Busted
@insightBB.com
| Insight AUP Violation Anyone seen one of these emails? Local CSRs state that they went out today. The tech that I talked to at 800-397-9982 was surprised & hadn't heard anything about it b4 my call.
So what is illegal? Is Remote Desktop Connection in WinXP OK? How about VNC / pcAnywhere? He stated that they were busting Kazaa & Morpheus users. What do you think?
Dear Insightbb.com Customer,
To ensure that all Insightbb.com customers consistently receive the highest
quality service available, Insight monitors network usage to ensure that
usage activity does not violate our policies and procedures as detailed in
our Acceptable Use Policy.
It has come to our attention that you are running at least one server on the
network. This is in violation of the Insightbb.com Acceptable Use Policy.
We must hereby notify you to uninstall your server(s) software and cease
other activity in violation of the Policy within 48 hours after receipt of this
communication. If you do not comply with this notice, we will disconnect
your Insightbb.com service.
As you know, the use of servers and other such violations of the Policy
place an unusually large burden on the network. Insightbb.com is a
residential service. Bandwidth and data storage resources are designed to
support residential usage. In maintaining compliance with our Policy, we
are protecting the interests of the tens of thousands of customers who are
using the service appropriately.
For more information about the Insightbb.com Acceptable Use Policy, please
visit www.insightbb.com. We are confident that you appreciate the urgency
of our request and look forward to keeping you as an Insightbb.com customer
in good standing.
Regards,
Insight Security | |
|
blah blah blah
@insightBB.com | Re: Insight AUP Violation that's scary, well I guess I won't try hosting any game server then | |
|
 | WeKnSmith
join:2001-08-09
Noblesville, IN | Re: Insight AUP Violation I think there is no question, a game server is a violation of the AUP. | |
|
2kmaro
Think
Premium,ExMod 1 BC
join:2000-07-11
ColossalCave
clubs:  
| Well, Busted, you haven't said specifically what you are using/have set up on your system.
Did YOU receive one of them, and if not, then where did you get your copy?
There are a couple of ways a provider can determine if it appears you're running a server that they consider illegal:
#1 - watch your bandwidth usage. If upload usage starts hitting all time highs, then they can take a closer look and see what ports are open on your system and that gives them a real good idea of what type server you're running (80 or 8080 = HTTP, 21 = FTP, etc.)
#2 - make either a random or organized effort to connect to known server ports on IPs within their domain, when they connect, they know they've got a server.
--
Waste is such a terrible thing to mine. | |
|
| WeKnSmith
join:2001-08-09
Noblesville, IN
 ·AT&T Midwest
| Re: Insight AUP Violation Just checking on us 2kmaro? Nice to see you back...
I think the point of the original post is to question what is/isn't acceptable use of the network.
Some things leave little question:
1. hosting a web site on http
2. game servers
3. ftp server (although I could see some users looking at it as a form of pcAnywhere/VNC)
4. providing mail service
the list goes on...
What about file sharing apps (Kazaa, Morpheus, Audio Galaxy) & remote connection programs (VNC, pcAnywhere, GoToMyPC, Remote Desktop in WinXP), etc...
I think there should be a distinct description of what is allowed, and what is not (P2P stuff...) | |
|
| |
2kmaro
Think
Premium,ExMod 1 BC
join:2000-07-11
ColossalCave
clubs:
| Re: Insight AUP Violation Usually there's a sharp distinction between usage of the programs you've listed.
Some are general purpose "everybody is welcome" type of programs/servers: http, ftp, mail, P2P of various types. Yes, even gaming.
But the "tunnel" applications are normally used by people in a very small, relatively unchanging group: VNC, pcAnywhere, Remote Anywhere etc.
A lot of restrictions are put on, I think, because of the end purpose of the application. Money is playing in to it also. The big stink about p2p is all of the copyright violations that take place through it. The problem isn't that this is something new - years ago I thought very little about making a copy of an album onto cassette tape and giving one to a close friend or family member. But the sheer scale of the sharing enabled by the internet has added a whole new dimension to it - and groups like the RIAA see it as a threat and are using their very deep pockets to limit it any way possible.
I tend to look at it this way: if it is for my PERSONAL use and convenience and not something I've put up so that the entire internet community can use it, then the provider shouldn't have a real problem with it. But if I crank up a mail server or start enabling FTP of a bunch of audio or video files, then I'd expect to be in over my head in short order.
