Cloned Modems and STM

[Martyn]

Originally Posted by Toto

Curious here, you say that STM is a means to keep upgrading costs to a minimum, what differences to network speed/capacity then does a minimum spend provide as opposed to a full spend?

i think he means they won't upgrade there systems, as new custoers join, the servers are getting more packed, and using more data.. so there are limiting us to this now, there faulse advertising..in a way.. but there doing it in a cleaver way.. there not stopping your services, only cutting the download..

so a game that would take 10 minutes to download, would ake 4 hours instead... i'm thinking of making a complaint towards this to the government about CO2 Levels, wasting electricity, due to us having to leave our PC's on longer to beable to download something we should beable to download within 20 minutes... the guy i spoke to (Rob i think it was) said take it to watch dog....

[eth01]

Originally Posted by Martyn

i think he means they won't upgrade there systems, as new custoers join, the servers are getting more packed, and using more data.. so there are limiting us to this now, there faulse advertising..in a way.. but there doing it in a cleaver way.. there not stopping your services, only cutting the download..

so a game that would take 10 minutes to download, would ake 4 hours instead... i'm thinking of making a complaint towards this to the government about CO2 Levels, wasting electricity, due to us having to leave our PC's on longer to beable to download something we should beable to download within 20 minutes... the guy i spoke to (Rob i think it was) said take it to watch dog....

You are not the only person experiencing such problems, k?

[Impz2002]

Originally Posted by pippincp

A cloned modem would never cause anyone to be accused of illegal file sharing nor would it cause STM problems for the legitamate customer. The clone would have a MAC address from a modem in a different area of the network.

Afaik a cloned modem will not trigger STM on the original connection as it is on a different node and therefore will have its own STM limit.

Impz

[jtwn]

Yes!! Over a THIRD of ntl's network is taken up from non-paying users!!

Just remember, it's pretty common place that for every customer that has the lowest package, there is another 10 customers who have the lowest package but used cloned modems + certain tv boxes in the household

Take grimsby for example....that used to be an area where practically every household had 2-4 modems + 2-4 tv boxes...

Seriously.

No, wait... I can't be bothered.

[grubbymitts]

Originally Posted by TraxData

But this is my giga stats from just 1 day (fresh format)

We have STM because people like you download 253.5gb in one day! The same people who seem to come on here and spread gossip with no backup data whatsoever. 35% cloned network my stinking backside. Trax, one day an admin/mod on here is going to realise what utter nonsense you talk and just ban you. The sooner that day comes, the better.

[Toto]

Originally Posted by grubbymitts

We have STM because people like you download 253.5gb in one day! The same people who seem to come on here and spread gossip with no backup data whatsoever. 35% cloned network my stinking backside. Trax, one day an admin/mod on here is going to realise what utter nonsense you talk and just ban you. The sooner that day comes, the better.

I think you'll find that Trax isn't on the VM network, otherwise he'd be bitching day after day about STM

[grubbymitts]

unless he still has an unlimited business account of course...

if he isn't, then he should just bugger off the forum and go to somewhere that caters for the network he is on.

[Jelly]

CableForum isn't limited to VM customers. Since he's also an ex-employee - AFAIK - he can be a valuable source of information.

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Jelly

CableForum isn't limited to VM customers. Since he's also an ex-employee - AFAIK - he can be a valuable source of information.

Certainly true, as long as the information can be verified as correct.

---------- Post added at 08:29 ---------- Previous post was at 08:12 ----------

Originally Posted by Sirius

No

If your mac is used then its YOUR mac that will be associated with the ip address at the dhcp level no matter which part of the network its on.

if they clone your mac 001122334455 then it is 001122334455 that will be tagged to the ip address when VM check the dhcp records

That raises two points.

1) STM is applied at the UBR level of your connection, therefore if your MAC IS cloned on a different UBR, and the cloner triggers the STM threshhold on that UBR, then its the cloner who will be affected. After all if your modem has been cloned, you're not getting the benefit of the cloner bandwidth are you?

2) In relation to a cloned MAC address, whilst it appears that this goes on, it seems to have been overlooked that you can't have the same IP address assigned to both modems. Therefore, it is likely that VM can see if a modem has been cloned when it sees overlapping DHCP lease IP assignments and that one IP address is not assigned to the customers regional DHCP server. How this would apply to STM I'm not sure.

I know STM is not popular with some, but I don't think VM are stupid enough not to factor in the possibility of a cloned modem.

Worrying thing too, the figure of 35% of the network being cloned has been banded about by someone, that's about 1M CM customers??? I'm sure that's incorrect.

Just a few thoughts I had this morning.

Originally Posted by Toto

2) In relation to a cloned MAC address, whilst it appears that this goes on, it seems to have been overlooked that you can't have the same IP address assigned to both modems.

Agreed but read below as far as Torrents and File sharing goes.

Therefore, it is likely that VM can see if a modem has been cloned when it sees overlapping DHCP lease IP assignments and that one IP address is not assigned to the customers regional DHCP server. How this would apply to STM I'm not sure.

Again agreed as regard to STM,

However when it comes to File sharing its a different matter as the BPI will just send in a IP address, Someone at VM (who could be very overworked) will then look at that IP address and trace it to its mac address, Guess who's account they will see when they do the cross reference ????. If there had been no alligation of cloning on that account would the person at VM even bother to look at all the DHCP data to see if there was a record of an other mac on a different local section of the segment.

