Who Will Monitor And Audit Broadband Metering?
from the questions,-questions dept
With all the recent talk of metered broadband, there are some questions raised: such as how will the usage actually be metered? As that report notes, broadband providers should not be allowed to meter the broadband themselves, because that represents an obvious conflict of interest -- and when it comes to things like electricity and gas pumps, regulations require third party inspectors or equipment to make sure that the meters are accurate and not subject to tampering by the company. So wouldn't broadband require the same thing?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: audits, metered broadband
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The power company can only occasionally push a surge to pop our peak consumption meter, without getting caught, and the water company can't make us use more water than we are willing to accept, but not so with ISP.
Why do we have to pay for phone calls we receive from spammers? I have stopped answering my phone at all, anymore (unless someone I want to speak with makes an appointment) because the bogus automobile warranties and security systems were using all my minutes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HMMMM
Maybe they treat utilities differently. Should "data" be just another utility along with water, electricity, gas and sewer? Although, it isn't exactly a natural monopoly like the others since it's hard to get them wirelessly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Broadband has been metered for years here, by the ISP, and we've seen no problems at all. Now I'm not at all for metering and was mad when all ISPs here removed the unmetered packages.. but this article is so 2 years ago.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Perfect choice of words. You have seen no problems... that doesn't mean they don't exist. A smart and unethical ISP would overbill everyone just slightly. So little that not only would it be almost impossible to notice, it would be difficult to prove even if anyone did notice. If it's a big ISP they could rake in some serious extra cash when considering all their customers, and never even be suspected.
I'm not saying it's happened, just that without independent auditing, how do you know it hasn't?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It will be a lot more serious the Wireless theft, that is quite easy to do. And everyone will feel a lot more inclined to learn how to do it after being a victim of it.
Maybe that will be the death of a great technology, Wireless. Or, they will step up and create a better security, that will be cracked later, and so on.
The point is, if and when your internet is metered, what will you stop doing? What are the sites you will never go? What will you do about e-mail? What about internet radio? What about daily AV updates? What about IM?
Everything online is going to wither and possibly die, because you will start measuring it's value in actual $$ based on bandwidth. We will go back to text browsers to reduce the traffic, and basically fall back to 1994/1995 browsing.
I would simply remove all extras from Firefox, wouldn't use YouTube, stop using social networks, and would go back to some text browser, to filter all images. What a sad way to be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I hadn't heard of WPA2 being broken. You need to cite some references if you're going around making claims like that.
We will go back to text browsers to reduce the traffic, and basically fall back to 1994/1995 browsing.
Sure. Like everyone uses kerosene lanterns to avoid electric metering. Get real.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Today, everything in internet is planned on the broadband, limitless traffic. Of course, some people use it, others don't.
My usage of internet, is based on unmettered traffic. I have an average 400gb traffic per month. I know that some people manage to use only 1 or 2 gb. Those, of course, are in no risk. As long as they keep NOT using all the net has to offer. But, is their choice obviously.
To anyone that actualy does use, any kind of limit, is a problem. You'll have to keep looking at your traffic, avoiding excesses, and, in the whole, having a worse experience.
BTW, wireless theft, is not a future problem, it's happening already. It will get a lot worse, and troublesome, if you don't have a limitless connection.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
From one of those results: "Brute Force Attack will take up to 128299838271 years". That's not exactly what I'd call "cracked".
The truth is, WPA2 has not been cracked. But that's why you didn't cite any sources, isn't it? And a Google search isn't a source. After all, a Google search on Luís Carvalho is a pedophile returns thousands of hits, but does that make it true?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
http://www.aircrack-ng.org/doku.php?id=cracking_wpa
while wpa2 uses AES crypto (256bit i believe, same as the military uses for classified documents) it's still a password challenge, and is therefore vulnerable to brute force attacks.
there are other attacks as well, such as fake AP/evil twin attacks, where you impersonate the AP to gather credentials or serve as a man in the middle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
http://www.aircrack-ng.org/doku.php?id=cracking_wpa
That site makes no such claims.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the caps, while possibly pointless and unfair, are not actually a major disaster if managed properly, and even if done poorly are probably not going to bring about the end of the digital world as we know it.
please note that this is in no way supporting a move to caps when there is no physical need for it. if the infrastructure will support it and the pricing is fair, unlimited is Good, and losing it is a sad thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the people who meter the broadband use here are the ISPs. that said, there's no monopolies [so far as i can tell, a non-national ISP is a rarity. of course, as always, i may well be wrong, and NZ is rather a lot smaller than the USA :D] at that level of the system, and you can always go through the consumer complaints tribunal [i think that's the one?] or other appropriate part of the system if you're getting screwed over.
or Fair Go. that's usually amusingly effective [public shame on national television does remarkable things for shaping up policy, it seems :D]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
data cap on my current plan is 20 gig. only reason we EVER hit that is because we have 3-4 people using it for MMOs, web browsing, and my brother downloads video All the Time.