--
Waste is such a terrible thing to mine. | |
|
IGGY
No Guru Just Here To Help
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-30
Chatham, IL
| I've yet to see this email in my Inbox. But if they try to kill P2P usage. That would be like shooting themselves in the foot. Whether they ( or others ) like it. P2P is the "killer app" that started all the hype for broadband. An ftp server, game server, P2P should all be allowed. Within reason. My opinion only. If in fact usage levels were effected by this. They could charge a $10 flat fee to the customer. For the higher usage. All this should be clearly stated. In sign up material, the website, and with customer service reps. DSL providers don't whine about this type of usage. So cable companies are going to have to learn. If this is a question of excessive usage. Then as I stated above. Charge the customer a higher flat fee. For the extra usage. Punishing your high end user. For using the connection they pay for. To it's max. Shouldn't result in punishment. Don't they realize shutting these people down. Is killing there biggest fan. Word of mouth can kill a company. And if the competition doesn't cry about this. Then you lose a customer to the competition. Instead of fighting this. Insight should learn to adapt! Instead of being cry babies. They should change there business model to adapt. They shut down uncappers. Which I understand. But it's in a way stupid. You've just killed a high usage customer. Who in most cases. Would be glad to pay more for the higher speed. Most people uncap. Because of the horrible upload caps. Most of these people have asked for tiered service. And have stated they would pay more. But the cable companies have yet to adapt. So out of frustration. People uncap. Without competition! The consumer will have to keep putting up with millions of restrictions. Funny how they promote broadband as more then web surfing & email. But when you do more than just that. They punish you. They need to get off there backside! Stop talking about the revolution. And start releasing the new services they brag about all time. Such as tiered service! They also need to face reality! P2P pays there bills. And for the record! NO = I rarely use these type of services. But have been a beta tester for several companies. Who do in fact offer such services.
--
*IGGYZ* *TeamZ* | |
|
|
blah blah blah
@insightBB.com
| Re: Insight AUP Violation Go Iggy!
I posted before about running a game server "within reason" like once or twice a week. Personally I think that should be allowed. As far as P2P file sharing apps, I can understand why they would want to block those, since they are usually sharing illegal stuff. You are right though about it being a reason for broadband's popularity.
btw, I get hits on FTP and some ports that I think are for P2P apps almost every night, and I have never run any of those kind of programs here, so Insight might be scanning for open ports like 2kmaro said. | |
|
| | 
hockeyfun1$
Down With Dc Exec
Premium
join:2000-11-26
New Hartford, NY | Re: Insight AUP Violation What kind of server is it that you are running? | |
|
| | |
blah blah blah
@insightBB.com | Re: Insight AUP Violation I am not running a server, I'm afriad of them booting me off for something stupid like a once-a-week game server with some friends. | |
|
| | | |
hockeyfun1$
Down With Dc Exec
Premium
join:2000-11-26
New Hartford, NY | Re: Insight AUP Violation A Game Server is still a server. 
Why would they send you the letter then? Does the game use a lot of bandwidth? What port does the gaming server run on? | |
|
| | | | |
blah blah blah
@insightBB.com
| Re: Insight AUP Violation hey sorry to confuse everyone but I am not the Busted that started this topic, I had a separate post a week or so ago about servers to get opinion on it
anyway, I flat out asked the tech support in an email about my little situation of wanting to host a server once or twice a week for some games
They said to just make sure the ports are firewalled when not in use so they don't get picked up as an active server.
So that should answer the questions if there were any. Insight does do port scanning on higher bandwidth usage clients. | |
|
| | | | | |
hockeyfun1$
Down With Dc Exec
Premium
join:2000-11-26
New Hartford, NY | Re: Insight AUP Violation So if you are running a firewall wouldn't you see a few thousand alerts (or the max it shows) from the same address probably? | |
|
| |
IGGY
No Guru Just Here To Help
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-30
Chatham, IL
| I have no doubt. They are doing auto scans. But the question is? Where does this all end. I can name several legit uses for all the things they like to block. And again. They state you can use your broadband for this & that. They hype how broadband is more than email & web surfing. Then punish you. When you use your connection. For what they advertised you could use it for. If your not running a 24/7 server. Or downloading or uploading gigs of data a month. Then I can't see why they would snap. And if someone is using to much bandwidth. Give them a choice. Either pay more. Or no service. Seems very simple to me. There competition is definitely a lot more liberal on game servers etc. If Insight & others. Continue they way they have. They will in fact loose business. And several post in this forum. Show they have lost customers. And don't seem to eager to keep them. It's sad how little power the consumer has in all this.
