Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:"Hard redirect" (Score 1) 355

by fgouget (#47707883) Attached to: Rightscorp's New Plan: Hijack Browsers Until Infingers Pay Up

I used the phrasing almost all specifically because it may be possible to bypass the controls using UDP.

If the block can be bypassed using UDP then the ISP made a 'big stupid error' as I mentioned. Their router should simply not forward any packet outside the local network until the customer provided his credentials. That covers IPv4 (TCP, UDP, ICMP, others), IPv6, and anything else, whether they support it or not. For ADSL it should be pretty easy to identify the customer's line and redirect anything coming from that line, leaving no possibility of escape. Customers who connect to their ISP through a shared medium, like cable or WiFi, there's an escape route which is to hack their hardware/software stack to impersonate another customer on that shared medium. But that's obviously illegal and furthermore there's no point for them to keep paying for Internet access in the first place.

Comment: Printer? Where? (Score 1) 116

by fgouget (#47705373) Attached to: FarmBot: an Open Source Automated Farming Machine

They plan to take this technology to an entirely new level by creating a 3D Printer that is capable of, you guessed it, farming.

So it's not a printer in any sense of the word. Great start for that article. The rest really goes downhill from there. Shouldn't it have been published on the 1st of April?

Comment: Re:"Hard redirect" (Score 1) 355

by fgouget (#47702099) Attached to: Rightscorp's New Plan: Hijack Browsers Until Infingers Pay Up

Yes, it would work on almost all browsers and there likely would never be a patch that would get around it.

No, unless they made a big stupid error, it would work on every browser past, present and future; as well as every other application trying to use the Internet; and no patch can get around that. That's because you cannot access the Internet if your ISP does not want you to. You could however get a contract from another ISP, assuming Rightscorp did not put you on some sort of industry-wide blacklist.

Comment: Power usage seems unrelated to Xfinity (Score 2) 224

by fgouget (#47627169) Attached to: The Hidden Cost of Your New Xfinity Router
The blog post did not compare the power usage with the Xfinity hotspot enabled and disabled. So all we can say is that the new Comcast modem is crap and wastes power by the bucket, just like the old one apparently. So while the title and many comments here seem to imply the extra cost is all due to the Xfinity Hotspot functionality, that view is so far not supported in any way.

Comment: Re:Service in exchange for a free modem? (Score 1) 224

by fgouget (#47627141) Attached to: The Hidden Cost of Your New Xfinity Router

The GP post is more an indictment on the mob^w justice system that all too often seems to presume guilt before evidence beyond a reasonable doubt is required.

Sounded more like the rant of a paranoid tinfoil hat wearer. That or given that hotspots are not a newfangled invention he should have no problem finding dozens of small businesses or hotels that got raided because they offered internet access.

Comment: Re:Huh? (Score 1) 406

by fgouget (#47623219) Attached to: Idiot Leaves Driver's Seat In Self-Driving Infiniti, On the Highway

Fully autonomous vehicles are scary for manufacturers because they potentially shift all liability to the manufacturer.

I think a simple solution is to turn the self-driving functionality a subscription-based service. Under that model the self-driving mode would require a network connection at the time you try to enable it and would check that you paid your montly subscription. Then you can use it for that month. The manufacturer would collect the subscriptions and use them to provide insurance in case of an accident. Then it's up to the manufacturer to set the subscriptions high enough or get the accident rate low enough for it to work out, like any insurance service.

Combined with some extra services like battery rental (for electric cars), this could even let car manufacturers shift to a business model close to the rasor+blade one (not saying that would be good for customers though).

Comment: Don't bring chargers ! (Score 1) 702

by fgouget (#47398727) Attached to: TSA Prohibits Taking Discharged Electronic Devices Onto Planes

Devices that can't be turned on won't be permitted on flights, TSA said.

