January 2011

US government getting more interested in IPv6

The US federal government seems to have IPv6 on the brain as of late: both the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) came out with IPv6-related documents recently.

The FCC document is a collection of previously known information -- it's not about FCC policy -- but they managed to include a few things we weren't aware of. It discusses the transition from NCP, the protocol used with the original ARPANET, to the current TCP/IP back in the early 1980s: "The NCP-to-IPv4 transition had two characteristics that distinguish it from the current transition: a flag-day transition date and a clear directive from an authority that could back it up. On January 1, 1983, NCP would be turned off. Those networks who had failed to prepare -- there were a significant number of them -- fell offline, and proceeded to spend several panicked months attempting to upgrade their computers and regain connectivity."

The meatier NIST document is intended for federal agencies, but "may be used by nongovernmental organizations on a voluntary basis." It goes into much detail about the differences between IPv6 and IPv4, and how those differences impact security. For instance: "Reconnaissance attacks in an IPv6 environment differ dramatically from current IPv4 environments. Due to the size of IPv6 subnets (264 in a typical IPv6 environment compared to 28 in a typical IPv4 environment), traditional IPv4 scanning techniques that would normally take seconds could take years on a properly designed IPv6 network."

Third Circuit Denies Full-Court Review Of Fox Decision

A Federal court will not review its decision that the Federal Communications Commission's indecency enforcement regime is unconstitutional.

Buried on page five of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals decision vacating the FCC's indecency fine against ABC stations over NYPD Blue was the news that the court back in November had rejected the FCC's request for a full-court hearing of its finding that the FCC's indecency enforcement regime is unconstitutionally vague. That finding came in the Third Circuit's review of the FCC's indecency finding against Fox for swearing on awards shows. After the Supreme Court ruled that the Third Circuit was wrong to rule that the FCC's regime was arbitrary and capricious, the High Court remanded the decision back to the circuit. The court was free to go to the constitutionality of the decision, which it did in ruling it too vague to pass muster. It was that finding that led the court summarily to vacate the ABC fine as well for stemming from an impermissibly vague standard, citing the Fox decision as its reason for doing so.

But arguably the bigger news was that the court had already decided not to re-hear the Fox case, which means the FCC's next step is taking it to the Supreme Court. Nov. 22 also starts the 90-day countdown for the FCC and Justice to file that appeal

Internet Gains on Television as Public's Main News Source

The Internet is slowly closing in on television as Americans’ main source of national and international news.

Currently, 41% say they get most of their news about national and international news from the Internet, which is little changed over the past two years but up 17 points since 2007. Television remains the most widely used source for national and international news – 66% of Americans say it is their main source of news – but that is down from 74% three years ago and 82% as recently as 2002. The national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Dec. 1-5, 2010 among 1,500 adults reached on cell phones and landlines, finds that more people continue to cite the Internet than newspapers as their main source of news, reflecting both the growth of the Internet, and the gradual decline in newspaper readership (from 34% in 2007 to 31% now). The proportion citing radio as their main source of national and international news has remained relatively stable in recent years; currently, 16% say it is their main source.

An analysis of how different generations are getting their news suggests that these trends are likely to continue. In 2010, for the first time, the Internet has surpassed television as the main source of national and international news for people younger than 30. Since 2007, the number of 18 to 29 year olds citing the Internet as their main source has nearly doubled, from 34% to 65%. Over this period, the number of young people citing television as their main news source has dropped from 68% to 52%. Among those 30 to 49, the Internet is on track to equal, or perhaps surpass, television as the main source of national and international news within the next few years. Currently, 48% say the Internet is their main source – up 16 points from 2007 – and 63% cite television – down eight points.

Don't stifle the Internet

[Commentary] The digital revolution has been shaped by blunders as much as by breakthroughs, and the course of its brief history is littered with the bleached skulls of visionary efforts undone by bad timing, bad judgment or the simple human inability to see around corners. So to the tangle of questions known as "net neutrality.'' It may not be, as Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) says, "the most important free-speech issue of our time,'' but the issues are indeed big, defining ones. They involve power, specifically how much power in shaping the online world will be allowed to the companies we pay to access it. Late last month, the Federal Communications Commission, the government's top industry regulator, issued a long-awaited order on "Preserving the Free and Open Internet.'' It should have been a decisive inflection point in the Internet's history. It may instead wind up consigning one of the online world's signature principles to a roadside boneyard. Open access and wide opportunity to the vibrant universe of content creators have defined the Internet's continuing success. But huge power naturally flows to those who control not content, but channels. Restraining that power is essential if the promise of the Internet isn't to be yet another weathered skull.