--
*IGGYZ* *TeamZ* | |
|
| | |
hockeyfun1$
Down With Dc Exec
Premium
join:2000-11-26
New Hartford, NY | Re: Insight AUP Violation But not everyone runs servers. It's only a small percentage that wont have much of an impact if they lose them or not. | |
|
| | | |
IGGY
No Guru Just Here To Help
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-30
Chatham, IL
|  Re: Insight AUP Violation
--
*IGGYZ* *TeamZ* | |
|
|
walleeys
join:2002-05-24
Lexington, KY
| You were lucky to get a warning message before getting shut off. About 2 weeks ago my service just quit working. When I called the local Insight office, they told me it had been disabled for running a server. I had accidentally left a sharing program called Direct Connect running over night, which probably caused me to use a lot of upstream bandwidth. I normally don't leave it running for very long to avoid this sort of problem. The guy was pretty nice about it and reactivated my account immediately and just told me to keep the usage at a minimum to avoid this in the future. He said that once they notice the high upload usage, they try connecting to the open ports on the IP in question and if they get a login prompt, it constitutes running a server. I have since reconfigured my router's firewall to not accept incoming connections and haven't had any trouble since. It looks to me like they don't mind you running any type of server until you start using a lot of upstream bandwidth. | |
|
indy0363
join:2002-01-26
Franklin, IN | is it insight doing the port scans?
or their evil master AT&T ? | |
|
|
blah blah blah
@insightBB.com | Re: Insight AUP Violation that is the question isn't it  | |
|
Phoenex
join:2002-03-22
Champaign, IL
| A tech from Insight locally told me of a story about a person running 10pcs via a router at a business that they checked because of the high usage on the IP. He stated that they did check the IP as a result of a network monitoring software notification. Insight does utilize network monitoring software just as any good network admin would to help troubleshoot, as a tool to gauge when and what to upgrade when there is congestion and find offenders. He told me that Insight did shut down this individual and closed his account. | |
|
| Anon | Haha. Insight is crying about 128k of bandwidth? Jeez. It would be hard enough to only have 128k of bandwidth, let alone an isp b*tching at you because you're using that minimal amount of bandwidth. Why does insight have to be like that? :\ They are NOT offering tier services, so why set so low of a cap? Even with that cap, why get mad about someone taking advantage of their small partition of bandwidth. Is using your 128k REALLY hurting the download/upload speeds of others? I doubt it.. | |
|
|
hockeyfun1$
Down With Dc Exec
Premium
join:2000-11-26
New Hartford, NY
| Re: Insight AUP Violation Yeah, because Insight plans on everyone having that as an upload and they don't have as much upload and download available as let's say a company who has caps of 5000/512.
To the post above; if it's a business they should have bought the business account.
--
Join DSLR's new Strategy Gaming Clan!
Join Team Discovery and find the cure for cancer! | |
|
| | 
lolwhat
We Are Toast
Premium
join:2001-06-11
USSA
·AT&T Midwest
 ·Future Nine Corpor..
| Re: Insight AUP Violation said by hockeyfun1:
if it's a business they should have bought the business account
InsightBB doesn't offer business access - at least, not yet. Point taken, though; that company should get DSL or a T-something. Of course, they're in Ameritech territory, which only recently started Pronto back up again in Illinois, so who knows when they could get DSL...
--
Yeah, well, at least your name isn't Michael Bolton.
Join Team Helix! | |
|
| | | Anon | I go with Iggy's point -- Some people don't WANT broadband with training wheels. I'm sure they have more than enough upstream to give at least a 256 or 350 cap. No company has that much of a gob of downstream and such a meager amount of upstream.. :P Besides -- we all know attbi powers insightbb. I've seen most/a lot of attbi users have 350 upload... And if they were having such trouble with connectivity with higher caps, why not have RR come in and do the job instead? Insight@RR has proven to be pretty good as I've seen.. | |
|
| | |
hockeyfun1$
Down With Dc Exec
Premium
join:2000-11-26
New Hartford, NY
| Re: Insight AUP Violation said by rutoro:
I'm sure they have more than enough upstream to give at least a 256 or 350 cap. No company has that much of a gob of downstream and such a meager amount of upstream..
Actually, every company is different. Also think. If an ISP is going to give a 128 kbps cap to everyone, what's the point of having 300 kbps available to the people if they aren't going to get to use it? It just costs extra money for the provider. With my provider in this area I get around 110 kbps of the 128 kbps. No point on even having an upload cap. The bandwidth for the upload isn't there. It just would cost the provider extra money. People use download more than the upload, that's why it's higher. Servers aren't allowed to be ran on your ISP, so they don't concentrate on the upload as much. People use the download way more if they aren't running servers. Then they give you the rest of the upload for what you might need it for without going overboard because there will be the people taking advantage of a higher upload.
