Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Friday October 28 2016, @09:00PM   Printer-friendly
from the keep-it-to-yourself-buddy dept.

Techraptor is reporting on the adoption of these rules:

The Federal Communications Commission(FCC) has adopted new rules which broadband providers must adhere to regarding the privacy of customer data. The FCC has published a press release as well as a fact sheet which explain some of the details of the new rules. The FCC claims authority in this area based on the Communications Act, which requires telecommunications companies to protect the privacy of their customers. The FCC has already implemented rules governing privacy for telephone companies and is now applying the same standard to broadband providers.

The FCC has implemented rules requiring notifications of how ISPs handle customer data. ISPs must tell customers what types of data are collected, the purpose of any data sharing that takes place, and what types of entities the data is shared with. Customers must be informed of the data sharing policy when they sign up for the service, and receive notifications any time the policy is updated. Additionally, the rules require that the policy is “persistently” available either on a website or a mobile app.

The rules distinguish between sensitive data and non-sensitive data. Some of the examples given for sensitive data include precise geolocation data, financial information, social security numbers, browsing history, and the content of communications. Such information can only be shared with third-parties on an opt-in basis and customers must explicitly consent to the sharing. Data like email addresses are considered non-sensitive and can be shared by default, with the opportunity for customers to opt-out. The FCC allows exemptions to the consent requirements for some purposes. For example if sharing data is necessary to provide the broadband service, to bill the customer, or to protect an ISP from fraudulent use of its network.

More information can be gleaned from TFA, and unsurprisingly, the vote and approval of these rules has been widely reported, with coverage from USA Today, Consumer Reports and The Washington Post, among others.

Do these privacy rules go too far, not far enough or are they just about right?
Is this a boon for the privacy minded or just another blatant example of government overreach? Is it both at the same time?

Related coverage:
After Setback, FCC Chairman Keeps Pushing Set-Top Box and Privacy Rules
FCC Waters Down Internet Privacy Proposal
Comcast Wants to Charge for Privacy


Original Submission

Related Stories

Comcast Wants to Charge for Privacy 59 comments

Stuck with Comcast? You may get stuck some more!

Ars Technica , Gizmodo, ZDNet, and a host of others are reporting that Comcast claims that the FCC has no authority to limit or prohibit the internet provider from distributing web histories to advertisers.

From the Ars Technica article:

As the Federal Communications Commission debates new privacy rules for Internet service providers, Comcast has urged the commission to let ISPs offer different prices based on whether customers opt into systems that share their data and deliver personalized ads.

Comcast executives met with FCC officials last week, and "urged that the Commission allow business models offering discounts or other value to consumers in exchange for allowing ISPs to use their data," Comcast wrote in an ex parte filing that describes the meeting. (MediaPost covered the filing yesterday.)

AT&T is the biggest Internet provider offering such a plan. AT&T's "Internet Preferences" program reroutes customers' Web browsing to an in-house traffic scanning platform, analyzes the customers' search and browsing history, and then uses the results to deliver personalized ads to websites. With Internet Preferences enabled, AT&T customers can pay as little as $70 per month for 1Gbps fiber-to-the-home service, but those who don't opt into Internet Preferences must pay at least $29 a month extra.

[Continues...]

FCC Waters Down Internet Privacy Proposal 10 comments

The FCC has proposed rules that would protect the privacy of broadband subscribers, although they are less ambitious than originally envisioned, following complaints from telecoms:

A privacy proposal unveiled Thursday will require broadband providers such as Verizon and Comcast to get your permission before sharing with advertisers your phone or computer data. [...] The revised proposal, which will be put to an FCC vote on Oct. 27, says broadband providers do not have to get permission from customers to use "non-sensitive" information, such as names and addresses.

Also at The Wall Street Journal .

The Hill reports that the FCC [Federal Communications Commission] chairman authorized staffers to leak information before a vote on the expansion of the Lifeline subsidy program:

But the investigation by the agency's inspector general turned up "no evidence that the information was provided to the press in an attempt to unduly influence the outcome of the vote" and found Chairman Tom Wheeler had acted within his legal authority.

