Comcast Lying About Vonage

jehnx writes, "Apparently, Comcast is trying some new tricks to get people to sign up for its version of VoIP, 'Comcast Digital Voice,' according to Wang (of WangScript fame). From the blog post: 'Today my wife received a phone call from a Comcast representative who had called to promote their new "Comcast Digital Voice" service... Ordinarily, we don't mind Comcast calling us from time to time with new offers... [but this time] they proceeded to tell LIE after LIE in an attempt to convince us that Vonage was not as good as Comcast Digital Voice. Imagine how many people would be scared into using Comcast Digital Voice because Comcast makes them believe that Vonage is insecure and only works when your PC is turned on.' Is Comcast going a bit far in their techniques to lure in new customers?"

Vonage isn't secure

no encryption at all. Man in the middle attacks are very possible.

Re:Vonage isn't secure

So VOIP is no more secure than POTS.

Re:Vonage isn't secure

Actually it's slightly more secure only because SS7 is a simple protocol compared to SIP (tunneled of course). It's also more secure in that a non-authorized person (like a private investigator) could not tap a VoIP connection without gaining entry to the premises. A POTS connection can be tapped by anybody who can access your line (anywhere). Comcast's VoIP likely uses similar technology to Vonage and so is probably just as secure.

Re:Vonage isn't secure

Actually it's slightly more secure only because SS7 is a simple protocol compared to SIP (tunneled of course). It's also more secure in that a non-authorized person (like a private investigator) could not tap a VoIP connection without gaining entry to the premises. A POTS connection can be tapped by anybody who can access your line (anywhere). Comcast's VoIP likely uses similar technology to Vonage and so is probably just as secure.

Define "secure"? POTS/DSL/Vonage-on-DSL has an inherent level of security and reliability above cable/cable-VoIP/vonage-on-cable because telco technology is [b]circuit based[/b]. Your line isn't dependant on a shared RF medium that can potently be snooped/jammed/interfered with by anybody else on the same node. Doubt that? Then explain why it took Time Warner six months to figure out that the problem with my Roadrunner service was a friggen 45 year old TV down the block leaking RF onto the cable plant? Had I TW's digital phone/vonage I would have been royally screwed. I can't recall the last time that my POTS/DSL service was taken down by a 45 year old phone next door....

Anybody that relies on VoIP service over a cable connection is insane. My DSL service is circuit based and survives just about anything including power outages. My cable service doesn't even survive thunderstorms and dies during power outages, presumably because the repeaters aren't line powered.

Re:Vonage isn't secure

DSL is no better than Cable. While you are somewhat more electrically isolated from your neighbors, it's still ultimately shared... On cable, yes, my packets and my neighbor's packets are on the same physical wire all the way to the head end (where thousands of other's meet on their way to the ISP.) On DSL, they travel down the same trunk to the DSLAM (where they meet and travel down a T1/T3/OC-3 (depending on how cheap your provider is) to the ISP.) While it looks easy to snoop your neighbor's traffic on cable -- it's right there on the cable just the same as yours, the volume (and number of channels) means you have a lot to hunt through to find one specific modem. And cablemodems support "baseline privacy" that scrambles the data making it harder to decode. (but it's still "simple" crypto, designed to limit cloning.)

DSL is a bit of a challenge, too. However, DSL can be monitored from other pairs in the same trunk just like a cable modem. (listen for weak cross-talk.) The DSL physical layer isn't scrambled at all, so if you can see the signal (no matter how weak), it can be decoded with ease.

The PSTN ceased to be truly circuit switched decades ago. It's been digitized, packet switching for a long time. The only circuit is in the "last mile" from the CO to CPE. And more often than not these days, your copper wires don't even go all the way back to the CO; they go to a multiplexer. (or "remote DSLAM" if we're talking DSL.)

As to which is "secure"... neither. POTS/DSL is easiest to sniff if you're willing to sneak around to plant a physical tap -- on the NID or any of the boxes on down the line, right down to breaking into the DSLAM itself. Cable just requires you be somewhere in the neighborhood (no sneaking required), and willing to sift through a lot of noise to find one specific modem's traffic.

