industryterm:internet service providers

Quelques organismes qui défendent le domaine publique en Allemagne et ailleurs

Commons und Konvivialismus – Das Commons-Institut
▻https://commons-institut.org/commons-und-konvivialismus

https://i0.wp.com/commons-institut.org/wp-content/uploads/cropped-Icon_M_Farbe.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1

Das »Konvivialistische Manifest« (2014 auf Deutsch erschienen) hat die globale Debatte um die Frage neu formatiert, wie wir das Zusammenleben angesichts von Klimakatastrophe und Finanzkrisen gestalten wollen und müssen. Die Beiträge des Bandes »Konvivialismus. Eine Debatte« (Hg. Frank Adloff und Volker M. Heins, erschienen im Transcript-Verlag) eröffnen nun die Diskussion um die Möglichkeiten und Grenzen des Manifests im deutschsprachigen Raum: Wo liegen seine Stärken, wo die Schwächen? Was hieße es, eine konviviale Gesellschaft anzustreben – in Politik, Kultur, Zivilgesellschaft und Wirtschaft? Welche neuen Formen des Zusammenlebens sind wünschenswert und welche Chancen bestehen, sie durchzusetzen? Acht Mitglieder des Commons-Instituts haben einen Kommentar-Beitrag zu dem Diskussionsband geschrieben

Free software is a matter of liberty, not price — Free Software Foundation — working together for free software
▻https://www.fsf.org/about

https://static.fsf.org/common/img/logo-new.png

The Free Software Foundation (FSF) is a nonprofit with a worldwide mission to promote computer user freedom. We defend the rights of all software users.
As our society grows more dependent on computers, the software we run is of critical importance to securing the future of a free society. Free software is about having control over the technology we use in our homes, schools and businesses, where computers work for our individual and communal benefit, not for proprietary software companies or governments who might seek to restrict and monitor us. The Free Software Foundation exclusively uses free software to perform its work.

GNU und die Freie-Software-Bewegung
▻http://www.gnu.org/home.de.html

http://www.gnu.org/graphics/heckert_gnu.transp.small.png

GNU ist ein Betriebssystem, das Freie Software ist ‑ d. h. es respektiert die Freiheit der Nutzer. Das GNU-Betriebssystem besteht aus GNU-Paketen (Programme, die speziell vom GNU-Projekt freigegeben wurden) sowie von Dritten freigegebene Freie Software. Die Entwicklung von GNU ermöglichte es einen Rechner ohne Software benutzen zu können, die Ihre Freiheit mit Füßen treten würde.

Commons einfach erklärt - Hauptsache Commons
▻https://www.hauptsache-commons.de/home/commons-einfach-erkl%C3%A4rt

https://image.jimcdn.com/app/cms/image/transf/dimension=807x10000:format=png/path/sd38660f5c3d6912e/image/icf21ea3d1099e67b/version/1472539859/image.png

Die Haupt-Commons-Formel lautet:
∑[aD+nW] = bL

aD = anderes DENKEN
nW = neues WIRTSCHAFTEN
bL = besseres LEBEN

Das Handeln nach Commons-Prinzipien ermöglicht eine Gesellschaft ohne soziale Widersprüche oder ökonomische Krisen. Commons ersetzen die alten Strukturen. Sie bilden sich selbst organisierende Netzwerke aus, geeignet für Innovationen, da sie die kollektive Intelligenz für das Wohlergehen Aller nutzen.

Wildnis in Deutschland - Hauptsache Commons
▻https://www.hauptsache-commons.de/spezielles/wildnis-in-deutschland

Die Initiative „Wildnis in Deutschland“ wird von 18 Naturschutzorganisationen getragen. Die Beteiligten finden, dass es ’höchste Zeit für mehr Wildnis in Deutschland’ ist !

Sie unterstützen die Gründung von Nationalparks und die Schaffung von Wildnisgebieten und stärken die Öffentlichkeitsarbeit rund um das Thema Wildnis. Gemeinsam mit vielen Partnern und Initiativen sind sie aktiv für mehr faszinierende große Wildnisgebiete in Deutschland – für uns, unsere Kinder und Enkel.

