S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge from 'Squid Game'

Post by lrem » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 7:59 PM UTC

pepoluan wrote: post #237

lrem wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A decade ago I was with an ISP who took a stand for "Google should pay us for the priviledge of having our users watch YouTube". I believe I wasn't the only one who decided that's the last straw and moved to an ISP that wasn't rejecting peering based on greed.

Sounds like an ISP in a monopolistic situation. When there are alternatives , ISPs would bend over backwards for what customers want. That are not colluding like a cartel, of course.

Post by fomine3 » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 1:57 AM UTC

gregable wrote: post #192

piaste wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The thing that's most ridiculous about this is that the bandwidth is essentially "free" for SK telecom. They sit a netflix caching server in their network and the traffic never leaves. Wouldn't that require them to MITM the Netflix traffic, which I would hope is under TLS?

Does this mean that Netflix has to have a private TLS key in the box? I wonder how the security of these keys is usually maintained. Interesting engineering/cryptography problem. This problem might also be an interesting use case for Signed HTTP Exchanges. Sign the video files, then push them to the caching server. The caching server then never possesses the private keys for the connection and also cannot modify the…