Hey,

I heard that the new guy running Cogent Co. is no longer allowing web hosting companies that allow adult content to host through their pipes (amazing). Everyone thinks it an ethics thing, but IMO I think that was probably a smart move. How else can you use not so great bandwidth and a lot of it.. Porn :). He just cut costs by half heh.

where did you hear this?

I will find where I read it, but I did see it =) Now the real question is if they will enforce it. I know it is in the contract.

Now that would be interesting, but I doupt true. Have you seen it in print somewhere?

Depends on their ethics/morality vs profits.

If their bottom line is being adversly affected by this move then, they may decide that adult content wasn't that bad after all.

besides there are different levels of adult content. it's all a matter of interpretation

wow, then they will lose a lot of businesses..... sooo many adult hosts recently moved to their connection due to low price (not the number one adult hosts, but some small/medium sites, with great traffic anyway).

ps. it's like a selling 'Ferrari', but with max speed limit of 30mph..

Is this just a rumor?

The question is:

1. How would they intend to enforce such a thing?
2. Will adult content be banned from the network, or "all porno hosts" be told no more
3. What of existing clients/contracts?
and 4. Where'd you hear about this? Certainly is the first time i've heard this rumor (if nothing more).

I don't know if that's true, but what its a fact is that several of the largest TGP's don't allow posts from people that host on Cogent

Originally posted by porcupine

1. How would they intend to enforce such a thing?


That's the first question that came my mind, too.

Originally posted by FDrive


That's the first question that came my mind, too.

Just like local isp's and traffic monitoring, it's the exact same thing basically.

They're billing for bandwidth overages on cable/dsl, but the thing is, you argue to them "what did i do to use that" they have to provide viable evidence, and most of theirs is BS, a little meter that says "5gb" isn't gonna cut it, demand logfiles, etc. and they cant come up with it, demand content ("what did i download that took that much?!") and they can't provide it.

My defense has always been "how can you proove i used any of that when theres thousands of people scanning my ip's daily for trojans, etc. that takes up bandwidth too ya know.

Except for the mega porn hosts (adult only), i think it would be one big fat "proove it!" scenario.

Er... heh

Its simple to do really... same way networks have filtering systems for porn in office buildings or public libraries ... its quite possible, while it couldn't block all of it, it would get the majority of it. Also its quite easy to prove, just get shown a router log of ur porn domains passing traffic.

Unless i see this in a PR or contract i think this is just BS.

We have Cogent coming in 30 Days so I will make sure to ask them about this as well.. That would suck.

Originally posted by DanielP
Er... heh

Its simple to do really... same way networks have filtering systems for porn in office buildings or public libraries ... its quite possible, while it couldn't block all of it, it would get the majority of it. Also its quite easy to prove, just get shown a router log of ur porn domains passing traffic.

possibly, but try doing that on a backbone thats got 80gbps of capacity and im sure you'll see theres more to it :)

Not really, if it was implemented the traffic would probabbly be cut in half :)

Even then its a one at a time deal, you filter it customer by customer if you have to, cutting off the ones who are doing porn. So in reality your only talking about at most 1,000 mbps at a time.

Originally posted by DanielP
Not really, if it was implemented the traffic would probabbly be cut in half :)

Even then its a one at a time deal, you filter it customer by customer if you have to, cutting off the ones who are doing porn. So in reality your only talking about at most 1,000 mbps at a time.

Filtering 1gbps of connectivity is nothing like filtering an office with a t1-t3. It's still no trivial job, and to do it efficiently and very cheap, i dont think its something they'll be doing realistically. They'll probably rely on reports, and the peoples business site, etc.

Even *if* they just rely on reports and tracking down the large users they'll cut off a lot of people

I just called cogent asking them to email me regarding this.

*shrug*

let us know what they say :)

^^^BUMP^^^


Anyone have an update on this rumor?

Originally posted by porcupine


Filtering 1gbps of connectivity is nothing like filtering an office with a t1-t3. It's still no trivial job, and to do it efficiently and very cheap, i dont think its something they'll be doing realistically. They'll probably rely on reports, and the peoples business site, etc.

well if it was up to me and I had to find porn on a network this is the steps I would do. Somewhat brut force but it should work.

All traffic is IP dominated.

therefore make list the top 64000 IP's that have huge traffic

then reverse dns them.

those that have domain names dump into a new list.

scan that list for offensive words IE: P*rn, S*x .....

do a basic list of that. now you got a list of IP's that belong on your net work that have a chance of porno stuff. now surf and bang you got it.

mike

Originally posted by ADEhost


scan that list for offensive words IE: P*rn, S*x .....


What if the site is a health-related site with information on sexually transmitted diseases, etc? Filtering based on words is /never/ a good idea.

Originally posted by FDrive


What if the site is a health-related site with information on sexually transmitted diseases, etc? Filtering based on words is /never/ a good idea.

Hi there Fdrive,

yes your right, but a basic list that has a "chance" of being porn related.

I did mention that there was a ton of brute force to this one LOL

Mike

Porcupine, do they bill on bandwidth overages on Cable/DSL where you live? (presuming the USA as I normally do) (or anyone else)

In the UK whilst our DC's are expensive comparativly on bandwidth, we can 'rape' our Cable/DSL connections as much as we want and they don't care. Even if it's £15GBP/mo only for 512/128

Originally posted by The Laughing Cow
Porcupine, do they bill on bandwidth overages on Cable/DSL where you live? (presuming the USA as I normally do) (or anyone else)

In the UK whilst our DC's are expensive comparativly on bandwidth, we can 'rape' our Cable/DSL connections as much as we want and they don't care. Even if it's £15GBP/mo only for 512/128

They claim to, but i've yet to see it :D

This is nothing more than a rumor, just like the price increases. Their AUP hasn't changed:

http://www.cogentco.com/policy.html

Just a FYI.. Nobody ever called me back but I spoke to one of my friends who was about to buy another 100 MBit/s from them and he said that the guy told him that they are planning to move to this direction so I guess its not offical yet? I doubt he would lie to me, he already has 100 MBit with Cogent as is. (this stopped him from getting the next 100)