On the issue of power, both DSL and cable are endpoint powered. If your house loses power, your modem will stop working. It doesn't matter if it's a DSL modem or a Cable modem. Telco's may have more experience with keeping their equipment powered, but they aren't going to give a shit if the DSLAM loses power during a storm; they'll only care about keeping "lifeline" services (read: POTS) functional. That DSLAM in the cabinet at the top of the hill doesn't have a generator backing it up.

Re:It's not....

No, they send the information down a different tube

I'm shocked, shocked...

...to hear of Comcast lying about a competitor's product. Next thing you know, they'll claim that satellite TV goes out every time it rains.

Re:I'm shocked, shocked...

Your winnings, sir.

Re:I'm shocked, shocked...

Wish I lived on a private island so I could complain about the satellite reception... :(

Re:I'm shocked, shocked...

You should hear how horrible the blowjobs are on his private jet!

Re:I'm shocked, shocked...

What's funny is that I've driven by Comcast facilities... They use multiple satellite dishes. Looks like they get their signals from Satellite and then send the signals over their own ground-based network...... In that context, they should be pretty careful about criticizing dish-based reception.....

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that a 12", $100 dish doesn't perform the same in the rain as the 100', multi-million dollar dishes Comcast uses.

Re:I'm shocked, shocked...

How about a (-1, whoosh) option, for the sound of the joke flying over the GP's head?

Think about it...

do you really think this is Comcast, or some jerk rep that's trying to meet his quota or make an extra few $ on commission!

(Why did this posting make it through?)

Re:Think about it...

He probably works for Vonage, and is trying to hurt Comcast's reputation.

On a more serious note, I've talked to many customer service reps who didn't know what they are talking about. I don't know that you can call it lying, it is perfectly possible this guy thought these things were true. Or maybe this guy is just a jerk who will be in the unemployment lines in a few weeks (every company has these, probably even Vonage). Bottom line is, you can't trust someone who calls you up during dinner to try to sell you a product. Just as you can't trust a single blogger that claims Comcast is running a massive campaign of disinformation because of a single experience.

Hate to say it by Comcast is partially correct

In this case Comcast is partially correct.

They are selling a full DQOS phone service. This means that that there is full QOS when on their network. You are guaranteed that you will have the bandwidth for the telephone call. This cannot be said when you are using Vonage. Vonage over a DOCSIS connection is strictly best effort, meaning that you voice packets have no more priority on the line than you neighbors downloads. This will (if it does not already) mean that you will have inferior quality on a Vonage phone vs. the Comcast solution. Also with DQOS from Comcast you get priority for any 911 call. You cannot get this from Vonage.

Disclosure - I do work in the cable industry but for a equipment vendor not Comcast.

Re:Really? Net Neutrality already broken?

PacketCable, which is what is used for these Cable/VoIP lines doesn't (intentionally) work like that.

DOCSIS has excellent QoS support. It supports what are called "Service Flows" when the modem is provisioned in DOCSIS 1.1 mode. Essentially, a service flow creates a secondary pipe to the CMTS that is completely independant of the other ones. Thus, there would be a second service flow, provisioned for 64 or 128Kbps, used only for VoIP, which has a higher priority than the data flow.

When using cable modem service, traffic from Vonage unfortunately falls into the "data" pipe, and therefore gets jumbled with the rest.

I don't feel that Comcast is being anti-competitive at all, they're using a feature of the DOCSIS specification that cable operators devised and use. Perhaps you need to take your case to CableLabs (and get laughed out by them).

-- Joe

Re:Hate to say it by Comcast is partially correct

Really? Then how come my Comcast VoIP phone goes all to hell when I start uploading big files at the same time?

If you really care....

Then why are you just kicking up a shitstorm on slashdot?

If they really are telling lies and they are really using fear mongering instead of honest product comparisons, then contact your fair trading /comsumer protections/ whatever offices instead. Alternatively just contact Vonage and tell them this happened and ask for their help.