Creativity & Innovation | Electronic Frontier Foundation
▻https://www.eff.org/issues/innovation

https://www.eff.org/sites/all/modules/custom/eff_library/images/eff-logo-stack-black.svg

Our digital future depends on our ability to access, use, and build on technology. A few media or political interests shouldn’t have unfair technological or legal advantages over the rest of us. Unfortunately, litigious copyright and patent owners can abuse the law to inhibit fair use and stifle competition. Internet service providers can give established content companies an advantage over startups and veto the choices you make in how to use the Internet. The Electronic Frontier Foundation fights against these unfair practices and defends digital creators, inventors, and ordinary technology users. We work to protect and strengthen fair use, innovation, open access, net neutrality, and your freedom to tinker.

In principle, intellectual property laws (or IP law, a catchall term for copyright, patents, and trademarks) should serve the public in a number of ways. Copyrights provide economic incentives for authors and artists to create and distribute new expressive works. Patents reward inventors for sharing new inventions with the public, granting them a temporary and limited monopoly on them in return for contributing to the public body of knowledge. Trademarks help protect customers by encouraging companies to make sure products match the quality standards the public expects.

#domaine_publique #creative_commons #convivialité #Allemagne

At least 186 EU ISPs use deep-packet inspection to shape traffic, break net neutrality
▻https://www.zdnet.com/article/186-eu-isps-use-deep-packet-inspection-to-shape-traffic-break-net-neutrality

NGOs, academics warn about DPI’s impact on user privacy, that net neutrality might be watered down in the EU. Despite net neutrality regulation being in effect in the EU since 2016, European internet service providers are already breaking the rules and shaping traffic, according to a conglomerate of NGOs, academics, and private companies. Earlier this week, this group — made up of 45 entities from 15 countries — has sent an open letter to EU authorities expressing concerns about European (...)

#Deep_Packet_Inspection_(DPI) #neutralité #profiling #surveillance #web #EDRi

##Deep_Packet_Inspection__DPI_ ##neutralité

https://zdnet2.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2017/12/14/8ee9b2ad-929a-4c45-a6fb-44349c2e3ee8/thumbnail/770x578/61cf257f95e763ece526f704a62f5061/net-neutrality.jpg

Telcos block access to websites continuing to host Christchurch terror footage
▻https://www.sbs.com.au/news/telcos-block-access-to-websites-continuing-to-host-christchurch-terror-foota

Telstra and other internet service providers have made the extraordinary decision to block access to 4chan and similar sites following the Christchurch attack.

Several websites including 4chan have been blocked by major Australian telcos for continuing to host footage of the Christchurch terrorist attack.

Telstra on Tuesday blocked access to 4chan, 8chan and Voat, the blog Zerohedge and video hosting platform LiveLeak.

"We understand this may inconvenience some legitimate users of these (...)

#Telstra #censure #filtrage #surveillance #web

▻https://sl.sbs.com.au/public/image/file/96fa8762-6d7a-45e4-954d-cba177549602/crop/16x9

Opinion | Can Europe Lead on Privacy? - The New York Times
▻https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/01/opinion/europe-privacy-protections.html

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/04/02/opinion/02wheeeler/merlin_99987431_997c0859-70af-4b02-a0e1-44c4c78014ce-facebookJumbo.jpg

The American government has done little to help us in this regard. The Federal Trade Commission merely requires internet companies to have a privacy policy available for consumers to see. A company can change that policy whenever it wants as long as it says it is doing so. As a result, internet companies have been taking our personal property — our private information — while hiding this fact behind lengthy and coercive legalese and cumbersome “opt out” processes.

The European rules, for instance, require companies to provide a plain-language description of their information-gathering practices, including how the data is used, as well as have users explicitly “opt in” to having their information collected. The rules also give consumers the right to see what information about them is being held, and the ability to have that information erased.

