerry, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Welp geeks, time to let people know about this, boycott anything AT&T!
    Sorry iPhone, but you are on a tainted network...maybe Apple will learn something from this
    • Atomic1fire, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5boycot anything apple
      because they are supporting this
      INDIRECTLY
      and thats the worse kind of direct
      • oneoverzero, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3In that case, boycott the internet, because most cites go through their tubes.
    • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Boycotting has no effect on businesses that big. They don't want you in the first place. You are a high maintenance customer. It is more profitable to keep the complacent sheep or the people that don't have any other options. Even if you convinced 100% of all diggers to get off of AT&T today, the wallstreet news would read "AT&T fell .4 points monday, but made a quick comeback after their company re-org wednesday and has climbed up 8 points, a record earning for AT&T."

      The only pain will be felt by employees. The remaining customers will have more bandwidth available to them however.
  • conwayblue, on 10/11/2007, -0/+19The Internet will soon be just like the cell phone networks. Micro-charges galore. It's so stupid that I'm paying $0.10 for a five word text message which probably costs AT&T about a millionth of cent.
    • abdrahman, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3I am only slightly joking here, but it probably does cost them more than a penny or two... you know with all of the eavesdropping + data analysis that they do for the NSA :).
    • sirdaz, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Cheaper than the UK, most are £0.10p (~$0.05)
    • Ryosen, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2The retail cost of an SMS message, purchased in large bulk, is about two-tenths of one cent (USD). That price was from about 2 years ago when I used to develop SMS-based applications. Considering that a cell carrier will charge up to $10 a month for SMS messaging, that comes to about 5,000 messages before they start to lose money on the subscription (5000 x .002 = $10). I'm an SMS junkie and even I don't come anywhere near that. At ten cents per message, that represents a huge markup. The only reason that I put up with Sprint is because it costs me $5/month for unlimited SMS.
    • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2You are pretty close actually. It is about 1/500th of a cent to them. That is even better markup than the jewelry business. Can't beat that!
  • AlbinoRaven, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Thank goodness they sell the iPhone otherwise we'd all be helpless.
  • KungFuJesus, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Encryption FTW
    • unusualbob, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1....ya like they cant crack it. i guess you could use 8192bit encryption keys and u might be ok.
      • thesarlacc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2They might be able to crack it, but it still requires decryption = more cpu cycles = more cpu's = more servers = more money spent. it adds up.
      • Fartag, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Well in non-classified literature they can't do this feasibly, (especially if everybody else was transmitting encrypted as well, why would they pick yours over others, etc). Perhaps the NSA can do this with its city sized computer center(s) or quantum computing platforms or backdoors in hardware and closed source drivers, or exploits. But if so, they'd never admit to it and using that level of decryption it would certainly not pay off to use against mere information content sharers. Much easier for the company to restrict or heavily throttle unknown protocols, (including known encrypted protocols), and flag / block anything it can find in plain data that matches restricted entries via a hashed lookup in some restricted info table.

        If this fails or congress keeps getting crazier, then we may be in for a future of encryption becoming illegal and penalties of restricted information transfer increasing to new heights.
    • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Start thinking in terms of multiple layers of encryption, data stream padding, using standard https or video conference ports, multiple chained algorithms that change randomly, various forms of obscurity and stenography.

      If you break up the processes into multiple layers, then yourself and others can make better use of multiple cores and threads. Simply increasing the key size won't help if they have the backdoor to the implimentation of the encryption at a single layer.

      Help encourage building things that will scale higher. :-)
  • WolfDV, on 10/11/2007, -0/+16Its like AT&T is actively trying to push customers away
    • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Nope. They just have to come out in the open since the SF incident "outed" them. Most all ISP's report activity to any authority that wants it. There are a couple that claim not to, but they most certainly would not want to draw that type of attention by saying "we dont disclose....". They are all just trying to keep as many customers as they can and AT&T is now forced to deal in the open because of the legal publicity they got. Even though the MPAA and RIAA are not authorities, there is no authority telling them that they aren't that has the power to push back a sea of lawyers.

