Sure, some big companies are stupid, but not THAT stupid.
It's an outrageous practice to enable radio-emitting devices in customer's homes without their consent. Unfortunately, they didn't see any backlash from the customer base, as most didn't understand what happened and believed to what lies ISP published on their FAQ page - that additional WiFi spot doesn't emit extra EMF and doesn't consume extra electicity...
I had to go to the lengths of reversing modem firmware looking for exploits in order to disable this.
Unless I owned the equipment then I'd just cut them off.
The line must be able to handle more bandwidth but somehow i doubt ISP's had the foresight to leave some extra for just this occasion.
Is the router even capable of handling the extra load this would introduce? Most consumer routers are known for being under powered.
They probably don't provide such a service; few cable operators use the maximum possible bandwidth on DOCSIS3.
1) Network isolation, according to the article there is some isolation. Not sure what this means exactly but if it's a private subnet routed to Comcast on a separate IP for security/privacy reasons. There is no technical reason this can't be accomplished. I do question how much Comcast (or their vendor) engineers care about security though.
2) Doesn't affect my speed, article states this. Assuming it's true, modern DOCSIS 3.0 cable modem can support an absurd amount of traffic, way more then most WiFi APs can handle at any reasonable range.
My biggest concern is that WiFi is already slow, if I'm streaming Netflix videos and it now starts to drop segments due to a person in a car on a tablet streaming the latest Gangnam style, I'll be upset.
"Kurn said no, anymore than Starbucks is liable for illicit behavior by the customers who use its in-store hotspots."
The separate IP is the key here when it comes to network isolation. If there is no separate IP, the customer will be held liable for illegal use, despite Comcast's ridiculous denial. Starbucks doesn't have to worry about being sued or prosecuted for the crimes of its customers because it has plenty of billions to defend itself. Joe Smo, your average end user who probably hasn't read the mail or e-mail about this and has no clue that it's on, should worry as he would be a target for other corporations lawsuits and even criminal prosecution. Without a separate IP and separate audit, he's going to get sued or thrown into jail. The authorities don't look kindly on such things as kiddy porn and won't care that it was some stranger using your wifi from across the street.
My concern with their plan besides being opt-out is, who is liable for misuse of the signal?
Basically, (unless an individual subscriber has chosen to disable the function) their home router radiates a second Wireless SSID, which is _completely_ isolated from your connection (all traffic to/from is tunnelled over a VPN back to ISP base) and _never_ detracts from your download speed (your own traffic always takes priority.)
In return, you have wireless access to thousands of similar hotspots - and in any populated area there's a more than reasonable chance that you'll be near someone that uses BT broadband. (UK's largest ISP.)
Nothing not to like about it. It's really convenient and works well.
Not to mention all the fun data leakage that happens when using open wifi portals.
http://www.offensive-security.com/kali-linux/kali-linux-evil...
Kali Linux Evil Wireless Access Point
Separate network, requires Comcast credentials, has -zero- to do with your account/data cap - other than sharing your Wifi.
I had to go to the xfinity FAQ to find the answer. http://wifi.comcast.com/faqs.html
Maybe it's bad practices to not tell the customer or whatever, but now in Paris, if you are a FREE customer, there is literally WIFI everywhere for you. And it's amazing.
just my 2cents :)
http://www.muniwireless.com/2013/06/10/orange-france-creates...
Also my experience with 'free' was that it's vaporware. Hopefully it's improved in the last 1.5 years.
That being said I'm also happy I bought my own cable modem for my comcast internet service.
Like some others have said, as long as it doesn't screw around with my own connection, then it's not a big deal. Plus I'll now be able to access internet in a lot more places that didn't have free Wi-Fi before. It's really useful for me since I only have a 200mb data plan.
It seems like a great idea...for opening a giant MITM attack vector to anyone who chooses to use it.
Finally I was able to do it, but now the page where you opt-in/out won't load so I can't confirm (and of course my neighbors all have it enabled so I can't tell if the network is mine or not).
Shameful but totally expected. ANY option for high speed internet would be better than this (except every other cable provider as they're all just as bad).
