Friday, March 24th 2017

Invading Subscriber Privacy - Senate Says ISPs Can Now Sell Your Data

The US Senate on Thursday passed a joint resolution to eliminate broadband privacy rules that would have required ISPs to get consumers' explicit consent before selling or sharing Web browsing data and other private information with advertisers and other companies. This win was pulled by a hair - 48 Nay against 50 Yea - and went entirely through party lines, with Republicans voting Yea, and the Democrats voting Nay. The effects won't be immediate, mind you - the measure will have to pass the House and then be signed by President Donald Trump before it can become law.
The FCC's privacy rules that are now put in peril would require ISPs to get opt-in consent from consumers before selling or sharing personal information. This includes geo-location data, financial and health information, children's information, Social Security numbers, Web browsing history, app usage history, and the content of communications - things we can all agree give almost unthinkable leeway in understanding your daily habits. Opt-out requirements, on the other hand, would have applied to less sensitive data such as e-mail addresses and service tier information, much less important in the scheme of things.

These opt-in and opt-out provisions were to take effect as early as December 4, 2017. The rules would also force ISPs to clearly notify customers about the types of information they collected, specifying how they use and share the information, and identifying the types of entities they'd share the information with.

The FCC's privacy rules also had a data security component that would have required ISPs to take "reasonable" steps to protect customers' information from theft and data breaches. This was supposed to take effect on March 2, but the FCC's Republican majority halted the rule's implementation. Another set of requirements related to data breach notifications is scheduled to take effect on June 2.

As was to be expected, party lines didn't fracture only on the Senate floor, with comments and positions regarding the voting separating cleanly in all other areas.

Ajit Pai, the new chairman of the newly Republican-led FCC, welcomed the Senate vote, telling reporters that his own core goal was "to make sure that uniform expectation of privacy is vindicated through the use of a regulatory framework that establishes a more level playing field."

Senator Bill Nelson, on the other hand, said during Senate floor debate that "Your home broadband provider can know when you wake up each day-either by knowing the time each morning that you log on to the Internet to check the weather/news of the morning, or through a connected device in your home (...) and that provider may know immediately if you are not feeling well - assuming you decide to peruse the Internet like most of us to get a quick check on your symptoms. In fact, your broadband provider may know more about your health - and your reaction to illness - than you are willing to share with your doctor."

Home Internet providers can also "build a profile about your listening and viewing habits." Mobile broadband providers, on the other hand, "know how you move about your day through information about your geo-location and Internet activity through your mobile device," Senator Bill Nelson said.

"This is a gold mine of data-the holy grail so to speak," Nelson said. "It is no wonder that broadband providers want to be able to sell this information to the highest bidder without consumers' knowledge or consent. And they want to collect and use this information without providing transparency or being held accountable."

This measure also ties the FCC's hands in advancing "substantially similar" rules in the future. Kate Tummarello, a policy analyst for the nonprofit Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), pits this as a "crushing loss for online privacy."

"ISPs act as gatekeepers to the Internet, giving them incredible access to records of what you do online," Tummarello said. "They shouldn't be able to profit off of the information about what you search for, read about, purchase and more without your consent."

What is your opinion on this matter? is this the way you envision your connected life?
Sources: NBC News, Ars Technica, Senate.gov
Add your own comment

109 Comments on Invading Subscriber Privacy - Senate Says ISPs Can Now Sell Your Data

#101
lexluthermiester
wiyosayaApparently, that is not the case in all situations. In some cases, as I understand it, ISPs know enough about their customers to make VPN use less than private.
You would be incorrect. All traffic between your computing device and the VPN host is encrypted using methods no ISP can crack, generally.
wiyosayaBTW - the US House of Representatives votes Tomorrow - Tuesday, March 28, 2017 on the issue.
Won't that be fun.
Posted on Reply
#102
Totally
notbI'm aware of SSN, but how exactly do you use it?
When you sign a contract (for a flat, a car, an internet/mobile plan etc) do you use your SSN? Is it written on the document?
Anything dealing with financials it will be asked for and used to pull u relevant information e.g. background check, credit history
notbWell this is surprising, but you seem very confident. :D
I used to think (and all I've found on the web seems to support it), that ID cards are not obligatory. Yes, you often need them to confirm your identity, but you are allowed not to have them.
There is no law requiring you to have them but the way system works it is extremely prohibitive, life will be very hard, to try and get by without one. Without an ID many things will automatically become off limits, so it is redundant make a law against not having one.
notbIn Poland (where the ID card is mandatory for adults) you must apply for your first ID card before you turn 18. If you don't, you're actually breaking the law and are subject to detention or fine (same if you don't renew it in time).


I know that very well and actually mentioned it before. I actually used to work "cute" to describe a situation when an ID card is in fact an ID document for the unfortunate that don't have a Driving License. And that the ID card is issued by DMV. Just how American is that? :D
An ID card would look exactly the same as a Driving license except the line item where it would state the driver's class would instead read "FOR IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES ONLY"
Posted on Reply
#103
Breit
dalekdukesboyI'd prefer to read Hillary's email, less 33k missing of course. :) That's a lot of yoga and wedding emails! rt junkie was right...simply the way this article was written was a grenade with the pin almost falling out. If this is Breitbart, MSNBC, Politico, NYT, or some other political organization (hardly "news" anymore) I'd be all for it but this just seems to be a way to turn techpowerup into techpoliticsup.
You're probably right, he isn't that much into checking facts and reading up stuff. He'd probably just googled himself up. :D
Posted on Reply
#104
Fx
Yet another gross misstep in violation of peoples property and privacy.

It won't stop here either. They will not allow anyone to impede their progress towards a full and complete surveillance network. I'm sure this would make all of the former merciless dictators proud.
Posted on Reply
#105
TheMailMan78
Big Member
FxYet another gross misstep in violation of peoples property and privacy.

It won't stop here either. They will not allow anyone to impede their progress towards a full and complete surveillance network. I'm sure this would make all of the former merciless dictators proud.
And in the same breath people will cry about this, they will ask for more gun control. Amazballz.
Posted on Reply
#106
Fx
TheMailMan78And in the same breath people will cry about this, they will ask for more gun control. Amazballz.
I know right; there are throngs of confused people. Don't get me started on that -- that is for a whole other forum.
Posted on Reply
#107
R-T-B
TheMailMan78And in the same breath people will cry about this, they will ask for more gun control. Amazballz.
Prepare to have your mind blown mailman:

Not all us liberals are for gun control. Some of us might even *gasp* LIKE guns.

The issue is the two party system. You can't have any frickin' inbetweens.
Posted on Reply
#108
lexluthermiester
And furthermore, some of us who lean liberal actually voted for Trump because he was a better choice then that sorry, pathetic excuse of a human being; Hillary "Human beings have no rights until they are born" Clinton. But I digress..
Posted on Reply
#109
dalekdukesboy
BreitYou're probably right, he isn't that much into checking facts and reading up stuff. He'd probably just googled himself up. :D
Maybe, however if I sent him an email he might get it and read it, and not lose it and get hacked and have all his emails released by Wikileaks....just sayin':). Oh also he's President, Hillary is no one's President...ever.

And furthermore, some of us who lean liberal actually voted for Trump because he was a better choice then that sorry, pathetic excuse of a human being; Hillary "Human beings have no rights until they are born" Clinton. But I digress..

I forgot to add this but I'll just paste it there Lexluthermiester hit it on the head there. When people of any political stripe start defending her as "human" they lose me. Sorry, just is what it is her whole family is corrupt like the Kennedy's.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
May 21st, 2024 10:54 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts