Hacking the SurfboardMotorola firmware hacks evolve ( old news - 11:01AM Thursday Feb 05 2004) tags: hardware · cable · securityWhile yesterday we mentioned how many are getting more from their router by upgrading to third-party modified firmware, the popular Surfboard modem is also seeing some less legitimate modifications. To the chagrin of ISP's, many groups are developing a new generation of cable modem hacking tools that do much more than simply uncap service. Unfortunately uncapping your cable modem can result in service termination - or in some rare cases - much worse as one Ohio businessman we interviewed last year will tell you; so doing so is obviously not advised. Since more newbie friendly uncapping tools showed up in 2001 and 2002, there's been a flurry of less technical users (unaware of how quickly their experiment can land them in hot-water) showing up in our forums begging for forgiveness and a solution after they've found their service terminated. This interesting Security Focus article takes a look at Sigma, a new program released last month that's already been downloaded hundreds of times. Sigma is flashed into the non-volatile memory of certain Motorola modems allowing complete control over the hardware. Hacking the Surfboard with an inexpensive chip and a soldering iron, users rlogin to the device and tinker with the modem's VxWorks operating system and web interface. From there the user can not only uncap the modem, they can often "unregister" the modem to try and obtain free service, as well as snoop through the network's raw data stream (often unencrypted, unless the ISP turns the DOCSIS encryption option on - which most don't). A CableLabs spokesman in the article claims the hack only works on DOCSIS 1.0 modems, and will be more difficult with DOCSIS 1.1 and 2.0 where modems only accept firmware digitally signed by the cable company. The designers of the hack argue that as long as the customer has the hardware in their hands, there's always a way.
Related:- Wednesday Evening Links
- Friday Evening Links
- Monday Evening Links
- Unions Want Improper Cable Grounding Inspected, Too
- Wednesday Evening Links
- Friday Evening Links
- Time Warner Taking Pre-Orders For SDV/CableCARD Adapters
- Time Warner CableCARD Fix On The Way
|
page: 1 · 2  |
 
Lumberjack
Premium
join:2003-01-18
Newport News, VA
 ·Cox HSI
| Lock box on the modems? I don't think it would hurt my feelings if we didn't have to pay for modems if the cable co puts it out side and just gives me ethernet. That would be kinda cool. But then again, it removes something that I could potentially replace if there is a problem.
In any case, it serves those thief's right if they get the boot. They will make it worse for everybody else that plays fair.
--
BBr UT2003 Clan | |
|  | 
CoxCable4
Temp banned from BBR more then anyone
join:2002-10-02
PwnZone
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Lock box on the modems? i've had experience with uncapping surfboard cable modems. back when I did it I used whatever programs I could find, and had to emulate tftp server have the cable modem download the hacked file from me. sb2100 worked the best. sounds like this new program makes it easier to ppl to do it. I was able to uncap my upload pretty high, to 5mbps, and my download past 10mbps. cox's speeds have greatly increased since then, so I have no need to risk getting caught for extra speed boost. the main reason I wanted to uncap was because our speeds sucked, back in the 192/1.5 days you could hardly get 50/300. I found that uncapping didn't really solve any problems, since top speed would fluctuate just like normal speeds would. it was still nice to be able to go on at 3am, and blow websites away. the longest I was uncapped was for 30 days, then the cable modem would reset. | |
| | lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL | Decent desktop computer $875.00
Broadband Cable Modem from Best Buy $79.99
High speed cable internet service $42.95
Having your services canceled for uncapping - priceless! | |
| | | 
wasg
@mi.ch | Re: Lock box on the modems? It's a good thing there are more than one choice of internet service in many areas... | |
| | | |
orionplus
@comcast.net | I hacked my SB5100 and my frinds remotly. not uncaped. just to 5mb/s bidirectional. learn to read hex packets. | |
| | | killer666
join:2003-03-13
70000 |  Re: Lock box on the modems?
have my Ip with 10...... and an unlimited config file but I can't get the
modem to take it. | |
| 
Stewy85
Premium
join:2003-01-16
Sharon, WI
clubs: | Well..... Would it be illegal to increase the speed to what we should be getting? 