Here on old /. a few people will try to pull a few funny points etc, but nothing concrete will happen.

I work for a small cable company...

And when I compare our VOIP service with Vongage, I use the following facts.

"Vonage requires an internet connection, we do not"
"Vonage routes their calls over the public internet, which may result in poorer quality or dropped calls, we route calls over our private cable network"
"Vonage has a national 911 call center, we route 911 locally in your county"
"We are a local call center, where with Vonage, you may get routed to a call center in East India"

While I'm not exactly a fan of Comcast, its all too easy to get a lone CSR (in any company) who really doesnt know what he/she is talking about and will say just about anything to win back customers.

Heh, the confermation/security word I had to type to post this was "exploit".

The auto industry does this...

The auto industry does this from time-to-time. Why, here's a pull quote:

"Hi, I'm the electric car.
I can't go very fast or drive very far.
And if you drive me, people will think you're gay.

Gay men: 'One of us! One of us!'"

Even Worse Experience!

The lies you were told were nothing! The sales rep from Comcast told me that Vonage causes cancer, stole my girlfriend, and wrote the screenplay for Firewall!

I call BS

Not that I'm completely sure of everything, but those old analogue phone lines that got replaced by Vonage service were insecure as can be, and Vonage didn't sell their service because its secure, they sold it because its CHEAPER! I'm also reasonably secure in thinking that Comcast has done more than just lie, I think they have done what they can to mess up how Vonage service routers work. Since Comcast changed to TimeWarner in my area, service has been much better, no dropped packets or dropped Vonage calls.

Comcast has every reason to be underhanded in their dealings with Vonage customers, and not much reason to be worried. Lets guess who spends lots of money in Washington D.C.? Vonage? or maybe its Comcast that spends more?

Verizon is also not trying to play nice either. They only want to offer good deals if you buy bundled services. This is business in the USA.

The whole argument about security is false, misleading, and only made to confuse customers... trouble is the media gets confused too.
It doesn't matter what voice service you use, it is susceptible to interception, end of story. The only thing that you can hope to do is make it more difficult to intercept it. Military grade encryption end-to-end is not available, and the US government won't allow it to be used anyway if they can at all prevent its use. (think of the children, or think of the terrorists) So the argument about which VoIP service is secure is a totally mute point.

Verizon FIOS

I have Verizon FIOS for Internet and phone right now, and the moment they offer TV, I can be done with Comcast for good... they got their TV franchise here a few months ago, should be a month or two, and then we'll be Comcast free, and everything will be running over the nice fiber pipe.

So glad there's finally some real competition for Comcast. I guess it takes one monopoly to take down another monopoly.

FTC Fines Are Laughable for Deceptive Adverts

Companies often stretch the truth in advertising, sometimes to the point of outright lying, since they know the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) will likely do nothing; when the FTC does act, penalties (if any) are usually very light; $100K or whatever fine is nothing to a company taking in billions.

On the bright side, Vonage is a big company too, and thus they can afford to play the deceptive ad game too ... with that said, at the moment, Comcast holds the winning hand regardless, since it has its own networks and has the ability to prioritize VOIP unlike Vonage which is basically at the mercy of the telcos, cable companies, etc.

Old fashioned POTS (plain old telephone service) providers have Vonage beat, since POTS works even when the cable, internet, power, etc go out ...

Ron

VoIP only as good as your connection

Do many people really have fully reliable connection? Every place that I've lived had spotty high speed internet connection. It was up MOST of the time but there were definitely periods here and there where it would go out and be a bit before it came back on. Most people are used to much greater reliability with their phone lines. I can't remember a time when the line gave out on me in the middle of a call (unless I accidentally hung it up with my chin while trying to do more than one thing at once). If I need to call 911 I don't want to have to deal with the net being down. Periodically going down for short periods of a time is annoying when it comes to the net but it'd be infuriating if it happened with my phone. It's hard for me to understand how others would want VoIP services like Vonage or a Comcast equivalent unless they had much more reliable internet service.

