UN's International Telecommunications Union sets out to standardize bulk surveillance of Internet users by oppressive governments

Discuss

8 Responses to “UN's International Telecommunications Union sets out to standardize bulk surveillance of Internet users by oppressive governments”

  1. fuzzyfuzzyfungus says:

    They don’t call the UN ‘Parliament of Dictators’ for nothing…

  2. Toby Johnson says:

    Despite there being much made of privacy concerns it is important to note that the standard (Recommendation ITU-T Y.2770) deals with the identification of application-specific properties rather than the inspection of user-owned application data. As such, Y.2770 does not provide for access to users’ private information and does not preclude use of measures to ensure the secrecy of correspondence.

    Essentially it’s a tool for Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to manage network traffic more efficiently. But let’s not let the facts get in the way of a good story eh.

    • akb123 says:

      While it may be correct that the alleged intent is to better equip ISPs with tools for network management, I think the problem is that this document completely, entirely, and irresponsibly ignores the fact that DPI has serious privacy and censorship implications.  From the outset they’re developing, behind closed doors, standards with the potential to severely curtail freedom of expression, without once acknowledging this fact.

      You say that Y.2770 does not provide for access to users’ private information and does not preclude use of measures to ensure the secrecy of correspondence, and that’s true.  But the very nature of DPI provides access to users’ private information.  That’s why so many people are very concerned.

      As a note, I can’t see the actual document text, so I’m going off an earlier draft.

    • fuzzyfuzzyfungus says:

      So it’s the DPI-for-price-discrimination purposes kind of DPI, then? 

      Oh, also, is there anywhere us non-ITU-TIES unwashed rabble can take a look at Y.2770?

    • Jardine says:

      Essentially it’s a tool for Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to manage network traffic more efficiently. But let’s not let the facts get in the way of a good story eh.

      More efficiently my ass. This is what Bell Canada and Rogers used to throttle traffic they decided was peer to peer. Bell even used it to throttle 3rd-party ISPs for anti-competitive reasons. It also slowed down VPN connections because those are encrypted and everything encrypted must be p2p traffic.

  3. BillStewart2012 says:

    Deep Packet Inspection is expensive.  It requires a lot more computing horsepower to look inside packets and see what the applications are doing, compared to the standard ISP job of looking only at the IP addresses and delivering the packet where it wants to go, and it’s usually done on CPU cores rather than cheap fast ASICs.

    There are times that it’s useful (such as firewalls and intrusion detection systems that provide security at the edge, or web caching systems for small ISPs), but typical government DPI proposals have been to force all ISPs to pay for the equipment so the government can spy on people, and so governments can enforce copyright restrictions on behalf of their corporate donors. 

  4. DPI is only as good as the processors you can throw at it , this will just push newer more powerful crypto like elliptic curve out into the mainstream and increase the cost of internet provision which in turn will create new markets which will enrich , oh , the members of the ITU , what a a surprise.

Leave a Reply