--
0111010001110010011101010111010001101000 | |
| 
Rexter
YeeHaw
join:2002-11-17
cloud 9
| If it's my hardware........ If it's my hardware, I'll do whatever the hell I want to it. It's asinine to have the bandwidth cap programed into the customers hardware. That's like a bank keeping the key to the vault in everyone's safety deposit box. The cable modem is a bridge, and with the exception of encryption, it should only function as a bridge. It would not be so hard to limit bandwidth per IP address at the node. This whole situation is just stupid. | |
| | 
Qumahlin
Never Enough Time
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-05
West Chester, PA
| Re: If it's my hardware........ said by Rexter  :
If it's my hardware, I'll do whatever the hell I want to it. It's asinine to have the bandwidth cap programed into the customers hardware. That's like a bank keeping the key to the vault in everyone's safety deposit box. The cable modem is a bridge, and with the exception of encryption, it should only function as a bridge. It would not be so hard to limit bandwidth per IP address at the node. This whole situation is just stupid.
No, Limiting bandwidth at the CMTS using QoS or other traffic flow methods wastes processor cycles/CMTS CPU power. The modems were meant to be this way it is part of the docsis specs.
In 1.1 and 2.0 systems the CMTS's are more "efficient" at handling pure QoS traffic control but it is still better off to limit the bandwidth at the modem.
--
Forum Posts:4004 | |
| | |
Rexter
YeeHaw
join:2002-11-17
cloud 9
| Re: If it's my hardware........ I understand that it's in the specs. The point that I am making is that the specs are flawed. No other HSI service, that I know of, works this way. It is the responsibility of th ISP to maintain their network on their end, not on the customers end, not on the customers equipment. | |
| | | |
Qumahlin
Never Enough Time
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-05
West Chester, PA
| Re: If it's my hardware........ said by Rexter :
I understand that it's in the specs. The point that I am making is that the specs are flawed. No other HSI service, that I know of, works this way. It is the responsibility of th ISP to maintain their network on their end, not on the customers end, not on the customers equipment.
There were plenty fo DSL providers who used to set caps at the customers DSL/router instead of the DSLAM. The ISP is maintaining their network just because part of the control is placed in an area the customer is not supposed to be accessing anyway doesn't exactly make it flawed. Just different.
What is flawed is manufacturers not bothering to test that their modems were up to spec. Manufacturers with "leaks" giving out shelled firmware so that firmware coders know exactly what they have to work with, etc, etc.
The bottom line is that as is this really does not effect much. It is easy to catch the users who decide to uncap if the ISP wants too and the "etherboot" method of install Sigma is far to challenging to the average user who has no cable making/soldering knowledge
--
Forum Posts:4004 | |
| | | | |
Rexter
YeeHaw
join:2002-11-17
cloud 9
| Re: If it's my hardware........ said by Qumahlin :
There were plenty fo DSL providers who used to set caps at the customers DSL/router instead of the DSLAM.
First off I'm not so sure that this is true. But even so the key word would be "used to." | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA | Re: If it's my hardware........ There are no grounds for legal action over cable modem hacking. | |
| | | | | | | 
xpkranger
No gnus is good gnus. -Gary Gnu
Premium
join:2000-10-27
Atlanta, GA
clubs:
| Re: If it's my hardware........ said by JakCrow :
There are no grounds for legal action over cable modem hacking.
Isn't there something in the EULA or service agreement that a would say different?
--
When I die, I want to die like my grandmother, who died peacefully in her sleep. Not screaming like all the passengers in her car.-Author Unknown | |
| | | | | | | |
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA
 ·DSL EXTREME
| Re: If it's my hardware........ An EULA is only a "contract" between parties. Worse they could do is terminate someone's service and -maybe- bill them something extra. Some cable companies have tried to get people charged with "theft of service" crimes, but since cable internet isn't regulated, theft of service laws don't apply. | |
| | | | | | | | |
xpkranger
No gnus is good gnus. -Gary Gnu
Premium
join:2000-10-27
Atlanta, GA
clubs:
| Re: If it's my hardware........ Perhaps you're right, but I wouldn't want to be the one to test it out, at least not against the lawyers I work for. Besides, I've got 3000K already. (wish I had better upstream though - too bad I can't give back .5 for upstream) Even if it doesn't violate the letter of the agreement, I think that it does violate the spirit. Either way, I'm definitely not going to be the first one to cast a stone. (Graveyards in my closets and all...) Good luck!
