Skype weighs in on Clinton's response to China Internet freedom

Skype wasn't a target of the recent attack on Google and thirty other companies. Google is considering leaving China, where they believe the attacks originated. The United States government has not adopted a position until today's speech by Hilary Clinton on Internet Freedom. Here is Skype's official response to the Secretary's speech. I'll comment below.

SKYPE LAUDS U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT FOR PROTECTING INTERNET’S FREEDOM TO CONNECT PEOPLE ACROSS BORDERS

WASHINGTON, January 21, 2010 – Skype, the global internet communications company whose mission is to enable the world’s conversations, applauds Secretary Clinton, her senior adviser for innovation, Alec Ross, the State Department and the U.S. government for embracing and defending the principles of freedom of expression, privacy, and the freedom to connect to the Internet, as well as for their use of Web 2.0 tools for 21st century statesmanship.

“Conducting international relations by encouraging online interaction is an example of the Internet’s power to change the way governments and people around the world engage as part of one global community,” said Staci Pies, Skype’s Director of Government and Regulatory Affairs. “Secretary Clinton’s concerted effort to transform the State Department’s role from traditional ‘government-to-government diplomacy’ to ‘people-to-people diplomacy’ is a clear recognition that more and more people around the globe are turning to technologies like Skype to freely connect with one another across borders and to increasingly facilitate diplomacy, interaction and understanding.”

It seems State heard Rebecca MacKinnon's guidance on how not to save the Internet by focusing on human rights to connect. How will these high minded aspirations become policy? Can we expect tariffs on goods from censoring countries? "This product made by people with a censored Internet" product labels?

tags: skype, clinton, china, freedomtoconnect, freedom, freespeech, us, usa

Call me at +1-510-316-9773, Skype me, follow @skypejournal and @Phil Wolff.
Visit our Skype Journal private technologist roundtable, one of the longest running public Skype chats.

Free Speech Activists Use Skype Data Channel To Bypass Government Censorship

Skype Journal is blocked by China's government. Millions work around censorship and monitoring with networking tools like GTunnel. The GTunnel proxy on your PC connects to GTunnel servers. The client connects directly, through the TOR network, or through the Skype network. Connecting through Skype assures your packets are encrypted from beginning to end. This hides your IP address from servers. This also circumvents blockades of target servers like mine.

GTunnel is run by Garden Networks for Freedom of Information, a member of the Global Information Freedom Consortium. When you combine GTunnel with UltraSurf, FreeGate, FirePhoenix, GPass, and Ranking you get a complete suite for surviving online censorship and monitoring.

Caution for Chinese users: Skype cannot assure what you download from TOM-Skype does not include spyware. So download the international version from the Skype.com site or another independent source.

tags: security, censorship, iran, china, gfw, encryption, anonymity, gtunnel, anti-jamming system, jamming, blocking, blocks, blocked, globalinformationfreedom, gift

Call me at +1-510-316-9773, Skype me, follow @skypejournal and @Phil Wolff.
Visit our Skype Journal private technologist roundtable, one of the longest running public Skype chats.

Skype Journal Glossary: Blocking

Blocking. Intentionally stopping Skype from working over a network.

Countries, internet service providers, and companies have blocked Skype. How do you block Skype?

1. At the edge, keep Skype clients limited or turned off through contracts or other controls. For example, AT&T Mobility forbids the use of Skype over its US cellular network. Some financial service enterprises forbid Skype as part of internal security measures.
2. In transit, make Skype ineffective by detecting Skype traffic on a network and slowing or stopping that traffic. You can buy software like NarusInsight to throttle or block Skype traffic.
3. Block the mothership, cut off Skype clients from Skype.com so they no longer download software updates, get help, manage accounts, or buy Skype credits. Etisalat, the UAE’s national ISP, blocks access to Skype.com. Many of the same tools used for censorship and for network operations and administration can also be used to block access to Skype.com or to block Skype traffic.
4. Last, governments can use market forces to restrict Internet access in general through pricing and taxes. When communicating over the Internet becomes a "sin", you apply a "sin tax" to reduce "bad" behavior. This is unconfirmed.

tags: skype, blocking, block, censorship, narus, narusinsight, etisalat, uae

Call me at +1-510-455-4384, Skype me, follow @skypejournal and @Phil Wolff.
Visit our Skype Journal private roundtable, one of the longest running public Skype chats.

iPhone tethering fees violate Carterfone principles

AT&T prohibits tethering unless they sell you permission. From Plan Terms, Prohibited and Permissible Uses:

"Furthermore, plans(unless specifically designated for tethering usage) cannot be used for any applications that tether the device (through use of, including without limitation, connection kits, other phone/PDA-to computer accessories, BLUETOOTH® or any other wireless technology) to Personal Computers (including without limitation, laptops), or other equipment for any purpose."

"Accordingly, AT&T reserves the right to (i) deny, disconnect, modify and/or terminate Service, without notice, to anyone it believes is using the Service in any manner prohibited"

Fine print in your contract extends AT&T control into all the devices you use.

Mobile Net Neutrality says neither your handset maker nor your wireless carrier should alter your service based on the content or endpoints of your communication. You wouldn't let your ISP dictate what software goes on your PC or which web sites your surf. Why should your mobile operator have that power?

Yet Apple supports AT&T's ban on VoIP in theory, and full Skype in practice.

Mobile Carterfone says mobile customers should be free to connect to mobile voice and data services without a mobile carrier approving or dictating the device. You wouldn't let your ISP dictate what PCs or printers you connect to your DSL or cable modem. Why would you give your mobile operator that power?

Yet Apple supports AT&T's upcoming iPhone tethering fees.

Tethering fees give AT&T the power to approve or disallow your use of your phone as a modem. This is unheard of in most of the world.

AT&T is expected to add a surcharge of 30% to 50% for the privilege of using your existing device and bandwidth you already bought.

Tethering fees feel strange. The charges should stop at the first device, the connecting device. An operator should charge for primary connectivity, not downstream connections.

What other imaginary services could your phone company bill?

• Cell-handoffs. Get the first 5 free and then 10 cents a go. Neil Stratford
• Secondary listening. Special speakerphone detection modes to charge you extra for other people overhearing the call. Neil Stratford
• Voice by the word. Charge for voice the way they charge for SMS. 10 cents for 15 words.
• Volume detection. Shouting must mean the message is very important so charge more for louder conversation. mort

photo credit: cc-by Holly Gramazio.