--
Join DSLR's new Strategy Gaming Clan!
Join Team Discovery and find the cure for cancer!
[text was edited by author 2002-05-25 23:22:32] | |
|
| | | | | Anon | Re: Insight AUP Violation 256 and 350 wouldn't be going overboard.. :P Most providers carry more bandwidth than they need for future growth. Nobody knows if 50% more users will want cable, or if a dsl company will go out of business and the dsl market desimates for that community. Yeah, each community and provider is different, but all providors have to carry more incase of future growth.. I say up the cap for now, then they can always lower the cap to save money if the company is going through some bad times, or needs more bandwidth. Only getting 110kbps of your 128kbps might happen for different reasons too, maybe latency? heheh | |
|
| | | |
IGGY
No Guru Just Here To Help
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-30
Chatham, IL
| Well I've said this before. There are many providers. Still providing higher upload with no issues. And for around the same price. Or exact price we all currently pay. InsightBB is one of them. Yes I said InsightBB. And not just there users on RoadRunner. With that said. People use upload more than they realize. But I'll spare going through all that again. Also if you read this post = »Where is MY 256? ATTBI is raising caps for some users. If this was going to cause such an issue. Why would they do it? As for provider cost. There bandwidth cost are a lot lower than they try & get us to believe. I've posted on this before. There main cost are development cost. And paying for the mostly useless tech support. Thank Goodness support is getting better in my area. With cable there are technical reasons you can't have 3000/3000. But there is nothing to stop them. From running at 256 or higher. Even without tiered service upgrades. Other providers do this. With no issue. The minimum standard for upload should at the least be 256kpbs. And several companies with broadband applications in the works. Would like that to be even higher. But your cable companies have no interest in stream video over the net. They aren't in the business. And it would hurt there cable interest. This is 1 of the many reasons we get stuck with low upload. Servers aren't the reason. And I've stated exactly why before. But again I'll spare the re hash.
--
*IGGYZ* *TeamZ* | |
|
Chuck D
@insightBB.com
| Here is the deal guys.
Games are fine.
Game servers are fine for short periods of time. (Dont run it 24-7)
Ftp's are a no no
Web servers are a no-no
Kazza and other P2P apps are ok.
Pc anywhere type utils are fine.
Just dont run 24-7 "dedicated servers for warez, pr0n, etc and you will be fine.
I work there ok. | |
|
|
hockeyfun1$
Down With Dc Exec
Premium
join:2000-11-26
New Hartford, NY
| Re: Insight AUP Violation Welcome to DSLR! You should register! They could sure use more people stopping by who work for the ISPs so it would be great to have you.
That's good to hear, it is pretty much like all the other ISPs in terms of what can and can't be ran.
--
Join DSLR's new Strategy Gaming Clan!
Join Team Discovery and find the cure for cancer! | |
|
| | Laggy
join:2002-05-07
Indianapolis, IN | Re: Insight AUP Violation pretty much the same response I got from my email to them | |
|
| |
XuhQshinR
join:2001-09-18
Bradenton, FL
| Reply to the original post.
I also received this AUP Violation notice May 20th 2000.
As of June 3rd I will also be an employee with Insight. I called and had them run a trace on what was leading them to believe that a server was running. As someone mentioned in another reply to this post Insightbb was doing port scans and it turns out that a port for FTP was open. I was not running an FTP server. However my router was set with the FTP port open.
Certain open ports will show a possibility that a server exists.
The bottom line here is that you should do a port scan yourself and see what is open. That way you can shut these open ports that are not in use. Port scans can be very beneficial to your own protection from "Evil Doers" (My President taught me that) They can even tell you if File and Print sharing is on (dangerous for cable users).
The tech support people at Insight are fairly busy but are willing to help you if you can not find what ports are causing the server detection during a port scan.
They don't want to ban anyone but full time servers will definitely get you the boot. Playing online games is ok but do not leave the thing up while you sleep, work, go to school etc...
Hope this answers a little bit of your question of concern on the AUP Violation notice you received. | |
|
deathmuppet
@insightBB.com | if they're already restricting our upload, how can they justify telling us what we're allowed to do with that tiny bit of bandwidth? we're allowed 128kbps of upload, we're just not allowed to use it. | |
|
|
hockeyfun1$
Down With Dc Exec
Premium
join:2000-11-26
New Hartford, NY
| Re: Insight AUP Violation said by deathmuppet:
how can they justify telling us what we're allowed to do with that tiny bit of bandwidth?