Why don’t we have similar protections in the United States? We almost did. In 2016, the Federal Communications Commission imposed similar requirements on the companies that provide internet service, forcing them to offer an explicit “opt in” for having personal data collected, and to protect the information that was collected.

This didn’t last. Internet service providers like Comcast and AT&T and companies that use their connections, like Facebook and Google, lobbied members of Congress. Congress passed a law this year, signed by President Trump, that not only repealed the protections but also prohibited the F.C.C. from ever again imposing such safeguards. The same coalition of corporate interests succeeded in discouraging California from passing a state privacy law similar to the 2016 F.C.C. requirements.

The New World must learn from the Old World. The internet economy has made our personal data a corporate commodity. The United States government must return control of that information to its owners.

Tom Wheeler, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission from 2013 to 2017, is a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution and a fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School.

#Vie_privée #RGPD #FCC

Killing Net Neutrality Has Brought On a New Call for Public Broadband
▻https://theintercept.com/2017/12/15/fcc-net-neutrality-public-broadband-seattle

The Federal Communications Commission’s 3-2 vote to repeal net neutrality rules has many worried that internet service providers will now build the same sort of tiered internet that some other countries have — where individual providers can collude to throttle traffic to certain websites and services in order to shake money from consumers or the companies themselves — or both. For instance, in Morocco last year, multiple internet service providers worked together to briefly block voice chat (...)

#Comcast #neutralité #WhatsApp #Skype #FCC

##neutralité

US regulator scraps net neutrality rules that protect open internet
▻https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/dec/14/net-neutrality-fcc-rules-open-internet

The US’s top media regulator voted to end rules protecting an open internet on Thursday, a move critics warn will hand control of the future of the web to cable and telecoms companies. At a packed meeting of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in Washington, the watchdog’s commissioners voted three to two to dismantle the “net neutrality” rules that prevent internet service providers (ISPs) from charging websites more for delivering certain services or blocking others should they, for (...)

#neutralité #FCC

##neutralité

7 Things to Know About Ajit Pai, the Man Trump Tasked With Killing Net Neutrality | Alternet
▻https://www.alternet.org/7-things-you-need-know-about-ajit-pais-cheerful-fanatic-who-wants-privatiz

https://www.alternet.org/sites/default/files/story_images/screen_shot_2017-11-27_at_5.12.37_pm.png

Ajit Pais is chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, the government agency that regulates radio and television airwaves, cable TV, and internet. In other words, he has immense power.

President Trump appointed Pai to serve as chairman in January and Pai has quickly moved to advance the interests of big broadcasting companies and internet service providers at the expense of the public. Next month, the five-member FCC will vote on Pai’s proposal to roll back FCC rules limiting cable and internet service providers from charging more for their services.

Even Trump supporters should be appalled, says the reliably conservative Forbes magazine.

Tim Berners-Lee, the man who invented the protocols of the World Wide Web, is blunt: “The FCC under Ajit Pai has consistently chosen to sell out Americans for the profit of corporations."

So who is this guy?

#Neutralité_internet #FCC

MSC Containership Drags Anchor, Causing Internet Blackout in Somalia -Reports – gCaptain
▻http://gcaptain.com/msc-containership-held-in-somalia-over-internet-blackout-reports

Somali authorities have detained an MSC containership alleging that the vessel dragged anchor and cut an undersea fibre optic cable supplying internet to much of the country, according to reports. 

Somalia has been suffering from an internet blackout since June 24 when the MSC Alice allegedly dragged anchor outside Mogadishu port, severing undersea fibre optic cables used by many of the country’s Internet Service Providers (ISPs).