Thanks to the Voice on the Web chat room.

See also:

• Power, Freedom And Money, a presentation on Skype, Apple, and the Carriers from April 2009
• FCC Chairman slams Skype Mobile Carterfone proposal; not dead yet, Skype Journal, April 2008
• Skype Journal nominates Chris Libertelli for the EFF's 2008 Pioneer Award, Skype Journal, January 2008
• FCC votes today, Skype glad FCC considering 'openness,' a far cry from 'delamination'. Skype Journal, July 2007
• Competing against Skype 102: Lobbying, Skype Journal, June 2007

tags: skype, iphone, att, at&t, tether, tethering, freedom, connection, connectivity, ripoff

Call me at +1-510-455-4384, Skype me, follow @skypejournal and @Phil Wolff.
Visit our Skype Journal private roundtable, one of the longest running public Skype chats.

Skype's Crypto Revolution

Mass encryption. 1.15 billion downloads. Hundreds of millions of people are using Skype's strong cryptography to talk. Encrypted for the very first time. Thanks to Skype. This is a notable achievement.

The last successful mass distribution of cryptography was SSL (secure sockets layer). Browsers alert you are talking securely to a web site by the little closed padlock icon. SSL let the world feel safe to share secrets. Banking. Taxes. Voting. Medical records. Divorce. School.

Skype's encryption gives people the same freedom to talk.

Most people don't know Skype safeguards their calls. There is no "padlock" to show that the other people in your conversation are also using secure Skype clients.

America's "founding fathers" would have liked cryptography a lot.  They would have viewed it as protected under the Second Amendment where "the People" are guaranteed the right to bear arms, not just for personal defense (which was obvious to them), but also because politicians prefer unarmed peasants. An unarmed populace is much easier to dominate. And so is a populace without the ability to have privacy.

— Hudson Barton

What data does Skype keep?

Clearly Skype has call records from SkypeIn and SkypeOut, so they can bill for time according to their tariffs and charge appropriate taxes. They also have records of when you log in through a client or the web to the authentication service.

Skype may keep a copy of the material in your account that's backed up onto Skype servers (profile, contacts, history, preferences like call forwarding). However that data may be encrypted so Skype wouldn't have the burden of sharing the data under a subpoena or be exposed to financial risks in the event of a security breach.

While it's not impossible for Skype to have engineered tattle-tale features into the client, reporting on p2p activity, there is no evidence of spyware in research done by independent researchers or by anyone else.

Skype has compelling business interests to assure customer privacy. Unless you're from China, you don't load Skype with the assumption your government, your employer, your priest, your ex's private detective, your insurance company, your political party, your local police department, or anyone else has the ability to know who you talk with or what you say to each other. You trust your phone company and Skype to keep your confidences as much as physically and legally possible. Unlike your phone company, Skype has done more to encrypt conversations.

Skype is legally better off not keeping any data it does not absolutely need to keep. And there is no technical reason for Skype to keep a log of your in-Skype-network chats or calls.

Power, Freedom And Money: Skype, Apple, and the Carriers

Power, Freedom And Money

View more presentations from evanwolf.

My thoughts on Skype's political strategy at CTIA 2009. It builds on my Monday post, Apple, AT&T hobble Skype for iPhone 3 Ways (Skype Journal), Robert Miller's Is Deutsche Telekom playing an April's Fool joke at the expense of Skype users in Germany? (Skype), Rob Topolski's AT&T Quietly Updates its Wireless Plans (Public Knowledge), Lesley Cauley's Skype's iPhone limits irk some consumer advocates (USA Today).

Maybe a three minute read, flip quickly Lessig style.

del.icio.us tags: skype, apple, iphone, att, regulation, carterfone.

Call me at +1-510-455-4384, Skype me, follow @skypejournal and @Phil Wolff.
Visit our Skype Journal private roundtable, one of the longest running public Skype chats.

Eurojust coordinating anti-Skype project

In response to evildoers trusting Skype encryption and police seeking more power, Eurojust, the Europe's Union's judicial cooperation unit, set three goals last week:

1. Overcome technical obstacles to intercept Skype calls
2. Overcome judicial obstacles to intercept Skype calls
3. Prevent criminals from using Skype

"Skype remains interested in working with Eurojust despite the fact that they chose not to contact us before issuing this inaccurate report," a Skype spokesperson told TechRadar.
Skype's Brian O'Shaughnessy told National Journal Online "It is unfortunate that Eurojust chose to release this inaccurate report without first contacting us. Skype has extensively debriefed Eurojust on our capabilities and programs. Skype cooperates with law enforcement where legally and technically possible."
Heise Online reports a "trojan is one of the solutions being discussed for intercepting internet telephony before it is encrypted." 
From the Eurojust news release:

NOTE: This is an update of the press release issued on Friday 20 February 2009. Some of the information in this press release was issued prematurely and is therefore incorrect, as there is not yet an official case reported to Eurojust.

Ms Carmen Manfredda, acting National Member for Italy, will take the lead in coordinating a Europe-wide investigation on internet telephony (VoIP).
At the request of Direzione Nazionale Antimafia in Rome, the Italian Desk at Eurojust will play a key role in the coordination and cooperation of the investigations on the use of internet telephony systems (VoIP), such as “Skype”. Eurojust will be available to assist all European law enforcement and prosecution authorities in the Member States. The purpose of Eurojust’s coordination role is to overcome the technical and judicial obstacles to the interception of internet telephony systems, taking into account the various data protection rules and civil rights.
Background
Criminals in Italy are increasingly making phone calls over the internet in order to avoid getting caught through mobile phone intercepts. Police officers in Milan say organised crime, arms and drugs traffickers, and prostitution rings are turning to Skype and other systems of VoIP in order to frustrate investigators. Skype's encryption system is a secret which the company refuses to share with the authorities. Investigators have become increasingly reliant on wiretaps in recent years. Customs and tax police in Milan have highlighted the Skype issue. They overheard a suspected cocaine trafficker telling an accomplice to switch to Skype in order to get details of a 2kg drug consignment. Investigators are convinced that the interception of telephone calls have become an essential tool of the police, who spend millions of Euros each year tracking down crime through wiretaps of landlines and mobile phones.
Following a meeting with the judicial authorities in Milan, Italy, Ms Manfredda commented: “The possibility of intercepting internet telephony will be an essential tool in the fight against international organised crime within Europe and beyond. Our aim is not to stop users from taking advantage of internet telephony, but to prevent criminals from using Skype and other systems to plan and organise their unlawful actions. Eurojust will make all possible efforts to coordinate and assist in the cooperation between Member States”.