--
When I die, I want to die like my grandmother, who died peacefully in her sleep. Not screaming like all the passengers in her car.-Author Unknown | |
| | | | | | | | | medici
join:2001-02-22
Shohola, PA
| IANAL, and I don't think you are, either. A contract is a legally binding document. Once you've agreed to the terms of service and accepted the contract, you are liable for any breaches of those terms. Straightforward contract law. If the cable company wants to make an example of you, they can sue for theft of service, disruption of business, their costs to investigate and mitigate your unauthorized use, legal fees and punitive damages.
Also, AFAIK, there is no requirement of specific legislative protection in order to prosecute theft of service.
What I find is interesting is that ISP's seem to have plenty of money to spend on capping customer's bandwidth, detecting modem hackers, tracking bandwidth utilization and penalizing so-called bandwidth hogs. But when it comes to stuff like firewall protection, junk email filtering, virus protection, traffic shaping, and just good old customer education and support, that's too expensive (even though there are plenty of free or low-cost tools to address most of these categories). | |
| | | | | | | | | |
xpkranger
No gnus is good gnus. -Gary Gnu
Premium
join:2000-10-27
Atlanta, GA
clubs:
| Re: If it's my hardware........ Where is the the line though between civil and criminal? If I go and take the filters off the line that at eye level on the side of my house and allow HBO, Cinemax, et al in to my house they're sure going to try have me prosecuted for criminal theft of services. And if there's a lawyer in the bunch out there, where does the DMCA fall into all of this? I thought it might have something to say about it. Also, does the law vary from state to state or is it Federal because of the ICC?
--
When I die, I want to die like my grandmother, who died peacefully in her sleep. Not screaming like all the passengers in her car.-Author Unknown | |
| | | | | | | | | |
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA
·DSL EXTREME
| said by medici :
IANAL, and I don't think you are, either. A contract is a legally binding document. Once you've agreed to the terms of service and accepted the contract, you are liable for any breaches of those terms. Straightforward contract law.
Signing up with an ISP is not a contract agreement in the way two corporations sign a contract to do business with each other. I have yet to see the TOS of a cable ISP state that they will sue you or you could be arrested if you hack your modem. No, the worse they can do is cancel your service and maybe charge you some kind of cancellation fee, -if- it's in their TOS.
said by medici :
If the cable company wants to make an example of you, they can sue for theft of service, disruption of business, their costs to investigate and mitigate your unauthorized use, legal fees and punitive damages.
In a case like that, the TOS would most likely work against the ISP. The "theft of service" charge would be hard for the ISP to make stick, since the courts have previously said that it's difficult to quantify just how much "service" was stolen.
said by medici :
Also, AFAIK, there is no requirement of specific legislative protection in order to prosecute theft of service.
I do believe there is, especially with cable. Modem hacking is a simple TOS violation, nothing more.
said by medici :
What I find is interesting is that ISP's seem to have plenty of money to spend on capping customer's bandwidth, detecting modem hackers, tracking bandwidth utilization and penalizing so-called bandwidth hogs. But when it comes to stuff like firewall protection, junk email filtering, virus protection, traffic shaping, and just good old customer education and support, that's too expensive (even though there are plenty of free or low-cost tools to address most of these categories).
They certainly aren't spending that money on upgrading their networks if they feel the need to crack down on "bandwidth hogs". | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Rexter
YeeHaw
join:2002-11-17
cloud 9
| said by medici :
But when it comes to stuff like firewall protection, junk email filtering, virus protection, traffic shaping, and just good old customer education and support, that's too expensive (even though there are plenty of free or low-cost tools to address most of these categories).
I really don't want my ISP to do this stuff. This is something that I want full control of. You have to keep in mind that security comes at the expense of functionality. It would be nice to have it maybe as an option, but based on past events, they are more likely to just force it on everyone. | |
| | | | | | | 
pit_viper
1 Shot, 1 Kill, No Remorse, I Decide
join:2002-07-24
Play_Hockey
| said by JakCrow :
There are no grounds for legal action over cable modem hacking.
No but a company can take civil action....
--
"Arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics, even if you win, you're still retarded" | |
| | | | | | | |
Rexter
YeeHaw
join:2002-11-17
cloud 9 | Re: If it's my hardware........ I agree, but they would have to prove damages. | |
| | | | | | | 
N3OGH
Will it all be Obama's fault now?
