Comcast torrent issues?

Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 12:54 pm

usucdik wrote:

the only way around detection is encryption, make sure it is enabled

They're not watching for encoded traffic, open Etherpeek or other and see. They're killing the torrent seeds with reset packets. Block all incoming rst packets from anything you dont trust 100% and the problem is solved. There are a few recent discussions on this as well, with simple ipfw entries pre-written for those of you not versed in *nix. Windows users.. if you dont know how to block rst packets, rtfm for your firewall.

Quirk-

Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 1:03 pm

List of ISP's classed as bad by azureuswiki LINK

Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:36 am

arrey wrote:

After my previous rant, I decided to check on broadband options in my area. Worse than I thought. Every local ISP I checked no longer offers their own branded DSL service, they all are re-sellers of Qwest DSL.

That may be okay -- I can't speak for Qwest, but a typical way around DSL shaping is to buy from a reseller because their bandwidth is usually not shaped.

Stop by the DSLReports forum for Qwest and ask around. You might get pleasantly surprised!

Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:40 am

Quirk wrote:

Block all incoming rst packets from anything you dont trust 100% and the problem is solved. There are a few recent discussions on this as well, with simple ipfw entries pre-written for those of you not versed in *nix. Windows users.. if you dont know how to block rst packets, rtfm for your firewall.

Most Windows users don't have that flexibility built in to their firewalls. But, worse than that, blocking RST packets on your firewall will not solve the problem .

Go to DSLReports and look for a post by "funchords" called "Tests and Results-RSTs are set in both directions"

Using a service like Relakks or SecureIX ($8-$10 a month) does get around the problem. Or, get a new ISP.

Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 2:09 pm

Can anyone verify that SecurIX works? If Cox can throttle encrypted BT traffic, why can't (or won't) they throttle encrypted VPN traffic?

A better (but more expensive) solution is to stop giving Cox any money. Get a sattelite dish.

Recently I found that the Cox DNS servers weren't identifying google correctly. I had to switch to opendns. Now I think these a-holes are capable of anything. Strong-arming google?

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:27 am

Comcast is killing my seeding as well. I did some searching on this issue and here is a copy and paste. There is some insight into this.

Is Comcast's BitTorrent filtering violating the law?

Posted by Chris Soghoian
September 4, 2007 12:06 PM PDT Law, Security
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. I'm a cybersecurity Ph.D. student and take classes in the Indiana University law school, but this in no way makes me a legal expert. CaveatlLector.

Within the last few weeks, there have been a number of reports by Comcast customers claiming that their BitTorrent downloads and uploads have been capped--or worse, blocked. TorrentFreak recently reported that Comcast, a major U.S. cable company, is using an application from Sandvine to throttle such connections.

Many ISPs routinely filter the traffic on their networks. Many forbid customers from running e-mail servers or Web servers, and when the ISP detects that a customer's computer has been hacked, they often sever the Internet connection until the machine has been patched. Thus, the fact that a major ISP is now filtering yet another class of Internet traffic should not be major news--except for two factors: BitTorrent traffic accounts for upwards of 25 percent of U.S. Internet traffic, and the techniques used by Comcast are essentially the same as those used by the Great Firewall of China.

Before we get deeply into this issue, let us step back for a brief and high-level lesson in TCP/IP and Internet filtering technologies. Most Internet applications communicate via TCP, a protocol that uses a three-way handshake to establish a connection.

The very first step in a three-way handshake involves the client sending a SYN packet to the receiving party. Modern firewalls block this packet for banned types of traffic--that is, they prevent the recipient from receiving it, and as such, the connection can never be established. Your home firewall does this, as well as those used by Comcast and other ISPs to prevent you from sending millions of e-mail spam messages from their network.

Assuming that the SYN packet goes through, the three-way handshake is allowed to happen, then the two hosts will be able to begin communicating. Your ISP can still kill the connection later, should it wish to, merely by blocking the transmission of future packets.

According to TorrentFreak, Comcast is not doing this. They are instead sending a reset (or RST) packet to the Comcast customer, pretending to be from the host at the end of the BitTorrent connection. This RST packet is the TCP equivalent of stating "I don't want to talk to you anymore, please terminate the connection." It is extremely important to note that when Comcast creates and sends this packet, it does not identify itself as the the source of packet, but instead impersonates one of the parties involved in the BitTorrent connection. This is where things get rather shady.

Last year, researchers from Cambridge University analyzed the Great Firewall of China and found that it used falsified RST packets to terminate connections that matched keyword filters. They were able to determine that users could evade the Chinese government's censorship system by ignoring these reset packets.

Ok, so the Chinese government and Comcast are using the same censorship techniques. Why should we care? The Chinese government doesn't have to pay attention to U.S. law, but Comcast, being a U.S. company, does.

Many states make it illegal for an individual to impersonate another individual. New York, a state notorious for its aggressive pro-consumer office of the Attorney General, makes it a crime for someone to "[impersonate] another and [do] an act in such assumed character with intent to obtain a benefit or to injure or defraud another." (See: NY Sec. 190.25: Criminal impersonation in the second degree). I do not believe that it would be too difficult to prove that Comcast obtains a benefit by impersonating others to eliminate or reduce BitTorrent traffic. Less torrent data flowing over their network will lead to an overall reduction in their bandwidth bill, and thus a huge cost savings.

New York is not the only state with such a law. Several other states including Connecticut and Alabama have similar laws on the books. Should any state AG's office decide to go after Comcast, it is quite possible that Comcast could be looking at a world of regulatory pain.

