We have filters in place that reduce the amount of peer to peer programs that can be used on our system. These programs often allow the distribution of copyrighted material as well as little or no virus protection for customer’s networks. All of the legal means of retrieving music off the interent have no limitations on our networks. Examples of such sites are musicmatch rapshody and itunes. Please let us know if we can be of any more help.
Alright, I can understand why they would want to reduce the amount of peer to peer programs that allow the distribution of copyrighted material, but virus protection is something that should be done client-side, not server-side. Here's my response:
Torrents are also the fastest way to transfer legitimate software, such as various distributions of multiple CD/DVD software, like Linux. The other method of transferring this monstrosity (FTP) won't get near the speed and reliability that a torrent would. Many other services also provide for the distribution of copyrighted material (Gnutella, Kazaa, FTP, IRC, etc.). Why do you not filter these?
As for virus protection, the only likely thing you can filter would be data that is stored on the server (POP3 for instance). You're simply unable to process all the data that moves through your server, and even if you did, many viruses will be compressed using methods that your server wouldn't even recognize.
His reply?
We do filter gnutella and kazza. IRC is used for more than simply file transfers.
Peer to Peer software opens up for the spread of viruses due to the unknown nature of the remote computer sharing out the files. The pop3 references you make have no bearing on peer to peer programs. Our virus appliance strips out all attachments regardless of the files being compressed or not.
This will be my final reply on this subject. If you need any more help, please let us know.
Now, if you've been reading carefully, you'd note that my POP3 comment referred to virus protection, not peer-to-peer software. Also, as I haven't tested this, I'm almost certain that their "virus appliance" does not strip out attachments, as many attachments are legit, even so far as to say necessary, especially for businesses that might be transferring things like spreadsheets via e-mail.
Either way, wouldn't you agree that, for one, his attitude is abrassive toward me, and two, he acts as if I do not know what I'm talking about. "Gee, IRC is used for more than file transfers? I'm such a doofus for not knowing that... With an acronym that translates to Internet Relay Chat, I would never have known that it was only for file transfers!" In my opinion, I'm almost certain I've used IRC before he even had internet access. I can remember running through a shell on my BBS to connect to IRC.
I've also looked a bit into our technological wizkid here. Here's a link where he talks about banning a Communicomm user for sharing copyrighted data. Now, do you think he has absolutely no copyrighted data on his home PC? I would like to think that he does, as anybody who knows a thing about computers has some kind of illegal software on their computers. After more digging, I've found a few other tidbits about him, although I can't say this is fact.
- He met his wife from IRC.
- He's an avid gamer. Hooray!
- He's older than 26, but I'd like to say 28.
Peace out, [edit: name removed]!
3 comments:
Mr. Fox,
As I mentioned to you through the email you sent my personal gmail account, I do not wish to communicate with you about business matters at home. However, I have red your comments about me on your blog page here. I must say you have some incorrect information here, but I must seriously ask you to remove the personal information that you posted about me on your blog. As for the comments about me personally you can say whatever you like. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but when you post personal information about someone without permission, there seems to be an ethic that would be followed here. Please remove the information you posted about me personally off of our page. This especially includes the information about my family please.
Additionally, I have no wish to communicate with you via msn messenger either, so please do not add me to your contact lists. I have you blocked on my side of messenger.
The policy I gave you is not a personal policy. It is a company policy. I have very little say (As do most people who work in the IT industry) over company wide policy. I have no idea why you have decided to attack me personally. The reduction to "name calling" in particular made me laugh.
Additionally, I would also ask that you remove the accusatory remarks about me using software illegally. This borders on liable due to the fact that is indeed untrue and is simply an attack of character.
In conclusion, keep in mind that we do have plans on removing the limitation on peer to peer programs, but this will not be done until our upgrade order for more bandwidth is completed.
Thanks for your time and attention in this matter.
Larry Thibodeaux
Keep with me here, lets work down through this comment.
Quote: I must say you have some incorrect information here,
Reply: After more digging, I've found a few other tidbits about him, although I can't say this is fact.
Quote: As for the comments about me personally you can say whatever you like.
Reply: Alright, you've got me there, but if you want me to post your business replies to my emails, I can point out your harshness toward me, almost like your attitude during your comment. But I do have free speech, that is what blogging is all about.
Quote: but when you post personal information about someone without permission
Reply: What permission do I need, in all honesty? I didn't exactly post your address, date of birth, phone number, credit card information, social security number, etc. I've also posted no information about your family.
Quote: Additionally, I have no wish to communicate with you via msn messenger either
Reply: Good, I told you I wouldn't communicate with you anymore, as per your request. However, I'm sure your curiousity will keep you reading.
Quote: The policy I gave you is not a personal policy. It is a company policy.
Reply: I understand that. How many police officers speed after they're off duty? How many telemarketers take market calls at home? You could say that work life and home life splits you in two.
Quote: I have no idea why you have decided to attack me personally. The reduction to "name calling" in particular made me laugh.
Reply: I said that your company hires morons. You can read past posts about the reliability of the ISP you work for. You probably feel like I'm calling you a moron, but I'm not. I said you were smart in an e-mail to you. I've even gone so far as to say this: "I got ahold of someone named Larry Thibodeaux, and a few days later, the connectivity issues finally started to fade away." You simply jump to conclusions too quickly, and paired with your quick temper, you just fail to see the points I try to make.
Quote: Additionally, I would also ask that you remove the accusatory remarks about me using software illegally. This borders on liable due to the fact that is indeed untrue and is simply an attack of character.
Reply: I said I would like to think that you had copyrighted data. It is an opinion, not a fact. I would also like to think President Bush is a failure as a leader. Again, opinion, not fact.
Quote: In conclusion, keep in mind that we do have plans on removing the limitation on peer to peer programs, but this will not be done until our upgrade order for more bandwidth is completed.
Reply: Finally, I have some truth from you. You simply cannot support your users bandwidth with what you have available. I really doubt it has anything to do with viruses, or the fact that it's copyrighted. You cannot blame the ISP for its users actions, like you cannot blame a phone company for the calls made using its system, right?
I'd like to see more comments on this issue, and by that I mean more than just Mr. Anonymous here.
It is obvious that this ISP has some serious work to do. From what I've seen, they can't even support the average users who just want to browse the web and send e-mail occasionally without being disconnected every 2 minutes.
Even without the ability to download using torrents, they still lack the pros of any other cable internet provider... like a 24/7 connection and download speeds comparable to other similar ISP's.
Honestly if you weren't getting just enough speed (faster than 56k for instance), at this point, dialup would probably be more reliable and less expensive. Since you can't get the download speeds and connectivity you want from them, dialup would probably actually be the better choice for the price you're paying (for something you're not getting).
Post a Comment