{"id":135640,"date":"2016-03-15T16:15:28","date_gmt":"2016-03-15T22:15:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/?p=135640"},"modified":"2016-03-15T16:15:28","modified_gmt":"2016-03-15T22:15:28","slug":"5-things-you-should-know-about-the-fccs-proposed-privacy-rules","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/2016\/03\/5-things-you-should-know-about-the-fccs-proposed-privacy-rules\/","title":{"rendered":"5 things you should know about the FCC\u2019s proposed privacy rules"},"content":{"rendered":"

Last week, the Federal Communications Commission proposed new privacy rules for Internet providers<\/a>. The proposal was immediately praised by privacy advocates as \u201ca major step forward<\/a>\u201d and lambasted by AT&T as an effort to place a \u201cthumb on the scale in favor of Internet companies<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"Tom

Courtesy photo<\/p>

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler<\/p><\/div>\n

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler stopped by our offices to explain the proposal, which will be voted on by the commission later this year after a period of public comment. Here is what you need to know about the proposed rules.<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. The new rules would prohibit Internet providers from sharing information with third parties about a customer\u2019s name, address, location and Internet activity, unless they have opted in to having their data shared. It is meant to provide the same level of privacy protection to Internet customers\u2019 data that companies must, by law<\/a>, apply to telephone customers\u2019 data.<\/li>\n
  2. The rules also broaden the types of data that are protected, Wheeler said. The old rules for telephone operators covered \u201cCustomer Proprietary Network Information\u201d \u2013 such as the duration and frequency of calls placed by customers and where they were placed from. Wheeler said the proposal includes Internet activities tied to a unique identifying number rather than a person\u2019s actual name or phone number. Under the proposed rules, Internet providers could not, without consent, track customers using a unique number tied to a customer\u2019s Internet activity or phone location.<\/li>\n
  3. The new rules would prevent Verizon from continuing to use its \u201czombie cookie\u201d on behalf of its subsidiary AOL. Last week, Verizon agreed to pay $1.35 million<\/a> to settle FCC charges that it violated customers\u2019 privacy when it used a hidden unkillable (therefore \u201czombie\u201d) number to track cellphone users. As part of the settlement, Verizon agreed to allow customers to opt in to any future uses of the tracking technique. But the settlement did not apply to Verizon subsidiary AOL\u2019s use of the tracking number. Wheeler said that the proposed privacy rules \u201cwould overrule the consent decree.\u201d The proposal only allows subsidiaries to use an Internet provider\u2019s customer data to market \u201ccommunications related services,\u201d and so AOL\u2019s use of the tracking number for advertising purposes would need to be opt in.<\/li>\n
  4. The new rules, however, would allow AT&T to keep marketing its privacy-invading Gigapower high-speed Internet service<\/a> in dozens of cities. Gigapower costs $70 a month for customers who agree to let AT&T view the Web pages they visit and the queries they type into search engines. Those who want to protect their privacy must pay $100 a month for the Gigapower service. Wheeler said he was concerned about privacy becoming a luxury service. But he said, \u201cAt this point in the debate, we have to deal with what we can deal with today.\u201d<\/li>\n
  5. The proposal doesn\u2019t cover content, only metadata. That means if a customer visits an unencrypted website, the Internet provider could still view and share the contents of that website without consent.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    As encryption becomes more common, that loophole will get smaller. But regardless of whether Internet traffic is encrypted, Wheeler said that it is important to protect information about what websites a person visits.<\/p>\n

    \u201cI might be getting encrypted data,\u201d he said, \u201cbut if I visit a cancer center, just the fact that I\u2019m going to the cancer center is of interest to an insurance company.\u201d<\/p>\n

    This article comes from\u00a0ProPublica<\/a>, a Pulitzer Prize-winning newsroom.\u00a0Sign up for their\u00a0newsletter<\/a>.<\/em>