They don't have to. They set the rules and you abide by them. If not, then you might have to suffer the consequences.
--
Join DSLR's new Strategy Gaming Clan!
Join Team Discovery and find the cure for cancer! | |
|
Engineer_TA
join:2001-08-26
Lexington, KY
clubs:
 ·Insight Communicat..
| Here's a small story...
About two weeks ago, my wife called me (I was on a business trip) and stated that the Internet was down....
Two days later, I called Insightbb and the tech said something was strange and he would call me back...
A few minutes later, a senior tech called me back and stated that I was running 4 servers. I said "HUH!" as I'm not running anything! I thought and then asked what ports...21, 80 and two others (don't remember which ones)....I asked if it could be my router, he said NO!
Well, after digging around, I discovered that it was indeed my router responding with a login prompt on those ports. I read around and fixed it, but the gripe I have is that I received NO notification what-so-ever...just a shutoff. On top of that, I lost 3 days worth of e-mail as the server didn't hold them when my service was shut off!
I haven't called back yet and explained...not sure if it's worth the bother...but it does make me a little angry..
Ok...enough of that....just thought I would share! | |
|
|
| SineSwiper
join:2002-04-04
Louisville, KY
| Re: Insight AUP Violation said by frankenfeet:
I really don't understand how they can shut you down for running a server. We pay for the up and download. Obviously your can't use any more bandwidth than you pay for. If you pay for 3000/128 than you should be able to use it, 24/7 if you want. Maybe I'm too simple minded for this though.
Whether you agree with it or not, it does appear in their AUP/TOS thingy. Personally, I'd like to give everybody a chalenge: Give me a cable ISP that doesn't give you any restrictions on servers or what you do with your bandwidth, and I'll eat my keyboard. | |
|
| |
IGGY
No Guru Just Here To Help
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-30
Chatham, IL
| Re: Insight AUP Violation »www.optonline.net/Cservice/Artic···,00.html I could be wrong. But from a quick read of OOL TOS it looks as if it is ok to run them there. Or at least it stated you could run an IRC server. Just from a quick read. Also DSL providers aren't as hard on customers about this type of thing. But if your going to ban ftp you should ban p2p. It's basically the same thing. Honestly they could boot me for using Paltalk or other chat software. Considering it & others. Have file sharing capability. And file share back & forth. Would seem to be a server to me. If I serve a file to someone else. Guess I shouldn't add file attachments to email anymore either. They might claim I'm running a server. Since I sent a file to a friend. P.S. = A firewall solves a good amount of the bs. If there scanning for open ports.
--
*IGGYZ*
*TeamZ*
[text was edited by author 2002-06-03 21:11:47]
[text was edited by author 2002-06-03 21:12:52] | |
|
SineSwiper
join:2002-04-04
Louisville, KY
| You know, some of these are probably Win2k servers, with people who don't know how to shut off their services. Now, I think MS shouldn't have these on by default, but if you're pirating Win2K Enterprise SERVER, it's implied that you're running a SERVER, so watch what you're doing with that machine and with what ports you have open.
I'm sure they're pissed at all of the blank IIS pages floating around that are passing CodeRed and Nimda viruses all over the net. Open-relay SMTP servers are probably another issue. Linux boxes also come with a lot of open ports, depending on the distro you're using.
I really don't think file-sharing services are an issue. That's the whole point of a HSD connection | |
|
SineSwiper
join:2002-04-04
Louisville, KY
| I'm not saying that I agree with it, either. I want 384 or 512 kbps, too, but honestly, the cable companies are starting to get reemed for the amount of bandwidth being used by customers, even though they are capped, and it's hurting them. (Not that I have any respect for monopolizing cable companies that choke as much money out of you as they can, but...)
When you compare a T1 line that pumps half of the b/w as your cable connection, and the price of at least $700/mo on a T1, I think you're getting a good deal, and they have every right to try to restrict what you run on it.
BTW, a good port scanner can scan ports IP-by-IP-per-port instead of port-by-port-per-IP. This kind of port scanning can fool firewalls. And I know they have this type of thing, because I've seen it on my firewall logs. | |
|
|
IGGY
No Guru Just Here To Help
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-30
Chatham, IL
| Re: Insight AUP Violation They can knock all day lol. But unless they use something other than a scanner. They won't get in. I've had many an @HOME tech tell me they couldn't ping me in the past. I've seen the old @HOME Security scans. I'm sure the ISP has something similar to this. If not even more advanced by now. But a good firewall would have stopped a few of the above issues. In my opinion only.
--
*IGGYZ* *TeamZ* | |
|
|
|
|