Common sense: An examination of three Los Angeles community WiFi projects that privileged public funding over commons-based infrastructure management » The Journal of Peer Production
▻http://peerproduction.net/issues/issue-10-peer-production-and-work/varia/common-sense-an-examination-of-three-los-angeles-community-wifi-proj

Several high-profile incidents involving entire communities cut off from broadband access—the result of natural disasters such as Superstorm Sandy in the Northeastern United States in 2012, to totalitarian governments in Egypt and Tunisia shutting down infrastructure in 2011—have raised awareness of the vulnerabilities inherent in a centralized internet. Policymakers are increasingly interested in the potential of community mesh networks (Harvard University, 2012), which use a decentralized architecture. Still, government agencies rarely fund community WiFi initiatives in U.S. cities. Three grassroots mesh networks in Los Angeles are distinct, however, as both local and state agencies subsidized their efforts. By comparing a public goods framework with theory of the commons, this study examines how government support impacted L.A.-based community wireless projects.

By examining public investments in peer-to-peer networking initiatives, this study aims to better understand how substantial cash infusions influenced network design and implementation. Stronger community ties, self-reliance and opportunities for democratic deliberation potentially emerge when neighbors share bandwidth. In this sense, WiFi signal sharing is more than a promising “last mile” technology able to reach every home for a fraction of the cost required to lay fiber, DSL and cable (Martin, 2005). In fact, grassroots mesh projects aim to create “a radically different public sphere” (Burnett, 1999) by situating themselves outside of commercial interests. Typically, one joins, as opposed to subscribes to, the services. As Lippman and Reed (2003, p. 1) observed, “Communications can become something you do rather than something you buy.” For this reason, the economic theories of both public goods and the commons provide an ideal analytical framework for examining three community WiFi project in Los Angeles.

The value of this commons is derived from the fact that no one owns or controls it—not people, not corporations, not the government (Benkler 2001; Lessig, 2001). The peer-to-peer architecture comprising community wireless networks provides ideal conditions for fostering civic engagement and eliminating the need to rely on telecommunications companies for connectivity. Instead of information passing from “one to many,” it travels from “many to many.” The primary internet relies on centralized access points and internet service providers (ISPs) for connectivity. By contrast, in a peer-to-peer architecture, components are both independent and scalable. Wireless mesh network design includes at least one access point with a direct connection to the internet—via fiber, cable or satellite link—and nodes that hop from one device to the next

As the network’s popularity mounted, however, so did its challenges. The increasing prevalence of smartphones meant more mobile devices accessing Little Tokyo Unplugged. This required the LTSC to deploy additional access points, leading to signal interference. Network users overwhelmed LTSC staff with complaints about everything from lost connections to computer viruses. “We ended up being IT support for the entire community,” the informant said.

Money, yes. Meaningful participation, no.

Despite its popularity, the center shut down the WiFi network in 2010. “The decision was made that we couldn’t sustain it,” the informant said. While the LTSC (2010) invested nearly $3 million in broadband-related initiatives, the center neglected to seek meaningful participation from the wider Little Tokyo community. The LTSC basically functioned according to a traditional ISP model. In a commons, it is imperative that a fair relationship exists between contributions made and benefits received (Commons Sommerschule, 2012). However, the LTSC neither expected nor asked network users to contribute to Little Tokyo Unplugged in exchange for free broadband access. As a result, individual network users did not feel they had a stake in ensuring the stability of the network.

HSDNC board members believed free WiFi would facilitate more efficient communication with their constituents, coupled with “the main issue” of digital inclusion, according to an informant. “The reality is that poor, working class Latino members of our district have limited access to the internet. A lot of people have cell phones, but we see gaps,” this informant said. These comments exemplify how the pursuit of public funding began to usurp social-production principles associated with a networked commons. While closing the digital divide and informing the public about community issues are laudable goals, they are clearly institutional ones.

