In July 2014, Golden Frog has filed comments with the FCC in support of Open Access. We have included some specific examples:
- A client VyprVPN said he gets us better Internet performance with VyprVPN if its ISP (in this case, Verizon FiOS)
- A wireless Internet service provider. blocking the ability of a Golden Frog used to encrypt its communications with its third-party mail server. We found that neither the former rules the FCC proposed or prevent "wired" and "wireless" Internet service providers broadband block encryption technologies if they so wish.
The strong support we received deposit of public interest groups and the press interest in how our products can help to reduce congestion caused Internet traffic to Verizon respond to our comments.
Surprisingly, we agree with much of what Verizon said.
was never accused Verizon encryption lock. As noted by the Washington Post, Cricket is the wireless provider that blocks encryption technologies. However, our point is that the FCC Verizon (or another ISP) are free to block encryption technologies if they want, and Cricket has done for some time. Encryption prevents ISPs capacity to inspect and guide traffic, insert ads and sell additional services. Given their track record, we do not trust the Internet providers and without clear rules at least some will be unable to resist the urge to block or interfere with technologies that inhibit their ability to make money even if it hurts the privacy of their clients.
Customers have noticed better performance Netflix using our VyprVPN service. One reason is that Golden Frog manages its traffic so he goes to Internet service providers on non-congested links. This significantly improves performance. Verizon recognizes that what is happening here. We speculate on how Netflix and others manage their business with Verizon, but we were able to provide excellent performance without having to pay Verizon as Netflix did. We actively manage our network and take it as a compliment that Verizon validated what we do works . Congestion is a problem the FCC should fix, but until he gives us a workaround for ISPs tactics.
Verizon's response spoke to "congestion" on the side of the Internet side, but he obviously failed to address several other points we have made about Verizon practices on the side "face -user". For example, Verizon has not denied inspect the unencrypted traffic coming from or going to its users. Nowhere Verizon denies that examines the content of Internet communications of its own users whenever he can. Verizon did not deny that he sometimes uses his knowledge of the content for its own benefit or disclose to others, including the government. Verizon did not deny that performs the identification of the application, and then unilaterally apply a "special treatment" for certain applications - either slowing or priority allocation for help that has not of unknown criteria -. On unencrypted traffic
The mission of Golden Frog is to provide tools that protect privacy online and provide a truly open Internet worldwide. However, VyprVPN has another advantage - it defeats the ISP limitations and congestion by identifying applications and VyprVPN, indeed, becomes virtual ISP customer and allows users to benefit from the encrypted VyprVPN connection, making them faster " special treatment. ". VyprVPN frustrates the efforts of Internet service providers in both the "side facing Internet" and "side facing the user," and simultaneously protects the privacy of users. The FCC must act to protect the continued ability of users to use options like VyprVPN. If reasonable rules are not put in place Internet access providers will expand their monitoring, throttling and blocking and could soon move to prevent users to protect their privacy using encryption tools like VyprVPN .
We urge the FCC to set binding rules in place to prevent Internet service providers to be able to block VPNs, proxies and other encryption technologies. If the FCC imposes no effective rules against it, and Internet service providers get their way, the poor performance Netflix may be the problem today, but the loss of tools to protect online privacy and security will become tomorrow's problem.
See our full response here.
0 Komentar