      Also, they have so many customers that it really doesn't hurt them at all if a bunch of people leave. It actually makes life easier for them to just push away the high maintenance customers. Those that either don't care or are not impacted by such events will happily keep paying them. Some people simply don't have enough options either way. Pretty soon all the bells will collapse back into one giant bell and there are not any more Reagans to stop that from happening.

  • nobogeys217, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6cable internet here I come!

    and cancel my phone service. I can just use my cell phone.
    • cfulp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I have cox cable. Yet when I goto google.com, i pass threw 2 at&t servers. The main problem, which has been posted numerous times above, is that at&t owns a lot of the internet backbone. Getting cable internet, doesn't mean you don't use their pipes.
    • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Who your provider is does not matter. It is how you manage your traffic. If you are doing anything that will leave your ISP's, then there is a high probability that your traffic will at some point route through AT&T, or any one of the major ISP's that have bent over. They don't need logs from your ISP per si. They just need who was transmitting what at what times.

      Encryption reduces the evidence that is left behind, but traffic patterns are still easy to detect becase p2p programmers have not put enough effort into making their traffic harder to decern from other non-p2p traffic. Freenet started to come close to this but still has a long ways to go. Padded data streams would help. Using standard https ports would help. Adding random hops would help. My hero, Ashcroft, started to help by being really oppressive, but unfortunately he is no longer in office and his replacements are more of the passive/agressive types which means they will just watch what you are doing and get you later. Had people like Ashcroft stayed in office a little bit longer, then most p2p traffic by now would be almost impossible to seperate from web browsing traffic, multi-user video conferences, vent and other forms of traffic.

      Don't worry though. Like any opressive parents, our leaders will cause more subversive technology to come into existance.
  • Vicujozobenaxod, on 10/11/2007, -19/+2How is it evil if they are going after content pirates? You don't like it, don't pirate on their network. Simple as that. This just in, to avoid jail time, don't commit crimes!

    PRIVACY DOES NOT EXTEND TO SAFEGUARD ILLEGAL ACTIVITY.
    • Fartag, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13Don't forget, you may be doing something illegal in your bedroom or bathroom too. Why make those places safe havens for crime-doers and terrorists? Allow Bed, Bath and Toilet Inc. to monitor your family in _every_ room of your house to make sure you aren't doing anything illegal there. If the room or facility isn't monitored then you can't use it, it's that simple. If you're not doing anything wrong you've got nothing to worry about, right?
    • Atomic1fire, on 10/11/2007, -11/+1agreed
      whats so bad about no privacy for criminals
    • Qtip42, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6What's so bad about no privacy? ..........are you kidding?
    • goffy59, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Dugg up because your a ***** idiot and I want everyone to see it.
      • anachronaut, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1@goffy59

        While I agree with your sentiment, you should at least learn the difference between "your" and "you're" if you're going to call someone else an idiot.
  • unusualbob, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2crap, now i have to figure out how to change my phone service, at&t why did u have to buy ouy bellsouth?
  • bobbybobington, on 10/11/2007, -0/+27AT&T: Your World Delivered... to the NSA... and the RIAA... what the hell we'll throw in the MPAA as well.
  • lobbster, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6dam, ive always wanted to send movies over edge.........
  • Gee1004, on 10/11/2007, -15/+1Who the ***** cares if you not going to steal.
  • glitch47, on 10/11/2007, -11/+8In an effort to actually have a intellectual discussion about this: why so much outrage over them trying to stop you from breaking the law? You don't actually have a right to pirate. Do you get angry at BMW for them putting locks on cars?
    • mharroun, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17Should the police have the right to set up cameras in your house to check if you're doing something wrong?
    • Atomic1fire, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1or making it illegal to use someone elses identity
      you wouldnt want someone pirating your software programs
      because THEY are taking YOUR money with DISREGARD to you
      you would lock those programs in an instant
      to the degree of usefulness's probably not
    • PunkRampant, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I guess it depends on how much you value privacy. Of course everyone would be against police cameras in the home, but it's a matter of personal opinion whether you think your privacy should extend to your data on the internet.
    • aazn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4The primary advantage about the Internet is anonymity. If you take that away, the Internet as we know it will cease to exist.
      • MacParrot, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1You really believe you're anonymous on the internet? That it's impossible to find out who you are? Keep living the dream.
      • MonkCanatella, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1This could very well mean the end of the world.... Of Warcraft.
        • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1
          Yikes... Well in that case, everyone stop that pr0n sharing.