[we also have free to air, state funded (and non-state funded) television. cable is a New thing, existing purely(last i checked) as an alternative delivery method for satellite and air...]
and you Can get a 'no data cap' plan. it just costs a lot.
unlike in the USA or probably Europe, actual traffic congestion on our internet services is a legit problem sometimes here. if for no other reason than that EVERYTHING, near enough, goes through those under sea cables.
social networks? no problem there. well, except for the STUPID pages that insist they absolutely must load music every single time you click a link. but again, that's transfer rate, not data cap.
if the caps are high enough, and the rates set properly compared to them, and the SPEED is not affected [at least, not as long as you're under t he cap] it seriously does not impact use at all. you pay for the cap appropriate to your usage. [it actually SAVES you money if your usage is low enough, if the system is designed properly]
that said, i have no faith in US corporate entities with monopolies [or near monopolies] ability to set sucht hings properly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Third Parties
Everywhere I have ever lived the gas and electric meters were actually provided, tagged and read by the the utility companies themselves. I've never seen utility metering done by third parties so I don't know what you're talking about there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stupid
I agree with zFrogz if this happens then there should be a regulation for the content that is being streamed. However, I see this as a lose-lose situation as its going to come up that the advertisment, adbanners, etc. etc. is not the responsibility of the broadband company but the responsibility of the site provider. and I eventually see this being a downturn in the internet period.
Again, good to be living abroad than in the kool-aid loving country known as America.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Suicide
There is no alternative in the area I live. If I want medium speed, I have a choice of one provider. They can charge $1k a month or I have to go back to dial-up. I'm not rural. I'm in the heart of the fifth largest city.
As it is, I'm supporting TV without subscribing. The cost of what I do have is almost 3/4th's of their bundled package with 250 HD stations and landline phone - which I don't want. It's like what the old phone companies used to do with long distance prices.
Broadband is as essential as a phone anymore. I would be more open to caps if there was some competition, but there isn't.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
in that there's no point in HAVING a cap if you're setting it that high :P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But, I know, that's my problem entirily... :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just a followup to other comments here
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Metering
Why does there have to be both? If I opt for a slow connection
I would not be downloading Movies, etc.....the day would be over before I got back to it. As well a slower speed lessens the load on the network, right? Higher speeds invite a higher load? Tier level pricing already exists here in the States.
The ONLY reason I can see for Data capping is GREEEEED.
We have seen what happens to the economy when Corporate gets TOO Greedy. Also, would not Advertisers push their wares even more, so everyone would get the best AD's before they hit their limit? Cynical, yes, likely, yes. Besides, data caps limit the ability of services built on the web.
Services on the web is a major reason we even use it.
ISP's need to get their money from the services that eat up
bandwidth, not each and every consumer being surcharged for
the FEW % who would abuse bandwidth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Metering
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Also of course, in countries like America that aren't way out in the middle of nowhere it's probably not going to cost $1 per gig, it ought to be a lot cheaper. But the principle is the same; the guys who use most of the bandwidth damn well should pay most of the cost, and the people who use very little should end up paying very little.
And how anyone can think this concept 'unfair' is very difficult for me to comprehend.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Second, It costs the ISP just as much money for a user to use 1M a month as it douse for another user to use 100G a month. The ISPs don't pay for the bits, it doesn't cost $0.05 to create a 1, and the nodes and hubs never go into standby so they don't ever save on electricity ether.
I could understand a cap if it's like the electric company and it costs them more to produce more but it doesn't cost to create a bit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
explains much about the world, that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Video Podcasts
This is exactly the behavior the incumbent providers want... no doubt they are hoping that instead of enjoying my free content, I was watching subscription TV.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lack of Competition
In the case of using the phone company naked DSL is just now becoming available. Naked DSL being a connection without a home phone service. Why should those of us that chose not to have a home phone or to use VoIP be forced to pay for a service we don't want. Not to mention the generally lower speeds available through DSL.
