the tindog coffeehouse

Two Senate bills, 773 and 778, introduced by Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller and Republican Olympia Snowe would, if passed, give the federal government virtually unrestricted control over the Internet, including private-sector Internet services, applications, and services.

The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any “critical” information network “in the interest of national security.” The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.

The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce “access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access.” This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws. …

Jennifer Granick, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, says that granting such power to the Commerce secretary could actually cause networks to be less safe. When one person can access all information on a network, “it makes it more vulnerable to intruders,” Granick says. “You’ve basically established a path for the bad guys to skip down.”

The bill’s scope, she says, is “contrary to what the Constitution promises us.”

Continue reading…

It’s not just the Chinese government imposing nationwide Internet filtering. Australia is getting it, too.

Under the current plan, Internet content filters will be mandatory for all Australians. They get to choose, however, between two different levels. The default plan blocks all content that may be objectionable to children, but consumers can opt-out, choosing a more watered-down blacklist which allows pornography but still blocks other “illegal content” (potentially including “euthanasia, drugs and protest”).

(Never mind that the filtering system probably won’t be very effective or that the deep-packet inspection required at the ISP level will cripple Internet speeds. And of course, all costs associated with the filtering will be passed on to consumers.)

As ridiculous as this is, however, I can’t help but to wonder if this same sort of nonsense is inevitable here in the U.S.  Surely not, right?

Continue reading…

The mainstream press is finally starting to catch on to the broadband caps issue.

It’s about time.

The phone company, Frontier Communications Corp., is one of several Internet service providers that are moving to curb the growth of traffic on their networks, or at least make the subscribers who download the most pay more. This could have consequences not just for consumers — who would have to learn to watch how much data their Internet use entails — but also for companies that hope to make the Internet a conduit for movies and other content that comes in huge files.

Meanwhile, ISPs such as AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast are starting to get behind the push for P4P as a way to reduce the load on their networks while speeding up traffic. (Overview of P4P here.) That’s good news.

Previously:
Metered broadband: An experiment
Bandwidth experiment, day 2: Throttled?
Metered broadband vs. cloud computing

So I’m chugging along in my month-long experiment to measure my home Internet usage while simultaneously cursing the very thought of having a usage limit imposed by my ISP, and all of a sudden the question smacks me upside the head: What about cloud computing?

“Cloud computing” is one of those fancy Web 2.0 (or is it 3.0?) buzzwords for software that runs from a web server on the Internet instead of your local computer. It extends beyond web-based email or even blogging. Google has a whole suite of web-based applications (Calendar, Google Docs, Picasa, etc.). Adobe has rolled out Acrobat.com as a web-based collaboration tool that integrates with their Acrobat products. They also have Photoshop Express, an online photo storage and editing portal. And Microsoft has their Office Live online application suite. Those are just a few examples.

And then there’s Midori, Microsoft’s experimental web-based platform that could possibly one day replace Windows.

Where do all these things fit in a world of metered Internet access?

Continue reading…

Yes, I know I’m getting a little preachy here, but hear me out.

There were a couple of related stories that were published recently that I think are important to mention. One was an AP story about free speech on the Internet and how companies such as Yahoo and Google sometimes impose arbitrary limitations on that freedom. The other was a story on Ars Technica about the recent amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, an amendment that not only grants telcos immunity for aiding in government wiretapping, but also gives the federal government much broader eavesdropping powers, allowing them to wiretap at will with almost no judicial oversight.

We’re at a point in history where our desire for certain freedoms and civil liberties and our use of the Internet for the exponential flood of information are often at odds with one another. We want to be freely connected to the world, yet even online, there are limits to those freedoms.

Continue reading…

In recognition of the 50th anniversary of the creation of ARPA (the Advanced Research Projects Agency), the Department of Defense agency that would give birth to what is now the Internet, Vanity Fair has attempted to compile an “oral history” of the Internet, from ARPA to today.

So how’d they do?

Al Gore aside, they did pretty well, at least at a high level, interviewing pioneers such as Paul Baran (the inventor of packet-switching), Vint Cerf (the inventor of the TCP and IP protocols), Bob Metcalfe (the inventor of Ethernet), Marc Andreessen (Netscape), Jeff Bezos (Amazon), Jerry Yang (Yahoo), Larry Page (Google), and Jimmy Wales (Wikipedia).

It’s mind-blowing to think that something so basic as a computer network wasn’t always so obvious, and how technology that we use every day and take for granted could very easily have never existed but for a few brilliant minds.

Continue reading…