tags: skype, eu, europa, eurojust, police, mafia, privacy, security, events, voip, freedom

Tweet with Phil Wolff on @evanwolf, talk on FriendFeed, or Skype me to join the Skype Journal private chat room.
Follow @skypejournal on twitter

China requires real names of online gamers

Online gamers have to give real names (China Daily), eroding the privacy that comes with anonymity and pseudonymity. How long until TOM-Skype is required to compel its users to give up their identities too?

Anonymous communication is a right. It allows political free speech. It protects people who blow the whistle on evil. It lets people call for help without retribution. It empowers people to explore their wild sides. Privately.

So anonymity in Skype is important. Skype users can be anonymous on Skype up to the point they spend money. Will Skype comply when China asks for your real name? Will Skype require TOM-Skype users to give real names too?

That's Skype's next moral challenge.

tags: skype, china, tom-skype, privacy, security, freedom, identity, id, regulation, anonymity, pseudonymity

Talk with Phil Wolff on Twitter or FriendFeed or on Skype.
Follow Skype Journal on twitter

photo: Scott Beale / Laughing Squid

Would you trust Skype with your vote?

I've been wracking my brain for the defining Skype moments of 2008.

It comes down to Skype's identity. The marketing, psychology, defining oneself sense; not the login, badge sense.

Brand marketers may talk of lovemarks, but trust comes before love. We trust Coke products to be Coke-like in taste, feel, fragrance, color, and packaging, for example. We trust products not to hurt or endanger us (unless you're into that kind of thing). We trust brands to keep their promises.

The people of Estonia trust their electronic voting systems with the fate of their nation. In a country that recently survived cyberwar, that's a lot of trust.

Estonia conducts elections online.  Building on successes in 2005 and 2007 they recently approved voting with mobile phones by 2011. The Estonian National Electoral Committee (VVK) will provide SIM chips to Estonian voters for free. The special chips from AS Sertifitseerimiskeskus (SK) will authenticate voters and keep vote transmissions secret using public key encryption.

Would you trust Skype's technology and Skype's business with your vote?

If you asked me in 2007, I'd have said yes. Skype's brand promises privacy and safety. Outside security experts applauded Skype's authentication, strong encryption, and ability to bypass most obstacles. Skype is an eBay company (though few people know this) and borrows some of our trust of eBay and PayPal.

I'm unsure now, as 2009 starts.

Skype's technology is strong but incomplete. Skype's encryption is end-to-end, from Skype client to Skype client. Nobody can listen in. So the weak points are the end points: a user's PC or Skype-enabled device and the gateway to the the voting system. Secure those end points and you'd have a pretty secure system.

That's not the whole story, though. We learned in 2008 that Skype shared a copy of their desktop source code with the TOM-Skype joint venture in China. That includes Skype's authentication (proving who you are) and encryption (foiling eavesdroppers) code.

We don't know how many people, including TOM-Skype former employees, contractors, and members of Chinese security services, have access to that code. (Hypothetically, if I offer a $1000 bounty, would someone sell me a copy?) Many people have the means to interfere with an election conducted through Skype. Given time, we know a way finds itself in the hands of those with a will. 

Speaking of intent, let's return to the joint venture. Skype's founding executives traded code for access to China. China is now Skype's largest market. The new executive team tightened up operational security, minimizing unauthorized access to log files, surveillance, and source code.

Despite Skype's 2008 policy review, the original deal stands:

• TOM-Skype gets a copy of Skype's source code with each major release,
• TOM-Skype modifies the Skype software to comply with China's government agencies,
• TOM-Skype shares data collected with users with Chinese agencies,
• TOM-Skype does not disclose that privacy breach to customer before or after sharing. 
• Skyper's talking with a TOM-Skype users are surveilled like TOM-Skype users

This is the arrangement we know of. We don't know if Skype agreed to similar arrangements with, for example, EU law enforcement or USA intelligence agencies.

Landline and mobile phone companies have long given keys to their networks to law enforcement and communications intelligence agencies. We're accustomed to the rule of law applying to our phones. We hope, we assume, we believe, perhaps naïvely, that our phone company keeps our secrets.

It is sad to let go of those illusions regarding Skype.

So this goes back to Skype's brand promise of privacy and security.

Do you trust Skype? 

Would you trust Skype's corporation with your vote?

With your country? With your liberty and freedom?

I'm less certain.

 

photo: Coca-Cola Blāk by The Rocketeer

China blocks New York Times and Skype Journal

Welcome to our club, Gray Lady. Skype Journal is blocked by the GFW too.

Technorati tags: censorship, china, nyt, gfw, skype journal

Wednesday Reading

Staffing

I didn't make Obama's short list for U.S. CTO. Darn.

Teachers interview for jobs via Skype video.

Family

ReadWriteWeb summarizes a study from the Pew Internet & American Life Project:  

"Simply put, technology may bring us closer, but, as this study shows, its constant use also means that we may be sacrificing other activities in order to fit it into our schedule. It really is both a blessing and a curse in many ways." - Sarah Perez

Design

James Kendrick dives deep into deaf users and text messaging. Text 4 Deaf serves this community.

Freedom

Skype could license Microsoft's patent on real-time speech censorship to improve the quality of filtering and monitoring in the TOM-Skype client.

UAE regulator reconsidering ban of Skype and Internet calls by year's end.

Economy

Fareed Zakaria's Question of the Week: "How long do you think this economic downturn will last? Some economists predict 1 yr; others say 4. And you? Email us at FareedZakariaGPS@cnn.com".

Competition

Mobilkom austria fights the 3 Skypephone with a Fring phone. News release in German.

Nomad Life

Anywwwhere Internet Café Services features Skype calling.