Don't bring chargers with you!
Clearly you won't be able to power on these devices if you're not allowed to plug them in. So under these new rules the TSA would clearly have to confiscate them. Furthermore you'd likely oppose their common sense move which would delay you going through security; increasing the risk that your phone's battery runs out, leading to it being confiscated too...

Comment: Re:Liability (Score 1) 474

If you consider an IP address, a port number, a timestamp and an account number to be insanely detailed then I can't wait to see what you're going to say when you discover all the information Facebook, Google and others keep about you!

I should probably clarify this because it's not really that obvious.

The naive solution would be to assign a random public IP+port for each connection. That would require creating a new log entry for each connection a customer makes which would be a lot of volume indeed.

I think the solution is to instead give out leases to public IP+port combinations to the customer and associate those to his session. When establishing a new connection, check if there's an unused public IP+port in the session pool and if so extend and reuse it. If not, allocate a new IP address+port lease and add it to the session pool. With long enough leases and given that most users will only make a handful of concurrent connections (and it's a context where it's pretty ok to limit the number of concurrent connections anyway), that would limit the logging requirements to just a few entries per session per customer which is pretty tractable.

Note also that if I'm not mistaken a lot of mobile phone operators already use Carrier Grade NAT for 3G/4G and thus have already faced these issues. Yet they presumably found a solution otherwise everyone would know that the 'safe' place to pirate is from a smartphone.

Comment: 1984 (Score 1) 99

by fgouget (#47281683) Attached to: Smartphones To Monitor Schizophrenics
Governments have realized that they can collect vast amounts of data about their citizens using smartphone apps that passively monitor the citizens as they go about their daily business. A prototype for opponents is planned to be tested out soon on Long Island. The Tia trial will look at behavior patterns (tracking movement, sleep, and conversations) and correlate them with data gathered from past opponents; researchers hope the data will reveal the "signature" of a citizen who is about fall off the one true path and therefore needs help.

Comment: Re:Liability (Score 1) 474

Comcast will have to keep this data despite the fact that it not only won't make them money, but will cost them money since they will have to have people to search it for the legal requests.

There's a ton of things that cost Comcast money. They're all called the cost of doing business. Also note that Comcast already has to do this logging for any of their customer who does not have a fixed IP address and I have not heard that they're not doing that part of their job.

Plus, I can generate thousands of connections per second and Comcast will have to log them all.

You do that. Of course since Comcast does not have to log failed connection attempts you'll have to use your own credentials. This will most likely break some Comcast's terms of service and ensure you get their attention. They can then simply suspend your account, probably including your cable Internet access, and even sue you if you really irked them. Sounds like a great plan you have there!

Comment: Re:Liability (Score 1) 474

There's probably a separate entry for every single element of every single page you visit.

Of course not. All comcast needs to log are the authentication events of which there are under one per day per customer on average. Once logged in that IP is yours to use until it is handed to someone else in another authentication event (obviously there's no explicit disconnection).

Comment: Re:Liability (Score 1) 474

Unless each login is given a unique public IP (unlikely), they will be behind some form of NAT.

Yes, it's called Carrier Grade NAT and is what Free has been doing in France for years for its community WiFi.

To reliably point to a specific user, it would require a ridiculous amount of logging. I doubt that Comcast will do that.

If you consider an IP address, a port number, a timestamp and an account number to be insanely detailed then I can't wait to see what you're going to say when you discover all the information Facebook, Google and others keep about you!

Comment: Re:Liability (Score 1) 474

Even better, as now all the WiFi users appear to come from a single IP as far as the MPAA/RIAA is concerned,

Which totally protects the home owner where the cable box actually is.

which means the only way they can get more info is if Comcast keeps insanely detailed records about every one of these connections.

If you consider an IP address, a port number, a timestamp and an account number to be insanely detailed then I can't wait to see what you're going to say when you discover all the information Facebook, Google and others keep about you!

"There is nothing new under the sun, but there are lots of old things we don't know yet." -Ambrose Bierce

Working...