          /blood

          /cry

          /beg

    • xknowsallx, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Does the government have a right to listen to your calls to see if you're a terrorist?
      • ours, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2No it shouldn't but the "war on terror" is changing that more and more.
        • blaze4metal, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1It ceased being the war on terror when the government declared the war on freedoms.
    • Rickler, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Can I make a copy of a bmw then ctrl+v it into my garage? You can't pirate a car. And even if there were such a thing as a molecular mass copier would it be wrong to make copies of tangible things?
    • bwebb, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10When I can't be sure of a 3rd party's intentions when using data that could potentially be personal and important I think I opt on the side of caution and value my privacy.

      Moreover, and this is the most important part, government is supposed to act according to the best interests of the private citizen. At what point did the term innocent until proven guilty become obsolete? If I'm not doing anything wrong, there should be no reason to monitor what I'm doing. Period.

      I vaguely remember a quote that is perfectly applicable in this situation...if anyone know the actual, please post it... "Have an Honest Man write 4 lines for me and I'll make a devil of him." Something like that. The point being that unless you are naive and believe in the good nature of all man, you can recognize that people will tend to take advantage of others in order to further themselves. This is made doubly worse by the fact that the internet allows you to interact with people you will never see or meet. There is no personal element to ***** someone over so there is typically less guilt associated with the action because you can not see the personal impact.

      The RIAA/MPAA are ALREADY powerful, thuggish organizations that insist on violating peoples' personal freedoms on a regular basis to extort money from them for their FUD campaign. Copyright law already allows them to bend the legal system to their will. You want to give them a better legal license to allow this to continue?

      As for your BMW analogy, the locks are there for the protection of MY property. If their locks tracked how often I drove, where I drove, and how fast I drove, all while reporting this info to law enforcement agencies, you're ***** right I would be angry. That would be a proper analogy.

      The moment people can no longer CHOOSE whether or not to break the law they become robots. When the time comes that I am no longer trusted to make the correct choice is the time when I (and I don't think I'm alone here) REALLY start making my choices and I can guarantee that those responsible for trying to make me a sheep will ***** pay.

      It's all about the CHOICE.
      • Rezistik, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3This may be one of the most thought out and best relplies ive ever seen on digd
      • Timberwolfl, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Would you mind going into congress and representing us?
      • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Very well put. You appear to be a free thinker. That is a rare trait amongst humans these days. Keep up the excellent posts.
    • javaroast, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Locks on cars?? What the hell does that have to do with the discussion any way. AT&T is selling bandwidth, I'm sure those routers on the backbone are protected and probably locked so there you have the product they are selling is locked. A better analogy is how about if BMW sold you a vehicle and then began monitoring the speed that you drove it at. If you exceed the speed limit BMW would forward the information to the proper authorities. There now your analogy is fixed. I think you might be angry at BMW for that, you'd probably be angry at the government as well. You want an intellectual discussion at least come up with an intellectual premise first. Besides how would they be able to tell if I'm breaking a law. They have no way of telling if I'm pirating of if I'm making an archival backup of my legally obtained MP3, Media file, Video.... And since when is AT&T entrusted with safeguarding laws. Last I heard they broke the law on a pretty big scale themselves http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_break_up_of_AT%26T
    • Lumet, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2And who says all laws are just? And who says what isn't illegal today won't be tomorrow? Ya. I'll keep my privacy thanks.
    • generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Copyright is not property. It has all sorts of holes in it, you see, so what's illegal can be fair use for a teacher, librarian, etc.
  • PFinn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1i can see it now.... person calls AT&T support: "my internet isnt working any more..." costumer service: "Im sorry sir, but that is because you downloaded too much porn...it looks like you have 30 different files of paris hilton"
    • GliTCH82, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2also, sir, the FBI want to speak with you about your recent download of the "jolly roger cookbook"
  • digitallysick, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2at&t, the government, and the mpaa/riaa, they give eachother handjobs
  • princessangry, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5this also works for thier regular wired ISP as well becuase comcast uses AT&T's network primarily from what I have seen and this is another reason to avoid cumcast. I would rather put up with satellite internet and pay more for less than deal with comcast! ugh! (comcast nashville sucked balls)