Deal

DLink DPH50U Skype Phone Adapter - $14 Shipped from Amazon.

Skype for Barack Obama

Local phone bank host invites you to bring your laptop and Skype.

Corner Pocket

Performance Pool Cyber League. Shoot from home over Skype video.

Touch Skype

Asus Eee Top one-finger touch PC. Hot boots with Skype.

TOM-Skype Breach: The Citizen Lab

This is the second of four posts resulting from an interview with Nart Villeneuve, principle investigator of the Citizen Lab report "Breaching Trust".

After discussing the report itself and some of the follow up activity, we went on to talk about The Citizen Lab, its mission and its activities. From their own website they are "focusing on advanced research and development at the intersection of digital media and world civic politics". Nart described their activity as research on the politics of technology.
Under the leadership of Professor Ronald Diebert, their activities are carried out by graduate students with an undergraduate degree in either computer science or political science who join the lab to build up expertise in the other discipline while carrying out their research. They explore issues using their strong understanding of technology to "lift the hood" behind various politically and/or economically motivated intervention of web-based information exchange by governments and other agencies.
Assisted by a worldwide network of volunteers and a check list of relevant websites, they can develop a sense of the content that governments are censoring. According to Nart, all governments do some form of surveillance but definitely not to equal levels of resulting actions. At one extreme one finds outright blocking of content but the UAE has economic motivation to block Skype to protect a local communications monopoly. Apparently the Saudis are most interested in blocking porn. China obviously allows "uncensored" content to pass through but we are aware that Skype Journal is often blocked.
They will look at filtering techniques used by various countries, the type of content being blocked and try to determine the "local" government's policy environment in which filtering is taking place. At this point in time most filtering addresses websites but gradually some countries are moving into screening applications (as we have seen with TOM-Skype). There is also "social filtering" censorship activity that involves blocking of porn, drugs and gambling.
At this point companies, such as Google, Microsoft and Yahoo, are modifying their products to address various "local" issues. For instance, Google has modified their process for enquiries from designated countries to "pre-filter" results delivered from their own servers in the U.S.. But then they put out a notification for "filtered" results with the wording for some search results: "to comply with local law, some results are not displayed". On the other hand Google will not offer GMail accounts with a ".cn" domain name and does not make Blogger available in China.
The Citizen Lab also participates in a broader effort to develop guidelines for Internet companies operating in China. But, given that has much broader implications, it will be the subject of another post.
Next post: Answers to Phil's Questions

Tags: Citizen Lab, censor, filter, Nart Villeneuve, Ronald Diebert

Powered by Qumana

TOM-Skype Breach: Meeting the Primary Investigator

This is the first of four posts resulting from an interview with Nart Villeneuve, principle investigator of the Citizen Lab report "Breaching Trust".

Last Tuesday afternoon I returned to a University of Toronto building I had last visited in its role as an engineering students' residence in the mid-1960's. Abandoned as a residence in the 1980's, the building was restored in the late 1990's to house the Munk Centre for International Studies, when the university's Centre for International Studies was designated as a strategic priority for future growth. In the basement of the former Devonshire Place South House, I found the Citizen Lab, "an interdisciplinary laboratory focusing on advanced research and development at the intersection of digital media and world civic politics".


I spent 90 minutes with Nart Villeneuve, the PhD student and Psiphon Fellow, who was the principle investigator resulting in the Citizen Lab's recently published "Breaching Trust: An analysis of surveillance and security practices of China's TOM-Skype platform". We covered a wide range of issues related to this report, from the initial contact with New York Times through to the follow up activities as a result of the report's release. We also discussed the broader mission of the Citizen Lab and some recommendations for how Skype should address the challenge of participating in the China market while making all parties aware that their conversation activity may be tracked.

Key points about the report and the follow up activity:

• A major issue to address in dealing with the media has been the confusion resulting because there is a need to separate out the security breach that allowed Nart to gather the data he has gathered and the functionality of the TOM-Skype servers resulting in the capture and logging of chat conversations and Skype calling activity. (There was no evidence of capturing voice calls themselves).
• As a result of reporting this breach prior to release of the document to New York Times, the security breach itself has been closed but there is no evidence that the actual information capture activity has ceased. Nart has been checking periodically to confirm that the security breach remains closed.
• There was a period of several hours between finally establishing contact with someone at Skype who could initiate action to address the security breach and the final close down of the breach. During this time Nart observed blocking of read access to the directories but since he knew the file names he was still able to follow a reconfiguration of the web servers, removal of sensitive files, such as an encryption key, and disappearance of the log files such that they were not accessible.
• While they have captured a significant quantity of call log data going back a year, they are being careful not to expose any of the detailed information which comprised both chat message logs and what amounts to call detail records for voice calls; more details are in the report itself. Basically they don't want to compromise anyone individually.
• While the log files are still under analysis, they have been encrypted while he continues to mine them for any additional information they may expose. Eventually it is his intention to destroy even these files.
• Messages were about 40% Chinese, 60% English with a small smattering of other languages.
• While it would be very difficult to reconstruct an entire conversation thread, as only each individual message was logged with no ready reference to other messages within the thread, they could build social graphs of conversing parties.
• There are at least two versions of the TOM-Skype client: a normal version and a second version with additional features such as a Baidu Toolbar; however, the promote.dll module in this can trigger off anti-virus scanners such as Norton.
• Other evidence that the servers had been compromised was the discovery that the servers were hosting "pirate" movies and had the appropriate software to support Bit Torrent transfers.

Nart had three definite recommendations for Skype; we also covered the broader issue of global enterprises doing business in China. These will be covered in future posts.
Next post: The Citizen Lab: Its broader mission and findings.
Tags: Skype, Citizen Lab, Breaching Trust, TOM Online, TOM-Skype, Nart Villeneuve, Munk Centre for International Studies

Powered by Qumana

Skype to FCC: Mobile carriers blocking Skype is proof of closed networks

Skype asked the FCC to support unfettered customer freedom following statements at CTIA's conference last month. CTIA and Sprint retorted with balderdash and Skype's Christopher Libertelli sets them straight in this short, direct letter. Emphasis mine. 