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon Online DSL
| Perhaps not in California, but in PA, one could argue that Pa. C.S. sec 910 Manufacture, distribution, use or possession of devices for theft of telecommunications systems might. The statute states that:
"Any person commits an offense if... for commission of theft of a telecommunications service or to disrupt,transmit, decrypt, yadda yadday yadda.... or acquisition of any telecommunications service without the consent of the telecommunications service provider."
The statute does specifically mention the modification of devices connected to a telecommunications network, and does not differentiate based on the ownership of the device. The statute also specifically states that the definition of a Telecommunications service is " any service provided by any radio,telephone,cable television, satellite,microwave, or wireless distribution system, including, but not limited to, any and all electronic, data,video, audio, Internet access, telephonic, microwave and radio communications, transmissions, signals and services.
First offense is a misdemeanor first degree, second offense is a felony.
How long do you think it is before Comcast goes after people for uncapping their modems. All they have to do is give the evidence to the local PD and shazamm, your name too, can be on the top of a criminal complaint.
Since I have no desire to be the test case, I will NOT be uncapping my modem. I don't have a legal plan that robust.
Besides, the "It's my hardware" argument is an illogical one, considering your cell phone is your hardware, you're not allowed to tinker with it, your cable box could be your hardware, you can't tinker with it to get free spice channel. Your CAR is your own hardware, but drive it on the road with no plates and no insurance, and expect to get a ticket....
Once again, just my 2 cents | |
| | | | | | | | 
DadeMurphy
Rbettenc
Premium
join:2002-07-25
Danvers, MA
clubs: | Re: If it's my hardware........ Cable HSI is not considered telecommunications. | |
| | | | | | | | | medici
join:2001-02-22
Shohola, PA | Re: If it's my hardware........ It is in PA. And it might be subject to interpretation elsewhere if you use VoIP. | |
| | | | | | | | |
N3OGH
Will it all be Obama's fault now?
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon Online DSL
| By PA law it is. The statute specifically states "Internet access" in the definition of telecommunications, as noted in the text of my previous post.
If the statute specifically states "internet access" , how then, is Comcast High speed INTERNET not telecommunications?
Just askin'' | |
| | | | | | | | | |
FreeBSDNut
@pacbell.n
|  Re: If it's my hardware........
| |
| | | | | | | | | | sharksfan3
Premium
join:2004-02-16
Pleasant Valley, NY | Re: If it's my hardware........ At the fed level you might be ok... but not the state. | |
| | | | | 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| said by Qumahlin :
The bottom line is that as is this really does not effect much. It is easy to catch the users who decide to uncap if the ISP wants too and the "etherboot" method of install Sigma is far to challenging to the average user who has no cable making/soldering knowledge
Oh i'm sure soon there'll be a flood of sites offering 'pre-modded surfboards' once this gets out.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
| | 
Ronin4740
join:2000-05-03
Saint Charles, MO
| Gawd... Okay, it's your TV - Does that make it legal to hack the cable connection so you get HBO, Showtime, etc... for free?
Yep, the modem is your hardware and yep you can use it to connect to the cable modem network but read the AUP for practically any cable internet service and you items which prohibit uncapping modems and/or modifying firmware.
Inlcuded for reference: Charter's AUP and Customer Agreement Links
»www.charter.com/site/rules.asp#aup
»www.charter.com/site/customeragreement.asp
Mod your firmware and/or uncap at your own risk. A simple query of the modem from the cable company's NOC will reveal your actions and may subject you to termination of service.
--
DSL? Why not Cable! | |
| | |
See 17 replies to this post | |
| 
Wall9
Tell Me, Did You See It Too?
Premium
join:2002-06-25
Dupo, IL | Mod it sure. It's yours. Having uncapped HSI is not yours. What's stupid about it?