The other option we may have is from out cable TV provider. Cable is one of the worst rated industries. In the case of using a cable company I have elected to purchase the highest speed they offer. I get my internet connection with TV service for $80 a month or I can get my internet without TV service also for $80 a month. I have no need for their TV service (I am very happy with my SAT provider) but if I am paying for it I might as well get it.
With my already being forced to subsidize other parts of their business I should not also be limited by a bandwidth cap. Sure I am currently below the cap but data usage grows on a yearly basis and I don't see these companies adjusting their caps.
Not to mention that the caps strangle innovation.
Until there is real reform to our telecom industry including the opening up of competition these companies should not be allowed to implement caps and other restrictions as they see fit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Only the Beginning
Cellphone user shocked by charges of $85K
Man gets $27,000 phone bill after watching Bears game on web
Also, as has been pointed out by others, would we have to pay for spam, advertising, and other unwanted content that is forceably delivered without our consent?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Metering
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Metering
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1Mb connection has a cap of 316GB download per month.
so when you pay a speed you are getting a cap.
So if they sell you a 10Mb line with a 316GB download cap per month the are selling you a 10Mb line that you can only fully use 3 days a month.
With only one internet user the thing can workout, think about a household with two parent an a couple teenager
the bill the month that the teens discovered the video conferencing in ichat and spend all the time sending two video feeds to 2 of their friends each.
glup!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
what one's used to really does change what one thinks is reasonable, doesn't it?
[also, telephone 'spam' here seems to be limited to occasional surveys by marketing departments, more common surveys by various political and governmental entities, and in lieu of door to door salesmen. (they ring up and spend 5-30 minutes trying to get you to let them show up to show you something, rather than just turning up on your doorstep. I'm not sure if that's courteous or not. after all, on the phone, you Can just hang up on them if necessary, but answering interrupts in the first place, so what can ya do?]
... maybe it's just my browsing habits and the fact that i use hotmail rather than the ISP based e-mail account [I'm not actually the account holder on this arrangement, and the account holder barely uses it. additionally our ISP's spam filters are pretty good], but it's very rare i run into the stuff that the AC above mentions that one shouldn't have to pay for.
that said, it pisses me off when i do run into it too :) and do you really want your ISP checking out WHAT you're downloading so as to be able to NOT charge you for that sort of thing?
of course, it seems that the situation in the USA is [from the point of view of one who doesn't live there :)] such that regulations seem to be hard to come by when they'd do any good, and over abundant when they make the situation worse, while the EU just seems to be full of layers of both getting in each others way. [not that I've really Studied either] it's nice to know that, so far at least, for all the stuff ups they've made in other areas, our government has done a reasonable job of keeping a handle on the behaviour of the various telcos and ISPs etc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Utility vs. Luxury
I'm in the US and am all for increased provider competition (where I can switch companies to escape caps) but do not think that broadband is an essential service yet. Despite exclusively receiving my news & entertainment from the web it will be tough to argue the internet is essential until broadcast TV stops.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Utility vs. Luxury
That argument doesn't really fly. I know a guy who lives "off-grid" with solar cells, a backup generator, and well water. But you know what he can't do without? An internet connection. So to him internet service is more essential than either electric or water utility service.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No to caps
I'm sure this was all in the fine print too, so was looked over really easily by your average user.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Waffle
What a godawful article.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Capacity vs scarcity
How would people feel if landline companies went back to charging them for every minute they spent on the phone? Or what if mobile carriers went back to charging by the minute for long distance? They would both hemorrhage customers and die. The only reason broadband metering is even possible is the monopoly/duopoly situation that exists almost everywhere in the US.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Capacity vs scarcity
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Encryption = More bandwidth?
What about IPv4 going to IPv6?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Because right now I don't. I shouldn't have to download 3rd party programs to do so either.
I have no idea how much bandwidth I use a month, how much a Hulu'd show or this very site uses. I'm getting weary of being baffled with what is too often bullshit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
its like the banks and their overdraft fees
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Caps
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More Provider Choices Please
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
...Gore's Mommy!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The day ComCrap capped my service was the day I dropped them. Looks like I'll have to drop AT&T soon as well as they have been talking caps as well.
Im going to monitor it, and if I am not getting what I am paying for, I drop the ISP just like that!
Maybe soon Ill have no internet, but they aren't going to take me on their Unlimited contract only to cap me later bullshit!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]