October 8, 2008

Electronic Filing

Chairman Kevin J. Martin
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street, SW
12th Street Lobby, TW-A325
Washington, D.C. 20554

Re: Ex Parte Presentation; RM-11361

Dear Chairman Martin:

Skype Communications S.A.R.L. (“Skype”) responds briefly to CTIA’s letter of September 24th and Sprint Nextel’s letter of September 26th, both of which take issue with Skype’s earlier letter to you regarding the lack of openness of wireless networks. CTIA and Sprint go to great lengths to rebut Skype’s characterization of remarks made at a CTIA conference earlier this month, which Skype viewed as indicative of a hesitant, closed network mentality among wireless operators.

Rather than prolong an empty debate about whose characterization of remarks at the conference is correct, let me point out that Skype’s application is forbidden, blocked and otherwise interfered with by the largest CTIA members.[1] When CTIA members claim that “the entire Internet is open,” the intended implication is that the entire Internet is open, including to multi-modal Internet communications applications like Skype. The truth of the matter, however, is that, despite their representations to the contrary, applications are blocked even on the most recently-announced advanced handsets.[2] The proof of Skype’s argument is in the conduct of CTIA members, no matter what speeches are made at conferences. If Skype is blocked, the network is not open.

I also would like to take this opportunity to remind you that CTIA is currently suing the Commission to overturn the very openness rule they now claim to embrace. If the wireless industry is serious about openness, CTIA would immediately withdraw that litigation.

CTIA attempts to sidestep the fact that its members’ networks are not open by arguing that Skype itself is closed and, apparently, therefore cannot advocate consumer empowerment principles and network openness. To make this point, they cite a blog post by Mr. Michael Robertson, CEO of Gizmo Project, a VOIP application. Fundamentally, Mr. Robertson is wrong. Mr. Robertson confuses open networks with open platforms. Skype is an open platform. Anyone, anywhere on the planet can download Skype for free, and he or she will be able to use Skype. Skype’s software is open to any application developer through our public Application Programming Interface (‘API’) program. Over 10,000 developers have taken advantage of this API and are part of Skype’s developer program. In fact there are many applications that use Skype’s APIs to send calls to/from Skype users and SIP endpoints, including VoSky, Fring, etc. Skype also recently collaborated with Digium/Asterisk, which will now bring Skype into “soft PBXs” for millions of users and allow many forms of applications and services to connect to Skype seamlessly.

Mr. Robertson is also wrong on the law. He rehashes the incumbent wireless operators’ various arguments against network neutrality and confuses to whom the Internet Policy Statement applies. Openness rules are properly targeted at network operators because of the limited intermodal choices available to US consumers in a wireless market dominated by the top three operators. Conversely, there is nearly limitless choice in Internet applications, with fierce competition and few or no barriers to entry. Quite properly, therefore, the Internet Policy Statement applies to networks and not to applications. Its aim is to assure an open Internet so that consumers can choose from the limitless number of applications available to Internet users, absent discrimination by network operators. To apply it to Internet applications would flipt the Internet Policy statement on its head. What the network operators are doing is very different. They restrict consumer choice by blocking Skype and other applications to which consumers would like to have access. To apply the Internet Policy Statement to Internet applications would flip the Policy Statement on its head.

We greatly appreciate CTIA’s invitation to attend the April show in Las Vegas. If CTIA members would like to prove their openness once and for all, Skype’s top executives will be available to attend the conference. When a Skype user can legally call the Chairman of the FCC on the mobile broadband networks of each of the top three wireless networks, we will know that their conduct is consistent with the consumer empowerment principles of the Internet Policy Statement.

We look forward to working with the Commission and CTIA members to ensure that the whole Internet – including multimodal applications such as Skype – is available to consumers.

Respectfully submitted,


Christopher Libertelli
Senior Director, Government and Regulatory Affairs
SKYPE COMMUNICATIONS S.A.R.L.
6e etage, 22/24 boulevard Royal,
Luxembourg, L-2449 LUXEMBOURG

 

1. Most network operators continue to restrict VoIP and or P2P applications on their network in apparent violation of the protocol-agnostic network management techniques employed by other operators, including Comcast.

2. See, e.g., Daniel Roth, Android: No VOIP for You -- and Other Oddities With the Google Phone. Sep. 23, 2008. In addition, commenting on the iPhone’s closed operating system, Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple Computer, said "Consumers aren't getting all they want when companies are very proprietary and lock their products down...I would like to write some more powerful apps than what you're allowed." Oct 8, 2008

tags: skype, sprint, nextel, ctia, policy, suit, api, sip, vosky, fring, digium, asterisk

Follow Phil Wolff on Twitter or FriendFeed or on Skype.
Follow Skype Journal on twitter

TOM-Skype Breach: A Promise

Skype made a promise to its users from the very start. Here's a page on their web site, No adware, spyware or malware, where they make that promise to this day.

No adware, spyware or malware

Skype is totally safe from these pesky blighters.

Skype protects and maintains your online security and peace of mind. This means that it will not display unwanted and intrusive advertising, or allow any malware or spyware to operate.

• No adware – no intrusive adverts.
• No spyware – nothing logs your online activity.
• No malware – no programs that could adversely affect your computer.

What is adware?

Adware is a type of software that makes money by automatically delivering unwanted advertisements usually as pop-ups. Normally it is very hard, if not impossible, to turn off the adware causing the problem.

Because you always have the ability to turn advertising messages off on the Skype software, we believe Skype is free of adware.

What is spyware?

Spyware is a type of software that automatically installs itself on your computer, usually without your knowledge, and covertly collects and transmits data about your computer use. For example, spyware may monitor a user’s behaviour and pass on details of a their online activity (for example, their usernames or passwords) to a third party for use in identity theft and fraud.

Skype does not allow any spyware to be included.

What is malware?

Malware (or malicious software) relates to software that is designed to infiltrate or damage a computer operating system or other programs. These are often described as computer viruses, worms, or Trojan horses. They sometimes come combined with other software and load in the background.

Skype never allows any other programs to be installed unless you are clearly informed of their presence.

As of 6 October 2008.

tags: skype, adware, spyware, malware, brand, marketing, behavior

Follow Phil Wolff on Twitter or FriendFeed or on Skype.
Follow Skype Journal on twitter

TOM-Skype Breach: What is filtered most?

Milk powder. Ah, so the list is updated frequently. 

