I came across a report (PDF)by researchers at the University of Washington that indicates some ISPs are injecting their own advertisements into web traffic bound for users’ computers. Most of the culprits were small ISPs but some large ISPs like XO Communications in the U.S. were implicated. XO states that it’s a downstream service provider purchasing network capacity from them that’s responsible. (wTwNjzVFVU)

PC World has an article on the matter. (You can read it here.) What’s notable in the PC World article is the mention of some client-side applications, designed to modify web page code for the purpose for security and privacy issues, actually injected security vulnerabilities into the pages they processed.

University of Washington has a web integrity checker you can access but make sure you turn off anything client-side that modifies web pages on its own such as ad and script blockers, code filtering/modification applications like Greasemonkey etc.

While less than 1% of ISPs were found to be doing this during the study, it’s extremely important to protect net neutrality, the security and integrity of web sites and address this issue early to increase consumer awareness.

Recently I had posted an article regarding Acanac’s Online PC VPS service as a way to get around Bell’s traffic shaping. My sister pointed out that on Google, my blog showed up around the third or forth hit regarding Acanac’s Online PC VPS service.

I feel that since my article shows up relatively high in the Google results, I should follow up because apparently Acanac has a big problem with customer service.

EDIT (May-29-08): I realize that some people might get the impression I’m jumping on the ACANAC Bashing Bandwagon so I’ve written a follow-up article explaining more precisely the problems with particular instances of ACANAC’s interaction with the public in the forums.    I also encourage people to follow the links provided.  The reason I’ve included them is to show that the criticism isn’t baseless.

There’s more!   Expand the rest of the article. >>>
<<< Collapse the article.

EDIT: See my latest post regarding Acanac. (April 13, 08)

Apparently I’m a part of the very lucky minority of independent ISP customers (TSI) who still remains unaffected by Bell Canada’s contentious traffic shaping policy. (wTwNjzVFVU)

It’s been three days since Bell’s published traffic shpaing implementation date of April 7th but I have to wonder how long I’ll remain off the leash.

There is an ISP called Acanac that may just have the solution to Bell’s hostile policies. They offer a service which gives you a Linux-based “virtual PC” that is hooked up directly to the Internet backbone. It doesn’t touch one wire of Bell’s network so it remains unaffected by Bell’s traffic shaping policies.

Acanac’s intention is to offer a PVR-style service for PC users where content is obtained from the Internet, stored on Acanac’s servers and accessed/maintained by subscribers via their Online PC VPS system.

Here are the user plan details:

	Standard VPS PC	Extereme VPS PC
Price	$23.95	$39.95
Speed	10Mbps/10Mbps	20Mbps/20Mbps
IP’s	1 Static	1 Static
Bandwith Traffic	500GB	1000GB
Hard Drive Space	100GB	200GB
Ram	750MB	1500MB
Root	Yes	Yes

Term	Standard	Extreme
1 Month	$35.95/month	$51.95/month
3 Months	$31.95/month	$47.95/month
6 Months	$27.95/month	$43.95/month
12 Months	$23.95 /month	$39.95/month

Note that you get SSH root access to your virtual PCs. This means you can install almost any software you want and aren’t limited to the basic set of applications that are offered with each account. You just have to make sure whatever software you install can operate within the 750MB RAM constraint.

The price for of $23.95/month for the 12-month Standard plan isn’t bad either. On average I spend about that much a month on just comic books.

Although Acanac intends that subscribers use this service in a PVR-like manner where content stays on their servers, theoretically, even throttled Bell Sympatico users could take advantage of this service since users would perform direct downloading from Acanac’s servers without the use of p2p’s protocols and number of active connections; which is the criteria upon which traffic shaping is based.

I primarily use bittorrent for downloading unlicensed anime series and TV shows that I’ve missed. I’m a big proponent of the concept of being able to watch what I want, when I want— and now ‘where I want’ now that I have the iPod Touch.

I’d be willing to try service out for 3 or even 6 months since it suits my usage pattern perfectly.

Screw you, Bell! May you continue to hemorrhage customers.

Gabe from TSI posted these charts to the dslreports.com forums and it shows how badly Bell’s anti-competitive practices are affecting not just p2p traffic but all types of traffic.

Besides the sizable drop in network speed, notice how the throttling is still in effect well beyond Bell’s stated window of 4pm to midnight.

Below is a chart illustrating traffic type/usage over time prior to Bell throttling the networks.  Note: Gabe indicated that the last two charts show services stacked bottom to top, from highest traffic type usage (UDP) to lowest (ICMP):

Below is what it looks like post-throttling.

What’s particularly telling is the scale on the left hand side of the last two graphics.  Bell has effectively cut TekSavvy’s traffic to more than a third of normal.  And it’s not just TekSavvy, it’s all wholesaler ISPs.

Notice the roughness of the traffic profile after throttling.  Throttling is affecting all types of traffic, not just p2p.

Bell says their throttling measures are intended to control p2p traffic and that p2p traffic accounts for "70%-90%" of all traffic on their networks.  TekSavvy’s charts show that p2p traffic is only #3 on the usage chart.

According to Bell’s claims, one would think that p2p should be dominating those charts, especially when it comes to TekSavvy, an ISP that has a large number of  p2p users because they don’t engage in traffic shaping.

That "70%-90%" figure sounds like more Bell bullshit.  And the shit’s hitting the fan now.

The National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) has formally requested of the CRTC to investigate the impact of traffic shaping on Canadian users.  They go on to stress the fact that the issue of net neutrality is being taken seriously by the United States and that "continued silence on these matters by the CRTC and the Canadian government violates the trust the Canadian people have placed in you."