Comcast thinks it ok to install public wifi in your house

[khelms at zcorum.com (Scott Helms)]

Not really, this is much more like the mesh networks that have been put in
place by lots of WISPs where every customer is also a relay.  It's also
comparable to pico cells that many of the LTE operators use to extend
coverage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picocell

https://wirelesstelecom.wordpress.com/tag/picocell/


Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
--------------------------------
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
--------------------------------

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 9:23 AM, TR Shaw <tshaw at oitc.com> wrote:

> Seems to me that they (Bright House Networks, Cox Communications, Optimum,
> Time Warner Cable and Comcast) are effectively operating a business out of
> your house and without a business license.  I am sure that this is illegal
> in many towns and many towns would like the revenue.
>
> In fact does this put the homeowner at risk since they are effectively
> supporting a business running out of their house?
>
> Tom
>
> On Dec 11, 2014, at 9:02 AM, Scott Helms <khelms at zcorum.com> wrote:
>
> > All of the members of the CableWiFi consortium have been.
> >
> > Bright House Networks, Cox Communications, Optimum, Time Warner Cable and
> > Comcast.
> >
> > http://www.cablewifi.com/
> >
> > Liberty Global, the largest MSO, also does it and this year announced an
> > agreement with Comcast to allow roaming on each other's WiFi networks,
> > though that is not extended to the other members of CableWiFi at this
> time.
> >
> >
> http://corporate.comcast.com/news-information/news-feed/comcast-and-liberty-global-announce-agreement-to-connect-u-s-and-european-wi-fi-networks
> >
> >
> > Scott Helms
> > Vice President of Technology
> > ZCorum
> > (678) 507-5000
> > --------------------------------
> > http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
> > --------------------------------
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Ryan Pavely <paradox at nac.net> wrote:
> >
> >> http://bgr.com/2014/05/12/cablevision-optimum-modem-wifi-hotspots/
> >>
> >> I thought cablevision has been doing this for years.
> >>
> >> I had a higher level tech at mi casa within the last two years and he
> >> suggested their goal was to get enough coverage to start offering CV
> voip
> >> cell phones.  "pay a little less, for not guaranteed coverage'
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  Ryan Pavely
> >>   Net Access
> >>   http://www.nac.net/
> >>
> >> On 12/10/2014 9:35 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> >>
> >>> Why am I not surprised?
> >>>
> >>> Whose fault would it be if your comcast installed public wifi would be
> >>> abused to download illegal material or launch a botnet, to name some
> random
> >>> fun one could have on your behalf. :-/
> >>>
> >>> (apologies if this was posted already, couldn't find an email about it
> on
> >>> the list)
> >>>
> >>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/10/disgruntled_
> >>> customers_lob_sueball_at_comcast_over_public_wifi/
> >>>
> >>> "A mother and daughter are suing Comcast claiming the cable giant's
> >>> router in their home was offering public Wi-Fi without their
> permission.
> >>>
> >>> Comcast-supplied routers broadcast an encrypted, private wireless
> network
> >>> for people at home, plus a non-encrypted network called XfinityWiFi
> that
> >>> can be used by nearby subscribers. So if you're passing by a fellow
> user's
> >>> home, you can lock onto their public Wi-Fi, log in using your Comcast
> >>> username and password, and use that home's bandwidth.
> >>>
> >>> However, Toyer Grear, 39, and daughter Joycelyn Harris â?? who live
> >>> together in Alameda County, California â?? say they never gave Comcast
> >>> permission to run a public network from their home cable connection.
> >>>
> >>> In a lawsuit [PDF] filed in the northern district of the golden state,
> >>> the pair accuse the ISP of breaking the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
> and
> >>> two other laws.
> >>>
> >>> Grear â?? a paralegal â?? and her daughter claim the Xfinity hotspot is an
> >>> unauthorized intrusion into their private home, places a "vast" burden
> on
> >>> electricity bills, opens them up to attacks by hackers, and "degrades"
> >>> their bandwidth.
> >>>
> >>> "Comcast does not, however, obtain the customer's authorization prior
> to
> >>> engaging in this use of the customer's equipment and internet service
> for
> >>> public, non-household use," the suit claims.
> >>>
> >>> "Indeed, without obtaining its customers' authorization for this
> >>> additional use of their equipment and resources, over which the
> customer
> >>> has no control, Comcast has externalized the costs of its national
> Wi-Fi
> >>> network onto its customers."
> >>>
> >>> The plaintiffs are seeking monetary damages for themselves and on
> behalf
> >>> of all Comcast customers nation-wide in their class-action case â?? the
> >>> service was rolled out to 20 million customers this year."
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>