SARS. Cripple public safety worker communications for the next outbreak?

Skype. Hah!

Chart and terms provided in BREACHING TRUST: An analysis of surveillance and security practices on China’s TOM-Skype platform by Nart Villeneuve, Psiphon Fellow, The Citizen Lab, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Information Warfare Monitor Joint Report, ONI Asia (JR01-2008). 1 October 2008.

 

tags: skype, tom-skype, communist, Communist Party, Falun, Hu Jintao, Taiwan independence, Wen Jiabao, quit the party, Jiang Zemin, June 4, Olympic Games, Nine Commentaries, Li Hongzhi, earthquake, democracy, Tibet, Mao Zedong, Circumvention, Deng Xiaoping, Diaoyu Islands, Kuomintang, Tiananmen, milk powder, SARS, Voice of America, free door, filter, anti-blockade browser, Garden Network

Follow Phil Wolff on Twitter or FriendFeed or on Skype.
Follow Skype Journal on twitter

TOM-Skype Breach: Chinese TV News

Ｓｋｙｐｅ在中國的合資公司Ｔｏｍ－Ｓｋｙｐｅ，爆發擅自儲存數以百萬則用戶的簡訊， 並且將訊息儲存在缺乏足夠保密措施的電腦上，使外部人士可以很容易監控這些簡訊，對此 Ｓｋｙｐｅ公司向用戶道歉。

根據加拿大多倫多大學的電腦安全專家發表報告披露，Ｓｋｙｐｅ在中國的合資公司Ｔｏｍ－Ｓｋｙｐｅ長期監控用戶在網上聊天的記錄，並且把包含了敏感內容的訊息，儲存在可從公司外部進入的伺服器上，但是由於缺乏安全措施，使外部人士可以輕易的查看經過監控系統過濾的超過一百萬則簡訊，其中很多包括政治敏感詞彙，包括共產黨、法輪功、胡錦濤、台灣獨立、溫家寶等政治敏感關鍵字，地震、奶粉等字眼也在監控範圍之內，由於Ｔｏｍ－Ｓｋｙｐｅ並沒有將事先這項行為通報Ｓｋｙｐｅ或是獲得Ｓｋｙｐｅ批准，因此Ｓｋｙｐ ｅ向用戶提出道歉。

[Google machine translation:]

Skype's joint venture in China, Tom-Skype, the outbreak of the unauthorized storage of millions of messages the user and the message will be stored in a lack of adequate security measures on the computer, so that outsiders can easily monitor these messages, the Skype's users are An apology.

According to the University of Toronto, Canada, computer security experts issued a report on disclosure, Skype's joint venture in China, Tom-Skype users in the long-term monitoring on-line chat records, and to contain sensitive content of the message can be stored in an external company to enter the server , But due to the lack of safety measures, so that outsiders can easily see through the monitoring system to filter the more than 1,000,000 text messages, many of which include politically sensitive terms, including the Communist Party, Falun Gong, Hu Jintao, Taiwan independence, Wen Jiabao, and other politically sensitive keywords , Earthquakes, and words such as milk powder is also within the scope of monitoring, as the Tom-Skype has not informed in advance of this act or Skype was approved by Skype, so Skype apology to the users.

tags: skype, breach, china, news, tom-skype

Follow Phil Wolff on Twitter or FriendFeed or on Skype.
Follow Skype Journal on twitter

TOM-Skype Breach: Stated Risks

This excerpt from the eBay Form 10K for the year ending 2006, Item 1A: Risk Factors, page 32 (screen 36 in the PDF), refers to Tom Online. TOM Group took TOM Online private. 

Our operations in China are subject to risks and uncertainties relating to the laws and regulations of the People’s Republic of China.

Our operations in the People’s Republic of China, or PRC, are conducted through our EachNet subsidiary, a recently announced joint venture between EachNet and Tom Online, and a PayPal subsidiary. EachNet and PayPal are Delaware corporations and foreign persons under the laws of the PRC are subject to many of the risks of doing business internationally described above in “There are many risks associated with our international operations.” The PRC currently regulates its Internet sector through regulations restricting the scope of foreign investment and through the enforcement of content restrictions on the Internet. While many aspects of these regulations remain unclear, they purport to limit and require licensing of various aspects of the provision of Internet information services. These regulations have created substantial uncertainties regarding the legality of foreign investments in PRC Internet companies, including the entities through which we do business in the PRC, and the business operations of such companies. In order to meet local ownership and regulatory licensing requirements, EachNet is operated through a foreign-owned enterprise indirectly owned by eBay’s European operating entity, which acts in cooperation with a local PRC company owned by certain local employees. The PayPal China website is operated through a foreign-owned enterprise owned by a PayPal subsidiary, which acts in cooperation with a local PRC company owned by certain local employees. We believe the current ownership structures of EachNet, the joint venture between EachNet and Tom Online, and PayPal comply with all existing PRC laws, rules, and regulations.

The law may not mean what we think it means.

There are, however, substantial uncertainties regarding the interpretation of current PRC laws and regulations, and it is possible that the PRC government will ultimately take a view contrary to ours. The People’s Bank of China, or PBOC, has recently proposed guidelines for payment settlement organizations which may require PayPal to identify and negotiate a new business relationship to act in cooperation with a local PRC entity that is not owned by local employees and has a substantial operating history, and to obtain prior approval of the relationship from the PBOC.

Just because we have a contract, doesn't mean we have any control.

There are also uncertainties regarding EachNet’s and PayPal’s ability to enforce contractual relationships they have entered into with respect to management and control of the company’s business.

If our partners break PRC rules, we could lose everything.

If any of the entities through which we do business in the PRC were found to be in violation of any existing or future PRC laws or regulations, they could be subject to fines and other financial penalties, have their business and Internet content provider licenses revoked, or be forced to discontinue business entirely. In addition, any finding of a violation of PRC laws or regulations by any of the entities through which we do business in the PRC could make it more difficult for us to launch new or expanded services in the PRC.

About Skype specifically:

Although Skype does not conduct operations in the PRC directly, it makes its software available through a joint venture with Tom Online and its software is used by residents of the PRC. PRC regulations surrounding VoIP telephony are unclear and the PRC or one or more of its provinces may adopt regulations or enforce existing regulations that restrict or prohibit the use of Skype’s software.