You sound as if you're placing the blame on ISP's. | |
| | |
See 6 replies to this post | |
| 
Healbot
Premium
join:2003-07-16
Vancouver, WA | Yeah but its there bandwidth, how else can they cap you? Image 10 people using all of the node(?) bandwidth and then the people getting 50/50 come to DSLreports and bitch about how cable is so slow | |
| | |
Rexter
YeeHaw
join:2002-11-17
cloud 9 | Re: If it's my hardware........ Just about any router has the ability to restrict bandwidth based on MAC or IP address. Yes it does consume resources on the router, but if you are going to be an ISP, you've gotta do what you gotta do. | |
| |
pit_viper
1 Shot, 1 Kill, No Remorse, I Decide
join:2002-07-24
Play_Hockey
| said by Rexter :
If it's my hardware, I'll do whatever the hell I want to it. It's asinine to have the bandwidth cap programed into the customers hardware. That's like a bank keeping the key to the vault in everyone's safety deposit box. The cable modem is a bridge, and with the exception of encryption, it should only function as a bridge. It would not be so hard to limit bandwidth per IP address at the node. This whole situation is just stupid.
To use the service you agree to those terms, if you don't like it get off
--
"Arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics, even if you win, you're still retarded" | |
| | |
Rexter
YeeHaw
join:2002-11-17
cloud 9 |  Re: If it's my hardware........
| |
| |
JoeBillyBob
@68.87.x.x
| You're looking at it all wrong.
It doesn't matter if it's your modem. Your modem is on their network. As long as you are using bandwidth on their network, then you are subject to their speed restrictions. How about if you had a 100Mb pipe and I put my own router into my house and plugged into your network. I then used as much of the 100Mb pipe as I could even though you are paying for the pipe. You wouldn't like that would you? You bought the modem, which means you are responsible for the hardware, not for how much bandwidth you use on someone else's network.
ARSE! | |
| | 
rchandra
Stargate S G-1 And Atlantis Fan
Premium
join:2000-11-09
14210-2642
clubs:
| Look: it boils down to this. You are free to do whatever you want with your hardware, and the cableco is free to do whatever they want with their hardware. On the cableco's part, this would include denying you service and possible pressing criminal charges akin to vandalism for damaging, if not the physical network, the operation of their network. I would find it really surprising if you're connected to a provider that doesn't have a clause in their AUP/ToS that states this sort of thing. Most of them also ask you to ACK that the AUP/ToS is a legally binding contract between the provider and you, and that if you don't agree to them, you must disconnect and not use those services.
I don't know where people like you come up with all this stuff about "I can do whatever I want" without consequences.
--
English is a difficult enough language to interpret correctly when its rules are followed, let alone when a writer chooses not to follow those rules. Blog is here | |
| | | | 
Rhobite
Premium
join:2002-02-24
Cambridge, MA
clubs:
edit:
February 5th, @11:05AM
| Saw it coming Cable is shared. It's always been shared, and many people don't even know that all the data on the node goes into everyone's house. All that's between you and your neighbor's browsing habits is a previously locked-down cable modem.
I mentioned this on the Comcast forum a while ago, and my warning was quickly dismissed. I forget who said this (maybe qumahlin), but I was told "Technically it's possible to sniff the traffic, but it would take thousands of dollars of equipment and I've never heard of anyone doing this." Yeah, right. It was just a matter of time.
This shouldn't even be a problem. I don't know the specifics on the DOCSIS encryption algorithm, but it is technically possible to have secure communications on a shared line. All you need is encryption from the headend to the CM with big keys, similar to SSL. If this isn't already being done by the cable providers, some people's jobs better be in jeopardy.
Requiring signed firmware is not a solution. You CANNOT trust any equipment the customer has access to, period. Even if you make this half-assed effort to lock it down. People would just solder in a new chip with their own certificate, so they could sign firmware themselves. The only solution is to trust nobody, and encrypt all traffic on the node. | |
| |
See 8 replies to this post | |
| |
See 12 replies to this post | |
GrandFunkRR7
Got Funk??
Premium
join:2003-02-12
Lebanon, PA
| Let 'em hack 'em...... Let 'em hack 'em......because it'll be funny as hell to watch them cry when they have no service and possible criminal action against them.
These folks are just plain greedy.They always want more than the next guy.
Go on,hack em.
--
DSLR's Glory Days Quick to judge,quick to anger,slow to understand.Ignorance and prejudice,and fear walk hand in hand... | |
| raye
Premium
join:2000-08-14
Orange, CA
| This is an old argument. You have an automobile which can go faster than the speed limit posted on the road. Can you go faster? Yes, but it is likely that you will get a ticket.
