According to the EFF, Comcast is forging Transmission Control Protocol Reset (TCP RST) packets that cause connections to drop. In a nutshell, these forged data packets “cause software at both ends to believe, mistakenly, that the software on the other side doesn’t want to continue communicating,” according to a statement issued by the EFF.
Comcast, which according to the AP is the nation’s largest cable TV operator and second largest ISP, has denied that it is interfering with P2P traffic, despite the results of the AP and EFF testing.
“Comcast does not block access to any [websites] or online applications, including peer-to-peer services like BitTorrent,” the company said in a statement. “We have a responsibility to provide all of our customers with a good Internet experience and we use the latest technologies to manage our network so that they can continue to enjoy these applications.”
In an interview with CNET this week, Fred von Lohmann, a senior staff attorney with the EFF, said that based on the EFF’s testing and what had been reported by other sources, “it seems clear that Comcast’s techniques are bad for its customers and bad for innovation generally.”
“The fact that Comcast’s efforts are reportedly interfering with BitTorrent, Gnutella and Lotus Notes communications makes it clear that they are not narrowly targeted at particular users or protocols,” Lohmann said.
Earlier this week, groups that support the idea of legislation mandating network neutrality cited Comcast’s actions as an example of why laws are needed to force companies not to engage in “data discrimination.”
“Comcast’s BitTorrent blocking is the canary in the coal mine for net neutrality — a clear example of an Internet service provider stifling innovation and free speech online,” said Ben Scott, director of the pro-network neutrality group Free Press. “Cable and phone companies like Comcast, AT&T and Verizon should not be allowed to play gatekeeper over legal Internet content.”
Markham Erickson, executive director of the Open Internet Coalition, echoed Scott’s point that ISPs should not position themselves as “Internet gatekeepers” or substitute their own judgment for that of their customers. Erickson asserted that without government regulation to prevent companies from abusing their position as the network operators, improper meddling with disfavored data will continue.
“Without federal rules of the road to provide boundaries to prevent discriminatory behavior, consumers do not know whether the Comcast example is the whole of the problem or the tip of the iceberg,” Erickson said. “What else is being blocked? What unilateral decisions are being made? Congress must act to answer these questions, protect consumers, and re-establish rules that preserve an open Internet.”