RE: Not so fast, broadband providers tell big users

[Blanchard_Michael () emc com]

 Way back when, in the late 90's I was a named plaintiff on a class action lawsuit against Hughes DirectPC.  They were 
doing exactly what was mentioned in the article.  They had this thing called a "fair access policy", that would cut 
your speed in half if you downloaded too much, then in half again if you kept downloading, then in half again, until 
your speeds were much less than modem speeds.
   They would never tell you how much was too much, and never tell you when your speed was cut in half.  I run Dumeter 
so I constantly watch my i-net speeds, then and now, so I knew when it was happening.  If you called customer service, 
they'd say that everything was ok and they'd have zero knowledge of any speed throttling.  They'd say, "well your dish 
must not be aligned properly".  Even when I explain to them that I'm an Engineer and used a thousand dollar meter to 
establish the strongest signal possible, they'd still say that it must be a problem on my end.  Customer service would 
have zero knowledge (or deny any knowledge) of any bandwidth throttling.

    DirectPC's claim was exactly what the article mentions Comcast is claiming, that .1% of the users make up the 
majority of usage.  I think DPC said something like 1% of the users took up 30% of the bandwidth.

   Well, I was part of the Windows 95 and Windows 98 beta teams, and was downloading a CD a week from Microsoft.  That 
was too much downloading, I wound up using just my 28.8k modem most of the time and that would download quicker.  (At 
that time you used a modem to upload and the satellite dish only for download at advertised speeds of 400kps fast for 
that time).

   Even after the suit was settled, I don't think they ever fully acknowledged the amount that you had to download that 
was deemed "too much" and initiated the throttling.  Heck I'd use the latest Netscape install to test my speed, and 
that initiated the throttling, it was only 75meg if I remember correctly!

   The only one that really got justice was the lawyers...  DPC was ordered to "buy back" the equipment from us, at a 
loss to us, if we chose to sell it back to them.  I think the lawyers got a couple hundred thousand bucks out of the 
deal for "legal fees".

   Mike B


Michael P. Blanchard 
Antivirus / Security Engineer, CISSP, GCIH, CCSA-NGX, MCSE
Office of Information Security & Risk Management 
EMC ² Corporation 
4400 Computer Dr. 
Westboro, MA 01580 


-----Original Message-----
From: Gadi Evron [mailto:ge () linuxbox org] 
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 8:29 PM
To: Blanchard, Michael (InfoSec)
Cc: funsec () linuxbox org
Subject: RE: [funsec] Not so fast, broadband providers tell big users

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 Blanchard_Michael () emc com wrote:
>  wow, it's the Hughes DirectPC FAP all over again..... 

That doesn't ring a bell?

        Gadi.

--
"beepbeep it, i leave work, stop reading sec lists and im still hearing
gadi"
- HD Moore to Gadi Evron on IM, on Gadi's interview on npr, March 2007.



_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.