Comcast is perfectly within its right to filter the Internet traffic that flows over its network. What it is not entitled to do is to impersonate its customers and other users, in order to make that filtering happen. Dropping packets is perfectly OK, while falsifying sender information in packet headers is not.

Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 11:32 am

I have not had any trouble seeding at all with Comcast, in fact I am seeding right now with Comcast. Are we sure this affects all Comcast customers? I notice a great degree of variance, connection, type, and serivice in different parts of the country with them.

Bouncy

Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 5:29 am

I read three or four years ago that cable companies were using packet shaping technology to limit bt traffic. Personally, I can't wait until power companies begin offering broadband via the power lines - bandwidth is unimaginable!

Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 2:09 pm

yeah i've been using comcast for several years now and they suck but there is no alternative

Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 4:57 am

[quote="Quirk"][quote="usucdik"]the only way around detection is encryption, make sure it is enabled[/quote]

They're not watching for encoded traffic, open Etherpeek or other and see. They're killing the torrent seeds with reset packets. Block all incoming rst packets from anything you dont trust 100% and the problem is solved. There are a few recent discussions on this as well, with simple ipfw entries pre-written for those of you not versed in *nix. Windows users.. if you dont know how to block rst packets, rtfm for your firewall.

Quirk-[/quote]

Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 4:58 am

[quote="Inny"]No need for a fuss people.

First of all, there's ways around this issue (be it by port-forwarding, tunneling or encrypting data-transfer). Second of all, for most people there will be alternatives to Comcast for internet access. Thirdly, Comcast doesn't provide internet connection to the planet. They cannot ever restrict internet as a whole to any more than their own customers.

As for "it's the end of the e-world": remember, however they may be rumored and even proven to be infringed at times, you do have a right to privacy . Filtering can only be done up to a certain extent without infringing your privacy. At which point you can take things to court.

You pay for what you want to use. Competition keeps the prices and limitations down while it keeps speeds and features up. If there's only two ISP's in your area and they both start charging you for using BitTorrent or whatever other service, that's one unlucky you . Again, there are legislations to be held into account. It is very unlikely that an ISP will get away with making their customers pay to visit a website run by another person/organisation/company. P2P is a little more complicated, as it's not owned by anyone.

Ask yourself: How likely is it that 'they' (hey, who's they anyway, company's are run by people who may use BitTorrent themselves, you know!) will introduce something like this on a broad (international) scale? Let me tell you straight out: not likely by far.

-V.[/quote]

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 6:36 pm

Bouncy wrote:

I have not had any trouble seeding at all with Comcast, in fact I am seeding right now with Comcast. Are we sure this affects all Comcast customers?

No, it hasn't been installed everywhere yet, but it has been slowly expanding in chunks. (I'm not sure how big an area they do at a time, but I think I read it's somewhere around the size of a large neighborhood or city. If you try to seed to someone outside your area, your connection to them will frequently get reset & you'll need to reconnect. This setup does not impede downloading, just uploading.) If they aren't stopped, I think it's reasonable to expect them to add it to your area eventually.

Whether this is affecting you or not at the moment, I recommend you:
* Investigate your options for other ISPs in your area
* Contact your governmental representatives and tell them ISPs should not be allowed to shape your internet traffic. (Not all P2P is illegal after all, and this technology is screwing with more than just P2P.)
* Donate to SaveTheInternet

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 9:08 pm

this is just rounge

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:22 am

i do not agree here

Kioshi wrote:

Edit: Again it seems to be affecting me now too... my seeding speeds are extremely low now. This is what i got from talking with a rep at the head office

Quote:

Comcast on Tuesday denied rumors that the company is filtering BitTorrent traffic running over its network.

Broadband providers have not been big fans of BitTorrent because the use of the peer-to-peer protocol can clog networks with huge files. The blog TorrentFreak claims that several Internet Service Providers have been "throttling" or limiting BitTorrent traffic on their networks for the past two years. And last week, the blog accused Comcast of going even further to limit the use of BitTorrent on its network.

The blog claimed that some Comcast users had noticed that their BitTorrent transfers were being cut off and that they experienced a significant decrease in download speeds.

Over the past few days, these claims have been widely circulated throughout the Web. But Comcast spokesman Charlie Douglas denied that the company was filtering or "shaping" any traffic on its network. He said the company doesn't actively look at the applications or content that its customers download over the network. But Comcast does reserve the right to cut off service to customers who abuse the network by using too much bandwidth.

"More than 99.99 percent of our customers use the residential high-speed Internet service as intended, which includes downloading and sharing video, photos and other rich media," he said. "But Comcast has a responsibility to provide these customers with a superior experience, and to address any excessive or abusive activities usage issues that may adversely impact that experience."

In the rare instances the company has to enforce its policy, Douglas said that Comcast contacts subscribers to work out the issue. But he firmly reiterated that the company doesn't Filter or throttle back traffic.

Given the proliferation of television, and in some cases even near DVD quality content, being delivered over the internet there are legitimate questions about how capable internet providers are of consistently delivering the bandwidth they use as a selling point for their service.

Whether the bandwidth required for Streaming and downloaded video is available is certainly one of those questions, but another is whose responsibility it is to pay for it.

As online content and IPTV services attempt to compete with traditional cable and satellite providers, some of whom will be providing the bandwidth to make it possible, expect both questions to be hotly debated.

Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 1:21 pm

Great Post !