NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] DPI vs. the (legal) Peeping Tom
Gang, we can argue the "benefits" and abuses of DPI all day, but a key point for me is that it is an opportunistic "voyeur" from a technological standpoint, which is likely to become of rapidly decreasing utility as pervasive encryption spreads throughout Internet applications. ISPs that are depending on DPI for network management will find it whittling away (they may be able to play something of a guessing game with traffic analysis even with encrypted data, but that's not really DPI). The fact that DPI works at all is an artifact of early decisions (reasonably based on the technology and environment of the time) not to encrypt most data on ARPANET/Internet by default. But all these decades later, there's no excuse for not using encryption to protect the communications channels in most Internet-based applications. This isn't a matter of protecting "bad" players, it's the fundamental concept of shielding the overwhelming mass of Internet users who are good and honest players from the much smaller number of unscrupulous ones. I tend to think of DPI now as some guy walking down the street at night and looking into bedroom windows that are well lit without the curtains drawn. He's not breaking any laws, he may derive some interesting (or even useful) information about how people behave in their bedrooms, and maybe he gets a sort of heady feeling of power over those persons as well. But if the next night everyone has closed their blinds and curtains, blocking his view (which they clearly should have done in the first place) he's not in a position to complain about it. By the way, the term "Peeping Tom" relates to the story of Lady Godiva. When Godiva made her famous ride, Tom (according to various versions of the story) ignored the edict not to look, to his ultimate misfortune. --Lauren-- NNSquad Moderator