[...] Republican commissioners reached a deal with Democrat Mignon Clyburn before the committee's March open meeting that would have capped the program's budget. But the meeting was delayed multiple times as details of the deal leaked to the press. Clyburn ultimately voted for a version of the item without a cap, as proposed by Chairman Tom Wheeler. Critics have focused on a Politico report that included leaked details on the compromise and the proposed $2 billion budget cap. Later reports echo these details. They allege that the details may have been leaked to increase pressure on Clyburn, since many groups and lawmakers opposed the cap. Critics, on the other hand, say the Lifeline program is an example of a government program run amuck.

"The events surrounding the March 31st Commission vote adopting the Lifeline Order, while not unprecedented in their entirety, were certainly unusual," an investigator said in a memo released by the Republican majority of the Senate Commerce Committee. "Typically, commissioners do not engage in negotiations resulting in significant policy shifts in the final hours prior to a Commission vote." "Thus, while such activity is not improper or illegal, the rarity of the occurrence explains in large measure the interest, speculation and concern the matter has generated."


Original Submission

After Setback, FCC Chairman Keeps Pushing Set-Top Box and Privacy Rules 11 comments

After a rare setback, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler is still pushing for votes on plans to reform the cable TV set-top box market and impose new privacy rules on broadband providers.

The FCC was scheduled to vote on the cable TV plan at its last meeting on September 29 but removed it from the agenda when the commission's Democratic majority couldn't agree on all the details. Last-minute negotiations aren't uncommon before FCC meetings, but this was a rare case of Wheeler not having enough votes to move forward with a controversial agenda item.

The cable TV proposal—which would require TV providers to make video applications for third-party set-top boxes—is not on the agenda for next week's FCC meeting. But it could theoretically be passed at any time, as commissioners can vote on it between meetings. It's not clear whether a vote is imminent, but Wheeler touted the plan again in an op-ed on CNET yesterday.

"There is currently a proposal before the FCC that would end the set-top box stranglehold," Wheeler wrote. "If adopted, consumers would no longer have to pay monthly fees to rent a box. Instead, they would be able to access their pay-TV content via free apps on a variety of devices, including smart TVs, streaming boxes, tablets and smartphones. Consumers would also enjoy a better viewing experience thanks to integrated search and new innovation that will flow from enhanced competitive choice."

The TV plan has faced persistent opposition from the cable industry, even though the FCC changed it to assuage some of the industry's concerns. Industry opposition hasn't stopped the FCC from approving other controversial rules, such as the reclassification of broadband and imposition of net neutrality regulations. But in this case, the vote was delayed because Democratic Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel seems to be concerned about how cable company applications would be licensed to third-party device makers.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 28 2016, @09:11PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 28 2016, @09:11PM (#419959)

    If my ISP offered service in my area that means the minimal federal limit to be called "broadband," I'd be excited about this. But they don't, so I'm not.

    • (Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday October 28 2016, @10:16PM

      by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Friday October 28 2016, @10:16PM (#419974) Homepage

      There should be a blanket law like this for all data collected for all services, not just for broadband.

      As an example, having your car serviced. It's the garage's policy to collect information about your vehicle. Know who ends up with that data? That's right, your auto insurance company, and they will jack your rates appropriately. If you have had a bit more mileage, even if you barely go into the next tier, your insurance will jack your rates up thanks to information sold by the garages to "a third party."

      When you call up your insurance company for answers, they will shuck and jive and bob and weave and just tell you, "We get information from a third party. We can't tell you what data they collect or how they collect it, that's proprietary information." And I'm sure that applies to pretty much everything nowadays, not just broadband or auto garages. Fortunately I can change my own oil and brakes, have a friend as mechanic, and know a local shop that writes down fictitious odometer readings.

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Joe Desertrat on Friday October 28 2016, @10:32PM

        by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Friday October 28 2016, @10:32PM (#419979)

        There should be a blanket law like this for all data collected for all services, not just for broadband.

        I'm all for a constitutional amendment banning the collection of data beyond that required to do business between two entities and banning completely the sale or transfer of that information to any third party save law enforcement with a properly authorized specific warrant.

  • (Score: 2) by edIII on Friday October 28 2016, @09:31PM

    by edIII (791) on Friday October 28 2016, @09:31PM (#419963)

    Since in almost every case the ISP's are a duopoly at best, and a monopoly as a rule, what choice do we have but to accept (and then fight the fuck out them forever on the tech level)?