Does China have laws protecting citizen privacy?

Did Skype contract for detailed, SLA-degree security and privacy with TOM-Skype? Or were requirements left general and abstract?

tags: skype, china, privacy, prc, regulations, tom online, law, tom-skype, tom skype

Follow Phil Wolff on Twitter or FriendFeed or on Skype.
Follow Skype Journal on twitter

McCain and Obama proxies debate technology policy Monday

Monday is One Web Day, the web's "earth day." Skype is sponsoring a debate between technology spokespeople for the two U.S. presidential campaigns. The debate in Cincinnati, Ohio, will be virtual, with speakers calling in to the public access channel studio via Skype video.

Three political issues directly affect Skype users.

Network neutrality requires your ISP not treat your Skype bits differently from other bits they carry. ISPs in some countries blocked Skype for political and competitive reasons. ISPs in the United States slowed or blocked Skype to favor their own VoIP solutions.

• McCain voted against net neutrality
• Obama voted for net neutrality.

Rural access to the Internet is limited compared to American urban access. It costs more to run cables and antennae those last miles and miles and miles. More than one third of the US population lives outside major cities and suburbs.

• Obama favors using the Universal Service Fund, moneys already collected for rural phone access, to improve rural Internet access.
• McCain favors tax incentives for those who expand rural Internet access.

Wireless Carterfone allows you to connect unlocked phones to the mobile phone network the same way you can plug any phone of your choice into a landline phone socket, the original Carterfone ruling. It's a consumer freedom (to move your sim chip into the Skype, Google or Apple phone of your choice) and an opportunity for mobile device makers to innovate.

• Obama voted for this.
• McCain voted against.

We'll update this post when after the debate goes online.

tags: skype, us, politics, policy, netneutrality, networkneutrality, universal service fund, carterphone, freedom, regulation, obama, mccain, debate, ohio, cincinnati

Follow Phil Wolff on Twitter or FriendFeed or on Skype.

Michael Robertson says Skype should open to Gizmo Project

Michael Robertson tells Andy Abramson his Gizmo Project peers with hundreds of other networks, so Skype should open up too. Robertson contrasts Skype's closed network to Skype's Carterfone petition to the FCC, a plea for mobile phone companies to let customers use phones of their choice. Skype wrote a letter last week

It's a false comparison. How we connect a phone to a mobile network is standardized. How we connect a client to the Skype network is not. How we connect the Skype network to another service is not. 

A few interoperability questions for Michael:

1. Will you peer IM, video, file transfer, presence, commerce, desktop sharing, conferencing, texting, microblogging, and data channels? Crossing all conversational modes? Exactly whose codecs and protocols should everyone use? Should Skype users downgrade the quality of their voice and video calls to match Gizmo's?
2. Will you require realtime encryption? Strong enough to prevent live intercepts? Will you require all networks to notify users when their conversations are no longer encrypted?
3. Will you agree to strong user authentication? So users can have confidence in the identity of friends and strangers?
4. Will you (and everyone you peer with) agree on user profile data structures, white page directory services, and directory search interop?
5. Will you support data portability principles? So users can switch to and from you network with their identities, profiles, buddy lists, histories, and preferences? 
6. Will you peer customer support costs and security? How should customers escalate security and technical issues across multiple networks?
7. Will you mandate end-to-end transparency of call quality information?
8. What namespaces would you suggest Skype use? Will you support OpenID or some other namespace? 
9. Will you open Gizmo up to all partners? Your contact page says "Unfortunately, we are not setup to partner at this time with organizations with fewer than one million users."
10. How will you make all this work? What industry body or standards process could help Skype and other companies find the sweet spots of commoditized conversation?

You like thinking of yourself as a David against Goliaths (I'm thinking back to SIPphone vs. Vonage), and you cast Skype as one of the giants. It's fine to take a swing at Skype.

I hope you are up for more than talk, Michael.

What will you do to advance Talk 2.0 interop? Will you dig deeper? Reach out? What are the next steps, Mr. Robertson? 

tags: skype, sipphone, gizmo5, gizmoproject, interop

Follow Phil Wolff on Twitter or FriendFeed or on Skype.

Skype asks FCC to support unfettered customer freedom

Skype called "liar, liar, pants on fire" [my phrasing] on the leading US mobile carriers and "we can't trust those guys" to the Federal Communications Commission. It was triggered by comments at last week's CTIA conference. For example:

"Unfettered access would be a pretty bad experiment." "There needs to be some stewardship or control."

— Robert Dobson, chairman and president of T-Mobile USA

"I think we have to be careful to not all run to one side of the ship"

— Lowell McAdam, CEO and president, Verizon Wireless

“The big Internet can be daunting ... There can be too much choice.”

— Sprint Nextel Corp. CEO Dan Hesse

Skype's Christopher Libertelli responded to these and other comments in a letter to the FCC's chairman on Friday. Let's sample the letter:

Instead of broadly carrying forward the Commission’s tremendous strides toward open networks, the word coming from the CTIA gathering is that open networks present a multitude of problems for the carriers, and that to protect consumers from too many choices, network operators must be the gatekeepers of the consumer experience. This is inconsistent with the Commission’s Broadband Policy Statement and a market structure that maximizes choice and innovation.

Let me parse this for you.

• Instead of broadly carrying forward the Commission’s tremendous strides toward open networks,
  
  
  • reminder that you (the FCC) already support "open"
  • the mobile giants are lollygagging and poo-pooing the commission's mandate
• the word coming from the CTIA gathering is that open networks present a multitude of problems for the carriers
  
  
  • they are whining and giving excuses
  • "too complex" is silly since open is simpler
  • despite they are usually slow moving behemoths overly concerned with internal operations
• and that to protect consumers from too many choices,
  
  
  • they say voters are stupid babies, 
  • they want to deny citizens their consumer freedoms
• network operators must be the gatekeepers of the consumer experience.
  
  
  • "we know best"
  • "control is our right"
• This is inconsistent with the Commission’s Broadband Policy Statement and a market structure that maximizes choice and innovation.
  
