Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CenturyLink is blocking customer internet, saying Utah legislators told them to

richsnapp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 294 posts

Re: CenturyLink is blocking customer internet, saying Utah legislators told them to

#131

Post by ryanlol »

jay-anderson wrote: post #11
pwg wrote: post #4

And here we see the disconnect between what politicians say, and what they write into law. The bill's sponsor's response to the blog authors query: SB134 did not require that ...They were only required to notify customers of options via email or with an invoice. And here is the text of the statute that was written: (ii) A service provider may provide the notice described in Subsection (2)(b)(i): (A) by electronic com…

Writing laws feels a bit like a monkey's paw. No matter how well written a law is they often have unintended consequences or are implemented manners that weren't imagined. I don't think the bill's author/sponsor is fully to blame (they aren't guiltless either). Centurylink certain did not have to implement this requirement in the way it was done. The most depressing aspect to this is the lack competition. The author…

>they aren't guiltless either

How is the bill's author/sponsor at all to blame for centurylink doing this? They could just as well be doing this without the bill existing.

Re: CenturyLink is blocking customer internet, saying Utah legislators told them to

#132

Post by donarb »

gronne wrote: post #40
jay-anderson wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Writing laws feels a bit like a monkey's paw. No matter how well written a law is they often have unintended consequences or are implemented manners that weren't imagined. I don't think the bill's author/sponsor is fully to blame (they aren't guiltless either). Centurylink certain did not have to implement this requirement in the way it was done. The most depressing aspect to this is the lack competition. The author…

However: This particular law was not well written.

No laws are written in a vacuum. Century Link most likely even participated in having this law drafted. No doubt they have lawyers in every state capital watching for laws that affect their business.

Re: CenturyLink is blocking customer internet, saying Utah legislators told them to

#133

Post by aflag »

jeroenhd wrote: post #32
zapdrive wrote: post #28

So what happens if a CenturyLink customer is not using their DNS, and using for example Google's DNS. They will suddenly have their internet disabled and will never see this page, where they have to click "OK" to reconnect their internet.

They will probably forward all DNS traffic to their own resolvers by just changing the destination IP of any UDP traffic to port 53. This won't work with DNSSEC or encrypted DNS though.

The tldr section of the article says that's not the case.

Re: CenturyLink is blocking customer internet, saying Utah legislators told them to

#134

Post by justwalt »

craftyguy wrote: post #102
erikpukinskis wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure?

No, that's why I'm asking... Not every question on the internet is a thinly veiled attempt to make a statement!

I find this unique trait of the Internet tiresome at times. I’d prefer not to feel like I have to include a disclaimer on a question comment to avoid coming off hostile.

Re: CenturyLink is blocking customer internet, saying Utah legislators told them to

#135

Post by freeopinion »

JohnFen wrote: post #36
pwg wrote: post #4

And here we see the disconnect between what politicians say, and what they write into law. The bill's sponsor's response to the blog authors query: SB134 did not require that ...They were only required to notify customers of options via email or with an invoice. And here is the text of the statute that was written: (ii) A service provider may provide the notice described in Subsection (2)(b)(i): (A) by electronic com…

"So, the fault here lies with the politician." No. The fault lies with CenturyLink. They're the ones who decided to implement this in the most repulsive way allowed by law. The law only required notification using normal communications methods, not disruption of services. CenturyLink is the one who chose disruption of services.

A big portion of fault lies with the consumer. If 20% of CenturyLink customers canceled their service for a week in a very publicized way, CenturyLink would scramble.

For example, they could all wear yellow vests and block the entrance to the CenturyLink parking lot.

Re: CenturyLink is blocking customer internet, saying Utah legislators told them to

#136

Post by zzo38computer »

The customer might not even see it without compatible software, or if using a different port number or protocol, or if not using DNS to access something, or using a different DNS. Or if you are using a web browser but with customized settings that make it incompatible.

Same with many hotels. If you are not even using HTTP(S), or DNS, then it won't work, and even if you are using HTTP but not with a web browser program, it won't work (there is a HTTP response code (511) defined for this purpose at least), using nonstandard port numbers, etc.

For terms of service requirements, one possibility to avoid these problem is to make the printed terms of service document with the wi-fi password mentioned in that document.

Re: CenturyLink is blocking customer internet, saying Utah legislators told them to

#138

Post by snapwich »

aflag wrote: post #133
jeroenhd wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will probably forward all DNS traffic to their own resolvers by just changing the destination IP of any UDP traffic to port 53. This won't work with DNSSEC or encrypted DNS though.

The tldr section of the article says that's not the case.

It wasn't the case for me, however I'm not exactly sure how they've implemented this DNS hijacking and if I was just an exception or the rule. Other people using custom DNS seemed to have a similar experience from what I read on reddit though.

Re: CenturyLink is blocking customer internet, saying Utah legislators told them to

#140

Post by cmurf »

otakucode wrote: post #122
xahrepap wrote: post #94

CenturyLink is totally shady. My wife just yesterday spent a significant amount of time fixing our phone bill. She decided a couple months ago to upgrade to a "fixed" bill plan (apparently they've been raising our prices $10/mo every year for the last few years). This plan price won't change until we change the plan. It's bundled with their internet though, but my wife told them to not send the modem because we weren…

An important bit of law to always keep in mind, as companies bank on consumers being ignorant of it: If a company mails something to your home that you did not expressly order - it's yours. End of story. They cannot request that you send it back, they can not charge you for it. It's yours. This includes if you ordered product A and they sent you product B by mistake. Legally speaking, in that situation you were sent…

Is this state law? Federal law or regulation?
Post reply on HN