Re: FCC Privacy NPRM
Page Not Found Link wasn't copied correctly, the "consumer-privacy" bit was cut off. Here's the working link: https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-releases-proposed-rules-protect-broadband-consumer-privacy On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Sean Donelan <s...@donelan.com> wrote: > On Thu, 14 Apr 2016, Livingood, Jason wrote: > >> I have not yet read all of the 147 pages of the FCC Privacy NPRM - >> >> https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-releases-proposed-rules-protect-broadband- >> consumer-privacy. But it may be worth noting, especially for this >> audience, that the FCC proposes considering things like IP addresses and >> geo-location information to be Customer Proprietary Information. >> > > Pretty much all ISPs should take a look at this NPRM. Although its > advertised as a "privacy" rule-making, it has a several sections on ISP > data security and data breach notification, including mandatory reporting > to the FCC and FBI. > >
Re: FCC Privacy NPRM
On Thu, 14 Apr 2016, Livingood, Jason wrote: I have not yet read all of the 147 pages of the FCC Privacy NPRM - https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-releases-proposed-rules-protect-broadband- consumer-privacy. But it may be worth noting, especially for this audience, that the FCC proposes considering things like IP addresses and geo-location information to be Customer Proprietary Information. Pretty much all ISPs should take a look at this NPRM. Although its advertised as a "privacy" rule-making, it has a several sections on ISP data security and data breach notification, including mandatory reporting to the FCC and FBI.
FCC Privacy NPRM [was Re: GeoIP database]
I have not yet read all of the 147 pages of the FCC Privacy NPRM - https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-releases-proposed-rules-protect-broadband- consumer-privacy. But it may be worth noting, especially for this audience, that the FCC proposes considering things like IP addresses and geo-location information to be Customer Proprietary Information. While IANAL it seems that this could perhaps complicate efforts to make GeoIP services more accurate. But who knows. Jason P.S. While these proposed rules would only initially apply to ISPs, from what I understand following adoption there will be a move for so-called parity such that any app or edge provider in the US might have to meet the same standards. On 4/12/16, 8:17 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Jean-Francois Mezei" <nanog-boun...@nanog.org on behalf of jfmezei_na...@vaxination.ca> wrote: >All GeoIP services would be forced to document their default lat/long >values so that users know that when these values, they know it is a >generic one for that country. (or supply +181. +91.0 which is an >invalid value indicating that there is no lat/long, look at country code >given). >