    These things cannot be solved legally as long as AT&T exists as a monopoly, set to become even bigger after eating up Time Warner cable.

    We need choice first before such rules make any difference.

    Data like email addresses are considered non-sensitive and can be shared by default, with the opportunity for customers to opt-out.

    It's fucking bullshit like that. They STILL get to sell your email address, which is why you never give an ISP your real one. Give them a throwaway alias that you kill the moment it gets anything not explicitly their domain.

    Do these privacy rules go too far, not far enough or are they just about right?

    Not nearly enough. Until there are prison sentences in the legal language for violating it, that apply to the tippity-top of management, it's NOT ENOUGH.

    We can't ever trust them for one second, so the solution isn't regulations at all (which will never be strong enough), but ADBB. Avoid. Disrupt. Block. Break.

    As a people, WE need to give them ZERO CHOICE.

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    • (Score: 3, Funny) by bob_super on Friday October 28 2016, @09:48PM

      by bob_super (1357) on Friday October 28 2016, @09:48PM (#419967)

      ADBB your ISP can be BADD (Broken Access to Disrobed Damsels).

    • (Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday October 29 2016, @04:29AM

      by frojack (1554) on Saturday October 29 2016, @04:29AM (#420039) Journal

      Does no one see the irony of one arm of the government establishing protections while another arm of the government strips them all away and demands the data and issues a STFU order as it walks off with the data?

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 2) by edIII on Saturday October 29 2016, @11:27PM

        by edIII (791) on Saturday October 29 2016, @11:27PM (#420337)

        Good point, but it's not irony. It's corruption.

        Some animals are more equal than others. Kinda like how the Mob really will protect your business, but then Vinny is the one with pleasure of abusing you on a regular basis. It's either some street punk, or Vinny, and hey... he's a funny guy.

        --
        Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    • (Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Saturday October 29 2016, @05:07AM

      by linkdude64 (5482) on Saturday October 29 2016, @05:07AM (#420047)

      A lot of people shut out the voice of the EFF because they remind everybody of their nagging wife for whom nothing is good enough, or their overly-strict parent for whom a 98% wasn't good enough, or their CEO for whom a 200% increase in profit is unacceptable because it could have been 300% if just a few more children had died. It's the same attitude. Remember that the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

      This will force ISPs to tell their customers what they are doing with their data. This will introduce opt-out options. This will generate discussion, which will increase customer awareness, and will damage the company image. This will mean that the sales department isn't happy, which will push changes internally.

      The monopoly took years to create. It will take years to dismantle - at the very least.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 29 2016, @10:16AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 29 2016, @10:16AM (#420077)

        The monopoly took years to create. It will take years to dismantle - at the very least.

        And we're not going to fix these issues without 'annoying' people or entities like the EFF working to do so.

    • (Score: 2) by shortscreen on Saturday October 29 2016, @05:21AM

      by shortscreen (2252) on Saturday October 29 2016, @05:21AM (#420050) Journal

      I'm pretty sure AT&T is going after Time Warner. (not Time Warner Cable, a different entity which already merged with Charter)

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 28 2016, @09:54PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 28 2016, @09:54PM (#419969)

    I mean... It's time for a nationwide deployment of Mesh Networking.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 29 2016, @02:39AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 29 2016, @02:39AM (#420017)

    Expect "great offers" coming soon. If you let them share everything, you'll get X% off... At the same time, they will raise the base price of your internet so that if you take the offer, you pay the same as you always did (you just lose your privacy, but who cares about that, right) and if you actually care about privacy and don't want them to share, you get penalized.

    It's the same switcheroo as the stupid dongle Nationwide or Allstate or whichever pilfering car-insurance company it is, wants you to hook up to your car to check your 'driving behavior' so you can 'get a discount'. (But watch out if you have to swerve just once to avoid a squirrel or hit the brakes hard because a kid jumped out in front of you just once... suddenly you get hit with an increase in your premium because 'your driving style is not careful enough and you drive too aggressively'...)

    The only winning move is not to play. But that move is not allowed!

    In the words of the late and so very much missed Mr. George Carlin: It's a big club... and you ain't in it! [youtube.com]