Rather than design Open Mar Vista/Open Neighborhoods according to commons-based peer production principles, the network co-founders sought ways to align the project with public good goals articulated by local and federal agencies. For instance, an informant stressed that community WiFi would enable neighborhood councils to send email blasts and post information online. This argument is a direct response to the city’s push for neighborhood councils to reduce paper correspondence with constituents (City of Los Angeles, 2010). Similarly, the grant application Open Neighborhoods submitted to the federal Broadband Technologies Opportunities Program—which exclusively funded broadband infrastructure and computer adoption initiatives—focused on the potential for community WiFi networks to supply Los Angeles’ low-income neighborhoods with affordable internet (National Telecommunications & Information Administration, 2010). The proposal is void of references to concepts associated with the commons, even though this ideological space can transform broadband infrastructure from a conduit to the internet into a technology for empowering participants. It seems that, ultimately, the pursuit of public funding supplanted initial goals of creating a WiFi network that fostered inclusivity and collaboration.

There’s little doubt that Manchester Community Technologies accepted a $453,000 state grant in exchange for a “mesh cloud” it never deployed. These findings suggest an inherent conflict exists between the quest to fulfill the state’s public good goals, and the commons-based community building necessary to sustain a grassroots WiFi network. One could argue that this reality should have prevented California officials from funding Manchester Community Technologies’ proposal in the first place. Specifically, a successful community WiFi initiative cannot be predicated on a state mandate to strengthen digital literacy skills and increase broadband adoption. Local businesses and residents typically share bandwidth as part of a broader effort to create an alternative communications infrastructure, beyond the reach of government—not dictated by government. Grassroots broadband initiatives run smoothly when participants are committed to the success of a common enterprise and share a common purpose. The approach taken by Manchester Community Technologies does not reflect these principles.

#Communs #wifi #mesh_networks #relations_communs_public

Egypt 24 hours later: What we know about the blocking of Mada Masr’s website | MadaMasr

Menaces contre un des meilleurs sites d’information égyptien

▻http://www.madamasr.com/en/2017/05/26/feature/u/24-hours-later-what-we-know-about-the-blocking-of-mada-masrs-website

Access to Mada Masr’s website via most of Egypt’s internet service providers (ISPs) has been blocked since Wednesday evening.

The country’s official state news agency, MENA, quoted a high-level security source on Wednesday night as saying that access to 21 websites, which had disseminated “content that supports terrorism and extremism and deliberately spreads lies,” had been blocked in Egypt in accord with “relevant legal proceedings.”

Mada Masr has not been officially informed that any party has taken official or legal measures against it.

Several other websites have also been blocked, including two Egyptian publications: Masr al-Arabiya and the website of the print weekly Al-Mesryoon. The list also includes some Qatari or Qatar-funded news outlets that support or are managed by the Muslim Brotherhood, principal among them Al Jazeera and Huffington Post Arabic, in addition to the official website for Palestinian political movement Hamas.

#Egypte #presse #médias

Internet Privacy 2017 | What You Need to Know - Shelly Palmer
▻http://www.shellypalmer.com/2017/04/internet-privacy-2017-what-you-need-to-know

There has never been a reasonable expectation of online privacy, and there never will be. Regardless of what you may have recently heard about joint resolutions or nullifications, nothing has changed. Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have always had the right to use your data as they see fit, within a few Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) parameters. This has not changed. And you have given FANG (Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, and Google) the right to use your data as they see fit (with a few privacy policy exceptions and within the few aforementioned FTC and FCC parameters). So regarding online privacy, for all practical purposes, absolutely nothing has changed.
What About S.J.Res.34?

Update: On April 3, 2017, the president signed S.J.Res.34, a joint resolution that nullified the FCC’s “Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services” rule. But the FCC rule never went into effect. So net/net, nothing has changed.

#USA #vie_privée #vie_privee #privacy

To Serve AT&T and Comcast, Congressional GOP Votes to Destroy Online Privacy
▻https://theintercept.com/2017/03/29/to-serve-att-and-comcast-congressional-gop-votes-to-destroy-online-pri

Clarifying events in politics are often healthy even when they produce awful outcomes. Such is the case with yesterday’s vote by House Republicans to free internet service providers (ISPs) – primarily AT&T, Comcast and Verizon – from the Obama-era FCC regulations barring them from storing and selling their users’ browsing histories without their consent. The vote followed an identical one last week in the Senate exclusively along party lines. It’s hard to overstate what a blow to individual (...)