  
  • market structure = anticompetitive duopoly (Verizon + AT&T)
  • duopolies don't compete fiercely
  • think "OPEC 2.0" power concentration
  • you say you want open networks
  • please verify the oligopoly is acting broadly, quickly, meaningfully
  • the public good is at risk

The letter continues in a similar fashion, full text below.

Skype is asking the FCC to check the carriers who promised open access to their networks.

Please.

Now.

Technorati tags: skype, fcc, regulatory, freedom, netneutrality, network neutrality, liberty, carterphone, us, chrislibertelli, von coallition

 

 

September 12, 2008

ELECTRONIC FILING

Chairman Kevin J. Martin

Federal Communications Commission


445 12th Street, SW


Washington, DC 20554

Re: Ex Parte, RM-11361

Dear Chairman Martin:

Skype Communications S.A.R.L. (“Skype”) writes to respond to various statements made at CTIA’s Wireless I.T. & Entertainment conference in San Francisco. Attached to this letter is a Reuters report on what seems to be a wireless industry theme at the CTIA meeting. Instead of broadly carrying forward the Commission’s tremendous strides toward open networks, the word coming from the CTIA gathering is that open networks present a multitude of problems for the carriers, and that to protect consumers from too many choices, network operators must be the gatekeepers of the consumer experience. This is inconsistent with the Commission’s Broadband Policy Statement and a market structure that maximizes choice and innovation.

Skype disputes the need for wireless carriers to maintain their closed networks not only in the face of consumer preferences but contrary to their assurances to the Commission[1] that the industry had adopted a policy of openness such as to obviate the need for the relief that Skype sought in its Petition in the above-captioned proceeding (“Skype Petition”). [2] Apparently,these assurances of openness led some at the Commission to believe that there was no present need for Commission action. In this regard, the carriers’ apparent change of heart should be a cause for concern.

Despite the carriers’ assurances, when lip service to the goals of open networks is translated into their terms of service, they continue to require their subscribers to limit the applications and devices that can be used on their networks. The attitude of the wireless carriers was perhaps best summed up in Sprint Nextel Corp. CEO Dan Hesse’s recent comment: “The big Internet can be daunting ... There can be too much choice.”[3] This stands in stark contrast to the Commission’s wise policies designed to promote as much consumer choice as possible.

Skype respectfully submits that the wireless carriers continued opposition to open networks — including their restrictive terms of service — raises questions about whether the industry will faithfully implement the Commission’s rules and policies, including the standards set out in the Commission’s Broadband Policy Statement.[4] Skype is mindful of the challenges that wireless operators face moving from a closed model to an open, Internet-friendly business. As noted, despite some recent steps to modify terms of service toward openness, carriers continue to prohibit voice applications that compete with their core business.[5] Consumer choice, competition and free markets, not carriers acting to block competition, should win the day in wireless — now, not later. If the Commission believed that the transition to more open networks was going to proceed quickly, statements out of CTIA’s convention suggest just the opposite.

Skype repeats that the best way for the Commission to maintain the vigilance that is necessary to protect consumers’ interest in open wireless networks is to for the Commission to affirm that the Commission’s Broadband Policy Statement applies to wireless broadband networks. This would be a measured response to the dynamics of the wireless market and would send the correct message to an evasive wireless industry. It would also encourage those in the application development community, like Skype, who have reasonable expectations that applications will run as they were designed on wireless broadband platforms.[6]

Affirming that the Commission will enforce the Broadband Policy Statement and address any violations of the Policy Statement on a case-by-case basis is fully consistent with the Commission approach to constraining Comcast’s abusive practices.7 In this way, the Commission will maintain a policy environment that serves the interests of consumers, carriers and innovative providers of wireless devices and software applications.

Thank you for your continued vigilance in this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or concerns.

Respectfully submitted,

________________________

Christopher Libertelli

Senior Director, Government and Regulatory Affairs – North America


SKYPE COMMUNICATIONS S.A.R.L.


6e etage, 22/24 boulevard Royal, Luxembourg, L-2449 LUXEMBOURG

Footnotes:

1. Ex Parte filing by CTIA — The Wireless Association, RM-11361, April 14, 2008, at 1 (“Wireless carriers, reacting to the demands of consumers in the competitive market, already have begun implementing a variety of openness initiatives designed to expand consumer access to new and innovative wireless devices and applications. . . . Because both Commission action and the wireless marketplace have addressed the concerns raised by Skype, the Petition should be dismissed.”).
2. Skype Communications S.A.R.L., Petition to Confirm A Consumer’s Right To Use Internet Software and Attach Devices to Wireless Networks, RM-11361 (filed Feb. 20, 2007).
3. Allie Winter, Embracing an Open Network, RCR Wireless News, Sep. 10, 2008.
4. Appropriate Framework for Broadband Access to the Internet over Wireline Facilities, CC Docket No. 02-33, Appropriate Regulatory Treatment for Broadband Access to the Internet Over Cable Facilities, CS Docket No. 02-52, Policy Statement, FCC 05-151 (rel. Sep. 23, 2005) (“Broadband Policy Statement”).
5. See Letter from Robert W. Quinn, Jr., Senior Vice President-Federal Regulatory, AT&T, to Commissioner Robert M. McDowell, WC Docket No. 07-52, July 25, 2008, at 1, n.1 (noting that all major wireless carriers do not permit the use of peer-to-peer VoIP applications like Skype).
6. A wide array of industry and consumer groups agree that the Broadband Policy Statement should apply to wireless broadband networks. See, e.g., Comments of the Information Technology Industry Council, RM-11361, at 1 (Apr. 30, 2007); Comments of the Consumer Electronics Association, RM-11361, at 2 (Apr. 30, 2007); Comments of the VON Coalition, RM-11361, at 2 (Apr. 30, 2007); Comments of Mobile Industry Executives, RM-11361, at 6 (May 1, 2007); Comments of Consumers Union, Consumer Federation of America and Free Press, RM-11361 (Apr. 30, 2007); Comments of the Ad Hoc Public Interest Spectrum Coalition, RM-11361 (Apr. 30, 2007).
7. Formal Complaint of Free Press and Public Knowledge Against Comcast Corporation for Secretly Degrading Peer-to-Peer Applications, Memorandum Opinion and Order, File No. EB-08-IH-1518, WC Docket No. 07-52, FCC 08-183 (rel. Aug. 20, 2008).