The analogy holds for your internet connection, with the ISP in place of the highway patrol. You can uncap your modem and speed as fast as you like. Should you get caught, be prepared for the consequnces, whatever they may be.
If you want Autobahn speeds, be prepared to pay for them. You will eventually, either up front with an agreement or when you get caught. Paying up front avoids a lot of heartache. | |
| 
IGGY
No Guru Just Here To Help
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-30
Chatham, IL
| Thought this was a no no topic The software has been out for a bit now. Didn't realize till just now that it had become such a big deal. I'll have to read the other replies and the article in detail to find out if it's become widely used. I hadn't read anything in regards to it's use becoming as popular as previous forms of uncapping software released from this same group. This new software doesn't seem to have a working version in relation to the SB5100. Am I to assume that Motorola made design changes in the product? So that this type of hack is no longer possible?
--
Test Your Security Team Z Member Cable Modem Diagnostics InsightBB 3000/384 XP PRO | |
| | 
Elite
join:2002-10-03
Orange, CT
·Optimum Online
| Re: Thought this was a no no topic Most of the modems that can be uncapped/are uncapped are SB4100s and SB4200s (a few SB3100s too) but SOME other modems can be uncapped. Many ISPs push firmware that cannot be uncapped and cannot be changed (without some advanced hacking of the modem).
Examples:
SB4100 - versions 4.4.2 and up are secure*
SB4200 - versions 4.4.2 and up are secure*
SB5100 - Currently all versions of firmware are secure (This modem cannot be hacked with a firmware change because no hacked firmware exists).
* = Changing the firmware with a boot interface is possible on the SB4100 and SB4200 but requires advanced hacking of the modem.
--
Optimum Online All The Way | |
| | |
IGGY
No Guru Just Here To Help
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-30
Chatham, IL
| Re: Thought this was a no no topic "SB5100 - Currently all versions of firmware are secure (This modem cannot be hacked with a firmware change because no hacked firmware exists)."
It was my understanding that there had been some success with the 1st version of the SB5100 firmware. Which my ISP still uses that version for the SB5100. But maybe I misread. The old SB3100 sure was fun to play with a few years back though.:)
--
Test Your Security Team Z Member Cable Modem Diagnostics InsightBB 3000/384 XP PRO | |
| | | | | rx7mike
join:2004-01-23
West Bend, WI
| 5100 is not changed that much The 5100 was mainly redesigned on the outside. The internal workings were changed very little. The new 5100 uses the DOCSIS 2.0 and has a new chip set in it. Depending on the date it was made it might have the head pin removed for ehternet boot or it might not. Either way you can make your 5100 into a 4100 or 4200 using similar methods of old. Uncapping is not a crime but is going to get you booted from your ISP. I speak from experience with charter. I got booted about 2 months ago hence why i have dsl now. Charter after 2 months offered me my service back. They have even now offered me the upload speeds I was using when I changed my modem. I didnt uncap my modem just changed my upload to 512k. I was running 2 modems not one. Yes I did pay for both modems through charter. They do have faster upload packages available but they are buisness type accounts and do cost a litttle more then your basic home packages. People who pay 20-40 dollars a month for HSI shouldnt complain. Just think 2-4 years ago you were paying that for dial up. So you get killer downloads and ok uploads for the price of dial up. People are greedy, you give them a little they want more. I was like this. Since then I have come to realize if I want a faster upload I'm going to have to pay for it. Fine I'm willing to pay for it, but you have to offer it to me first. Thats exactly what I told charter when they killed my service 2 months ago. If they would have made those packages available to me when I signed up I would have bought them. I dont mind paying for what I want. If a 2mb/768 line from charter is going to cost me 99.00 a month fine I'll pay it. As long as you offer it to me. According to charter they dont offer service like that to residential customers because 98% of them would not be willing to pay that much. Well what about us 2% that are? At least offer it to me. It never hurts to ask someone. I cant dig on charter because after all I did break the rules and I got caught. So all in all it was fun I learned a lot about my cable modems and charter is willing to wotk with you if yer not a dumb arse. | |
| 
nizbit
Learn to Swim
Premium
join:2003-09-20
Grainy | yes sweet | |
| 
FLECOM
Bay Networks Freak
Premium
join:2003-03-03
Miami, FL
| hrmm... free |
|
|
|
;):(:D
Re: If it's my hardware........
·
·