#Comcast #Google #Verizon #Facebook #AT&T #données #profiling #publicité #historique

##AT&T ##publicité

US consumers lose privacy protections for their web browsing history
▻https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/28/privacy-protection-sell-web-browsing-history-data

Congress voted to kill rules meant to prevent internet service providers from selling users’ web browsing histories and app storage histories to advertisers US politicians voted Tuesday to kill privacy rules meant to prevent internet service providers (ISPs) from selling users’ web browsing histories and app usage histories to advertisers. The planned protections, proposed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and scheduled to take effect by the end of 2017, would have forced ISPs (...)

#Comcast #Google #Verizon #historique #publicité #FCC

##publicité

Senate Republicans Vote to Allow ISPs to Sell Your Private Data - Motherboard
▻https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/senate-republicans-vote-to-allow-isps-to-sell-your-private-data

Republican lawmakers in the US Senate approved a measure on Thursday designed to kill federal broadband privacy protections and allow internet service providers like AT&T and Verizon to sell your sensitive private information to the highest bidder.

The vote represents the culmination of a year-long campaign by the nation’s largest internet service providers (ISPs) and their GOP allies to torpedo Federal Communications Commission rules that require broadband providers to obtain “opt-in” consent before using, sharing, or selling private consumer data.

Consumer advocates and privacy watchdogs responded with outrage, and accused Republican lawmakers of putting the financial interests of a handful of wildly profitable corporate giants ahead of the privacy interests of the American people.

Doha News statement on the blocking of its website in Qatar
▻https://medium.com/dohanews/doha-news-statement-on-the-blocking-of-its-website-in-qatar-9f3759a99282

As many are aware, Doha News became inaccessible to most online users in Qatar as of yesterday, Nov. 30.

Our URL — dohanews.co — was apparently blocked by both of Qatar’s internet service providers, Ooredoo and Vodafone, simultaneously.

Since then, the majority of people in the country have been unable to access our website on their desktop computers and mobile devices.

[…]

While we waited for their response, we temporarily diverted readers from dohanews.co to another domain name, doha.news.
However, that URL also stopped working in short order.
Deliberately blocked

Given this development and the silence from the government and ISP providers, we can only conclude that our website has been deliberately targeted and blocked by Qatar authorities.

We are incredibly disappointed with this decision, which appears to be an act of censorship.

We believe strongly in the importance of a free press, and are saddened that Qatar, home of the Doha Center for Media Freedom and Al Jazeera, has decided to take this step.

“Internet service providers charging for premium access hold us all to ransom” - Cory Doctorow’s take on Net Neutrality:
▻http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/28/internet-service-providers-charging-premium-access

#turkey blocks access to #Youtube after new audio leak
▻http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/turkey-blocks-access-youtube-after-new-audio-leak

Turkey on Thursday banned video-sharing website YouTube, a week after blocking access to Twitter, after both were used to spread audio recordings implicating the prime minister in corruption, local media reported. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s government had informed mobile phone operators and internet service providers of its decision, the Hurriyet newspaper reported on its website. read more

#freedom_of_speech #Top_News

Net Neutrality Ruling Will Disempower Communities of Color
▻http://www.filmsforaction.org/watch/net-neutrality-ruling-will-disempower-communities-of-color

Jessica Gonzalez: As US Court of Appeals rules against net neutrality, internet service providers will restrict access for communities of color - January 17, 14

JAISAL NOOR, TRNN PRODUCER: This...

Net neutrality threatened by court
▻http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25743200

A US federal appeals court has rejected rules intended to prevent internet service providers (ISPs) from prioritising certain types of content.