Nothing New

I had Verizon not want to install DSL because I was went with Speakeasy. I finally said, IT really doesnt matter to me, and they tech installed DSL *THAT DAY*. I switched after to Speakeasy, but at least I got my DSL installed.

People break rules, even if the company has policy in place.

Never atribute to malice...

When I hear things like this, I always wonder how much of it is the company and how much or it is the phone operator. I mean, I ahve heard sales people say some amazingly stupid things in the past. Often not because of any intentional malice but simply because they have no clue. Now, think about the person on the other end of the telephone. They are likely fairly young and are being paid ~$8-$9 an hour to sit in a chair and read a script to people on the phone. They have gotten all of an hours training on any given service if they are lucky. Maybe all they got was an e-mail or memo saying what the new spiel was. That, plus some comments overheard in the break room, are all they have to go on and they are being judged on how many people sign up. So, sure some of the time it is intentional corporate lies, but my guess is that it is an issue with the operator more times than not.

Lanham Act

In the US, it is _illegal_ to lie about a competitor's product.

IANAL, but _these guys are_

http://www.poznaklaw.com/articles/falsead.htm [poznaklaw.com] (horrid seersucker background, but they're spot on)

If this is true, then Comcast is _hosed_ and I would cheer on Vonage's lawsuit.

--
BMO

Security issues true...

Ok, not entirely, but Vonage is a completely unencrypted service. It is the same as sending a standard email. If you are ordering things over a Vonage phone line and saying or dialing your credit card number, it is just like emailing it. Grabbing these packets off the internet and replaying them is exceedingly simple. As your voice travels across the internet, any router along that path could be used to dump those packets and a malicious tech or hacker who has gained access to that router can very easily steal your information.

Comcast probably suffers from the exact same problem, although the traffic is probably not traversing multiple provider's networks the way Vonage is and therefore the danger should in theory be less.

WangScript fame?

WangScript? Some mIRC script that I've never heard of? How about telling us if he had any ties to Wang Labs, the 80s powerhouse, or to the Wang VS mainframes?

See, you're driving a Yugo...

I'm a customer of both Comcast and Vonage. I won't say that Vonage is perfect, but for $25/month, it's pretty fantastic. We've had voicemail outages (voicemail doesn't pick, we can't check voicemail), and that sucks, but it's been very rare (3 times in a little over a year for a couple hours each time). We've had more trouble, in fact, with our Comcast cable modem and Comcast cable TV going down. Generally, the weak link seems to be Comcast, not Vonage.

My wife and I were at a local festival, and Comcast had a booth. I had to figure out why they could have the balls to advertise $40/month for what sounded like the same thing as Vonage. I told the rep that I was a Vonage customer, and I was willing to listen to his schpiel. "See, you're driving a Yugo, and what we've got here is a Lexus!" Uh huh.. So, what makes it a Lexus? He rattles off some features. Vonage includes every one of them. Oh, and Vonage includes calls to Canada and Western Europe. Hmm?

"See, you're driving a Yugo, and what we've got here is a Lexus!"

I thought I gave him a fair shot, and he had no actual arguments or points to make. I'll stay with Vonage, thanks much.

Comcast is chock full of lying goodness

This isn't news to me. On no fewer than three separate occasions in about four years with Comcast, I have had service outages long enough to cause me to brave their call center. Here's the record on this:

1) Called and was told they were doing work in my area; that service would be restored in "a couple hours." The next day it was still out. While heading out to the car I noticed that the line to the house had become disconnected. I got a ladder, plugged it back in, and it worked fine.

2) Called and was told, again, they were doing work in my area; that service would be restored in "a couple hours." Called again when service was still out the next day. Was told they would send a person out -- this entailed a ten day wait. When the service guy arrived, he told me that the line splitter on the street was not only corroded but had been installed backward. Not sure how that's possible, but there it is.

3) Called and was told, yet again, they were doing work in my area; that service would be restored in "a couple hours." Ten minutes later I reset all my equipment and everything worked fine.

Fact is, "work in my area" is apparently a lie common to call center vermin. And Comcast doesn't care that they do this. Lovely.