    and guess who is providing all the software for this... cisco they are the ones who are behind the ***** with china and everything else about net neutrality and they are against it as well. they are doing all this so they can sell thier filtering and thier big brother survaliance equipment to make a big buck off it.
    • Atomic1fire, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2big brother survailince on the freeloading pirates
    • aazn, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Well I mean Cisco makes everything. Supercomputers, Internet Backbone Routers, home routers, etc. But they didn't make the Great Firewall, so stfu nub.
      • princessangry, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1uhh they are behind it all though. they are running out of products that are different to sell and they are trying to gain a further monopoly on the networking hardware market buy doing this becuase their routers are allready dominate and they want an even greater stronghold and they will lobby the govt. to require ISPs to have thier technology, thus making even more! becuase the ISPs will be required to purchase thier filtering/spying equipment or be shut down. cisco has powerful lobby with all governments and they are highly in the cabal. they are one of the main people behind the network neutrality issue and they are trying to create a further monopoly on the networking market by doing this and so they will make thier stuff not compatible with other networking equpiment they are pulling a microsoft they are allready doing so but they are going to do it harder this time. microsoft has a hold like this allready. they lobby too. and so do alot of companies. look at ma bell and the oil companies for an even bigger example how evvery major company is owned by the same few families.
    • Pie4Weebl, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1if cisico wasn't realizing this product another company would move to fill the demand, its still at&ts fault.
    • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Cisco? No. They have added code to their IOS that enables ISP's to monitor traffic better, but they have only made the weapon. Weapons are harmless in the hands of those that are properly trained and have only good intentions. All network device companies have put the same functions in their code.

      Internet traffic is not private, nor has it ever been. There was never any expectation that it would be. It is up to the people to keep their data private. That is why VPN's, SSL tunnels and such were created. That is why some people encrypt their data in multiple layers.
  • Lancelot9201, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1What about Newsgroups, are they going to remove all access.?? There is content there that I download & I know it's legal. But, there's also some great proggies too. I don't need someone to assist in helping me not break the law.. Funny, how some people think that anything other than surfing the net or writing emails must be illegal.
    • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Some NNTP providers offer encryption, but I have never seen one that says that you are anonymous. If you post something inappropriate, they will have no problem handing over your name, IP, etc. Some claim to not log downloads, but all of them log uploads. They would not dare try to be truly anonymous for fear of loosing their newsfeed connections.
  • vegasbright, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Everyone - Go now and download TOR now before its a controlled program only spooks can own..
    • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1It was funded by Darpa. I don't believe they will expose access though, since it was intended to trick others into chatting openly. It wasn't meant to trap p2p/pr0n pirates.
  • PiMPSP, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3wow, month old news thats been dugg already!! excellent!
  • Qtip42, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1way to piss off shareholders.
    • Ryosen, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The shareholders should be ecstatic about this. You don't think that AT&T won't be compensated for their cooperation? Either in the form of direct revenue or (further) relaxed regulations, it most definitely will result in higher profits.
    • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1This will not impact their business in the slightest. Even if shares were to drop by a small margin, they would quickly be fixed by laying off a few thousand employees.
  • Rabbittt, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Where is the Open Source Internet?
    • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1That is 100% possible! It can most certainly be done. We just need a few thousand independently wealth eccentric billionaires to step forward and kick down some duckets.