US, Australia isolated in TPP negotiations
▻http://wikileaks.org/US-Australia-isolated-in-TPP.html

Throughout the text it is clear that on the contentious issues, Australia’s position is closely aligned with the US. Australia and the US are the only two countries to object to a proposal to limit Internet service providers’ liability in relation to copyright infringement, a proposal supported by the remaining countries (minus Japan which does not express its position). Malaysia and New Zealand both oppose provisions that would force ISPs to filter or block access to ’repeat infringers’ of copyright. New Zealand’s proposals have strong support from Malaysia (115) and Chile (114).

Cameron’s proposed filters extend to more than just porn (Wired UK)
▻http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-07/27/pornwall

The organisation, which campaigns for digital freedoms, has spoken to some of the Internet Service Providers that will be constructing Cameron’s content filters. They discovered that a host of other categories of supposedly-objectionable material may be on the block-list.

As well as pornography, users may automatically be opted in to blocks on “violent material”, “extremist related content”, “anorexia and eating disorder websites” and “suicide related websites”, “alcohol” and “smoking”. But the list doesn’t stop there. It even extends to blocking “web forums” and “esoteric material”, whatever that is. “Web blocking circumvention tools” is also included, of course.

The ORG’s Jim Killock says: “What’s clear here is that David Cameron wants people to sleepwalk into censorship. We know that people stick with defaults: this is part of the idea behind ’nudge theory’ and ’choice architecture’ that is popular with Cameron.”

The problem with the ’debate’ over online porn is the two sides aren’t even speaking the same language
▻http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/technology/willardfoxton2/100009299/the-problem-with-the-debate-over-online-porn-is-the-two-sides-are

Claire Perry, the Prime Minister’s “special adviser on preventing the sexualisation and commercialisation of childhood”, has three demands which she claims will save the world from the horrors of porn. First, that internet service providers and other internet companies block child pornography at its source; second, that any sort of simulated rape pornography is banned; and third, that pornography is banned from public WiFi.

On the face of it, these all seem like reasonable demands. I mean, if you oppose them, you must be some kind of filth peddler or mad porn obsessive, right? Or you might just be a person who understands how the internet works, and therein lies the problem. Let’s tackle Perry’s demands one by one and explain, patiently, why she is wrong.

#censure #pornographie

Copyright Scofflaws Beware : ISPs to Begin Monitoring Illicit File Sharing | Threat Level | Wired
►http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/10/isp-file-sharing-monitoring

la future #hadopi américaine a l’air encore plus compliquée que la française :)

The nation’s major internet service providers by year’s end will institute a so-called six-strikes plan, the “Copyright Alert System” initiative backed by the Obama administration and pushed by Hollywood and the major record labels to disrupt and possibly terminate internet access for online copyright scofflaws.

The plan, now four years in the making, includes participation by AT&T, Cablevision Systems, Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Verizon. After four offenses, the historic plan calls for these residential internet providers to initiate so-called “mitigation measures” (.pdf) that might include reducing internet speeds and redirecting a subscriber’s service to an “educational” landing page about infringement.

#surveillance #copyright #internet

The known unknowns of #Skype interception
►http://paranoia.dubfire.net/2012/07/the-known-unknows-of-skype-interception.html

If governments can intercept and record the encrypted communications of users (via assistance provided by Internet Service Providers), and have the encryption keys used by both ends of the conversation — or can impersonate Skype users and perform man in the middle attacks on their conversations, then they can decrypt the voice communications without any further assistance from Skype.

Do we know if this is happening? No. But that is largely because Skype really won’t comment on the specifics of its interactions with governments, or the assistance it can provide. However, privacy researchers (pdf) have for many years speculated about governments compelling companies to hand over their own encryption keys or provide false certificates (pdf) for use in MiTM attacks. In such cases, when the requests come, there isn’t really anything that companies can do to resist.

#cryptographie #surveillance

Netherlands passes net neutrality law | News | .net magazine
►http://www.netmagazine.com/news/netherlands-passes-net-neutrality-law

The #Netherlands is set to become the first European country to guarantee #net #neutrality, meaning it will effectively legislate against internet telcos and internet service providers who want to discriminate by charging more for using particular applications or services.