Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Comments
The Implications Behind Proposed Internet Privacy Rules
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Shantaram
50%
50%
Shantaram,
User Rank: Ninja
4/19/2017 | 9:11:54 AM
Re: 192.168.0.1
Very intуresting and detailed post. Thanks for sharing
dritchie
50%
50%
dritchie,
User Rank: Strategist
4/18/2017 | 3:31:53 PM
Re: Some bold claims here
Not only that, but the original poster works for a company that seems to try to help companies deliver unwanted commercial email (i.e. SPAM), so limiting the ability of providers to sell him information hurts his bottom line.
dritchie
50%
50%
dritchie,
User Rank: Strategist
4/18/2017 | 3:28:40 PM
Re: Some bold claims here
Not only that, but the poster works for a company that seems to try to help companies deliver unwanted commercial email (i.e. SPAM).
guy_montag
100%
0%
guy_montag,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/18/2017 | 11:10:24 AM
Some bold claims here
The author makes some bold claims here but doesnt make a very good case for them. Whats the FTC's track record in actually protecting privacy? How do common carrier privacy protections "stiffle antispam and malware detection" any more than TLS does? How would the FTC be less susceptible to regulatory capture than the FCC? Regultory capture is imo, the strongest case against FCC action but this article doesnt even mention it.

The only arguments here seems to be "the ftc does a great job, take my word for it" and also that adverstisers "already know everything" so who cares? That undercuts the whole part about the glories of self-regulating ISP's and the past work of the FTC. Never mind the fact that those that do deep packet inspection are ripe targets for attack even if they dont voluntarily sell the data to third parties.

The article also ignores the major impetetus for the Title II classification, namely, net neutrality. Pretending common carrier reclassification was just about privacy is silly at best, disengenuous at worst.

All in all, this article doesnt pass the laugh test. Isps are local monopolies, comcast is not google, and vpn's wont protect you. 


7 Tips for Infosec Pros Considering A Lateral Career Move
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/21/2020
For Mismanaged SOCs, The Price Is Not Right
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/22/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment:   It's a PEN test of our cloud security.
Current Issue
IT 2020: A Look Ahead
Are you ready for the critical changes that will occur in 2020? We've compiled editor insights from the best of our network (Dark Reading, Data Center Knowledge, InformationWeek, ITPro Today and Network Computing) to deliver to you a look at the trends, technologies, and threats that are emerging in the coming year. Download it today!
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
Organizations have invested in a sweeping array of security technologies to address challenges associated with the growing number of cybersecurity attacks. However, the complexity involved in managing these technologies is emerging as a major problem. Read this report to find out what your peers biggest security challenges are and the technologies they are using to address them.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-19631
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-24
An issue was discovered in Big Switch Big Monitoring Fabric 6.2 through 6.2.4, 6.3 through 6.3.9, 7.0 through 7.0.3, and 7.1 through 7.1.3; Big Cloud Fabric 4.5 through 4.5.5, 4.7 through 4.7.7, 5.0 through 5.0.1, and 5.1 through 5.1.4; and Multi-Cloud Director through 1.1.0. A read-only user can ac...
CVE-2020-5219
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-24
Angular Expressions before version 1.0.1 has a remote code execution vulnerability if you call expressions.compile(userControlledInput) where userControlledInput is text that comes from user input. If running angular-expressions in the browser, an attacker could run any browser script when the appli...
CVE-2019-18900
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-24
: Incorrect Default Permissions vulnerability in libzypp of SUSE CaaS Platform 3.0, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 allowed local attackers to read a cookie store used by libzypp, exposing private cookies. This issue affects: SUSE CaaS Platform 3.0 libzypp versions p...
CVE-2020-7226
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-24
CiphertextHeader.java in Cryptacular 1.2.3, as used in Apereo CAS and other products, allows attackers to trigger excessive memory allocation during a decode operation, because the nonce array length associated with "new byte" may depend on untrusted input within the header of encoded data...
CVE-2012-6302
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-24
Soapbox through 0.3.1: Sandbox bypass - runs a second instance of Soapbox within a sandboxed Soapbox.