      If you meant encapsulate everything in encrypted padded tunnels and make all traffic look like it is legit, that would be good too.
  • Raiu, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7It really disgusts me how people honestly try to argue "If you aren't doing anything illegal, why care?" Why care? Oh I dunno.. check the last 24 hours of digg posts. There is one there talking about FBI agents under fire for abuse of Patriot Act rights. Unless they have a warrent, probable cause etc they have no right monitoring what ANY of us do in the US. But if you want to be a Bush "Patriot Act" drone go found your own Big Brother country while the few of us left will try and fight for our right to privacy.
    • quado, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1To those "Patriot Act Drones" I say this:

      He who sacrifices freedoms for security, deserves neither freedoms, nor security.
      -Ben Franklin (I think)
  • tler126, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6We as people may technically not have a right to privacy, but the fourth amendment clearly states they cannot touch or look at our ***** without probable cause! So how are they going to check and see if we are doing anything illegal without infringing on the fourth amendment? So does this sound totally illegal to anyone else?
    • abdrahman, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2"cannot touch or look at our ***** without probable cause"

      See "our *****" is the key term in your statement; according to AT&T and others, once your "*****" gets on their servers it is "their *****", free to deal with however they please.
    • MacParrot, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2abdrahman gets it. Your right to privacy does not extend to the public airwaves. Such airwaves now include the internet since even though you pay for access, service providers other than your own cannot legally deny you access through their servers to public sites. Your only reasonable expectation of privacy is on your own private network. Does it suck? Yep. Anything you or I can do about it? Nope. I love how people think this extends to the Repubs as if the Demos aren't just as happy to trample your rights if it suits their needs. Keep thinking that the Dems will wave a magic wand and make it all better. They love that attitude. Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin. Neither care about you and your petty problems. They just want to be the big cheese and if you make problems for them, well they can deal with that.
    • tao52nyc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Hate to have to say this, but the 4th Amendment (and all the others) only applies to what THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT can or cannot do to the citizens of the 50 States. The Bill of Rights was intended as the original barbed/razor wire wrapped around the Federal system. There is nothing in the Constitution stating that completely private entities/corporations are also bound by Bill of Rights restrictions. Corporate restrictions only come from laws passed by legislatures, and nowhere else. AT&T owns the pipes - they have made a deal with another set of big corporations to help "protect" what those corporations feel are infringements on their legally-owned copyrights. We may not agree with it - we may think it's total ***** - but there is no fundamental law preventing them from doing it. Learn to use Tor, and as many forms of encryption as you can. Dump Limewire, et al, and get into torrenting, which is a much more sophisticated distribution method. Sooner or later, something you do will pass through an ATT pipe. Prepare for it.
      • quado, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Thank you for clarifying this for everyone, as what has been said here is the truth. The later amendments were made to incorporate the bill of rights into state governments. The amendments that are referred to only protect against infringement by the government, and no one else. I think thats why we have privacy policies and the FCC.
    • microchp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Internet traffic has never ever been protected by anything in the Consitution of the United States of America. It is up to you to secure your traffic and keep your activities anonymous as you wish. Using P2P, even when encrypted is anything but private. Torrents are the same way. Your traffic patterns can be identified within milliseconds.

      It is up to you to find ways to transfer data that can not be identified as questionable or objectionable.

      You must encourage the developers of your favorite software to make the traffic more obscure, harded to identify, add padded data streams, stronger forms of encryption, randomize access and so on. This has to be done in the application layer of anything yourself and others make use of. Just because you hide your traffic doesn't mean your friends are anonymous. Everyone must be equally anonymous for anything to be effective.

      You should also encourage all of your friends to double encrypt all of their data and better organize it. In the early 1900's, people would gamble in private clubs even though it was considered to be illegal. They would write down all their bets on flash paper. If they were raided, each of them would touch their cigarette/cigar to the flash paper and all evidence would be gone, in a flash. Today, everyone should be using full disk encryption, with virtual drives inside their disk that use encryption software from a second vendor and encrypt their files individually using software from a third unrelated vendor.

  • superdog87, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Privacy?.... Where did you go?!!!! Thank you Charter Communications for keeping freedom!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 89 of 89 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.