Report shows users moving from landlines to wireless

According to a new report from the Federal Communications Commission, as of one year ago less than half (47.9 percent) of the 1.4 billion phone numbers available to carriers have been assigned to customers. Local carriers saw their utilization rate decrease from 48.8 percent to 47.3 percent over the previous six months. Wireless utilization rose 0.6 percent to 66.7 percent over the same period. Since the government began allowing users to port their phone numbers to new accounts in November 2005, more than 163 million people have taken advantage of the option. Of those, four million switched their landline number to a wireless phone, while only 200,000 did the reverse. The rest switched their number from one wireless account to another or from landline to landline. The most utilized area codes in the U.S. were Michigan's 947, which covers Oakland County, with 91.6 percent of numbers assigned, followed by 646, which covers Manhattan in New York and has 79.8 percent of available numbers assigned.

Warrantless cell phone search gets a green light in California

The contents of your cell phone can reveal a lot more about you than the naked eye can: who your friends are, what you've been saying and when, which websites you've visited, and more.

There has long been debate over user privacy when it comes to various data found on a cell phone, but according to the California Supreme Court, police don't need a warrant to start digging through your phone's contents. The ruling comes as a result of the conviction of one Gregory Diaz, who was arrested for trying to sell ecstasy to a police informant in 2007 and had his phone confiscated when he arrived at the police station. The police eventually went through Diaz's text message folder and found one that read "6 4 80." Such a message means nothing to most of us, but it was apparently enough to be used as evidence against Diaz (for those curious, it means six pills will cost $80). Diaz had argued that the warrantless search of his phone violated his Fourth Amendment rights, but the trial court said that anything found on his person at the time of arrest was "really fair game in terms of being evidence of a crime."

NARUC Names New Telecommunications Committee Chair

The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) has named John Burke to chair its telecommunications committee effective Jan. 17. Commissioner Burke, a member of the Vermont Public Service Board, has been a member of the committee for the past decade. He succeeds Ray Baum as chair. Baum was named last week to be senior policy adviser to the House Communications Subcommittee headed by Greg Walden (R-OR).

Appeals Court Tosses FCC Indecency Fine Against ABC

A federal appeals court tossed out the Federal Communications Commission's $1.2 million fine against ABC and its affiliates for briefly airing a female character's nude buttocks during a 2003 episode of the now defunct program "NYPD Blue." The FCC found in 2008 that ABC violated the commission's indecency rules and fined ABC and its affiliates a maximum $27,500 penalty each for airing the episode. In its decision to toss the fine, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York cited a ruling the same court issued last year that struck down the FCC's indecency policy for violating "the First Amendment because it is unconstitutionally vague."

Can eBooks help bridge achievement gaps?

A massive study published last spring confirmed what many educators already know: having books in the home is as significant as socioeconomic status or parents’ educational level in determining the level of education children ultimately will attain. Now, as more traditional book content goes digital and smart phones act as electronic readers, educators are left wondering whether technology will make achievement gaps even wider -- or whether electronic books might act as a bridge for students traditionally hamstrung by family circumstances and other issues neither they nor their teachers control.

MetroPCS LTE Plans Charge More For Skype and Streaming

MetroPCS’s discounted 4G LTE mobile broadband plans were not just the beginning of a possible price war. It represented a long-talked about tactic of wireless Internet service providers charging for content at different rates and potentially favoring their own services while charging more for access to rivals.

The new LTE plans raise the specter of consumers paying more for certain kinds of content and the potential for a fractured Internet experience, where users may not be free to jump easily from one site to another. And it appears poised to test the latest net neutrality rules enacted by the Federal Communications Commission, which created fewer protections for discrimination of mobile content. Free Press, a media advocacy group, has now called upon the FCC to investigate MetroPCS’s new pricing tiers. MetroPCS spokesperson Drew Crowell said the carrier is not prepared to discuss the Free Press statement or net neutrality implications of its latest service plans.

Benton

Search