Worrying thing too, the figure of 35% of the network being cloned has been banded about by someone, that's about 1M CM customers??? I'm sure that's incorrect

That figure seems a bit over the top to me as well.

Your right about cloned modems and STM however this next bit is slightly off topic but it has to be said Sorry

However i don't agree as far as BPI letters and cloned macs go. If that customer who received a letter has never used any type of file sharing then it must potentially point to a cloned modem, However would VM have checked for that before they sent out a letter potentially accusing someone of something they never did.

I don't use file sharing system that requires you to upload and download at the same time on an open and insecure server (i use news groups), Therefor if i was to get a letter relating to torrent use for instance i certainly would be asking for any information relating to cloning.

Because for me to get a letter it should relate to my usage on newsgroups and that would open up a whole new ball game about how they received that information.

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Sirius

Agreed but read below as far as Torrents and File sharing goes.



Again agreed as regard to STM,

However when it comes to File sharing its a different matter as the BPI will just send in a IP address, Someone at VM (who could be very overworked) will then look at that IP address and trace it to its mac address, Guess who's account they will see when they do the cross reference ????. If there had been no alligation of cloning on that account would the person at VM even bother to look at all the DHCP data to see if there was a record of an other mac on a different local section of the segment.



That figure seems a bit over the top to me as well.

Your right about cloned modems and STM however this next bit is slightly off topic but it has to be said Sorry

However i don't agree as far as BPI letters and cloned macs go. If that customer who received a letter has never used any type of file sharing then it must potentially point to a cloned modem, However would VM have checked for that before they sent out a letter potentially accusing someone of something they never did.

I don't use file sharing system that requires you to upload and download at the same time on an open and insecure server (i use news groups), Therefor if i was to get a letter relating to torrent use for instance i certainly would be asking for any information relating to cloning.

Because for me to get a letter it should relate to my usage on newsgroups and that would open up a whole new ball game about how they received that information.

You're right.

We could surmise given the recent press about the letter itself (or rather the sticker on it) that every care is being taken now to make sure that the account contacted was not the victim of a cloned modem.

You should stop harking on about USENET downloads, the BPI are not targeting that arena, and stop trying to slip in the DPI argument either, naughty boy.

[Berealwith]

Originally Posted by Sirius

Your right about cloned modems and STM however this next bit is slightly off topic but it has to be said Sorry

However i don't agree as far as BPI letters and cloned macs go. If that customer who received a letter has never used any type of file sharing then it must potentially point to a cloned modem, However would VM have checked for that before they sent out a letter potentially accusing someone of something they never did.

I don't use file sharing system that requires you to upload and download at the same time on an open and insecure server (i use news groups), Therefor if i was to get a letter relating to torrent use for instance i certainly would be asking for any information relating to cloning.

Because for me to get a letter it should relate to my usage on newsgroups and that would open up a whole new ball game about how they received that information.

I wondered about this Sirius

But to get back on topic. I have left Virgrim a few months ago, i got my last phone call from them and true to form it was another let down.

The reason for this was. I was aksed to be at home friday pm after 12 midday, so someone could pick up my STB, and yes i waited in and no one came

I also asked if they were going to pick up my two cable modems.

So i have two cable modems and one STB sat at home with me and Virgrim cannot be bothered to pick them up that was weeks ago.

So my point is, some people i know use cloned set top's and cloned modems. They give me "so with all you whinning about Virgrim i bet your on cloned stuff now". Not a chance my reply, that's what is slowly killing the network. Now if they cannot be bothered to pick thier stuff up on your disconnection day why dont they just re-configure the modem and brick it !!!!

Oh in case you are wondering i took all the cables out of my house to the street i was that mad about the way i was treated by Virgrim, and i dont recommend them to anyone. As they are a crap outfit

[Impz2002]

It obviously isn't easy for VM to check DHCP records to see weather the same mac has leased an IP address on another node of the network as if they had easy access to this data it would be much easier to disconnect cloned modems. It wouldn't surprise me if they didn't check anything when they get a BPI request as it isn't a formal pursuit for damages.


VM will only do the bare minimum required and we have seen this time and time again !

Impz

Originally Posted by Toto

You should stop harking on about USENET downloads, the BPI are not targeting that arena, and stop trying to slip in the DPI argument either, naughty boy.

Oh come on i have to have some fun

Originally Posted by grubbymitts

We have STM because people like you download 253.5gb in one day! The same people who seem to come on here and spread gossip with no backup data whatsoever. 35% cloned network my stinking backside. Trax, one day an admin/mod on here is going to realise what utter nonsense you talk and just ban you. The sooner that day comes, the better.

1)I havent been with VM for sometime now.

2)No, we have STM because VM dont want to upgrade the network to handle how big the net is getting (unless your stuck in the 90s thinking files are still 5mb )

3)Most of that data is legal (server to server backup, distro uploading to FTP, database backup and a few other things)

4)My ISP dont care if i download that much in a day because its fibre and they have a good core network, i know people that do more.

5)It was 35% at last count (before all the hits), believe whatever you want but there was a reason VM had to hit so many modems in such short time, i think you'll find most cloners have the basic minimum package (2Mbit) as well as to not look suspicious, i think you should go to a place like sheffield or parts of nottingham or even better, grimsby and see just how many cloners there are, it's bloody charming, if there wasnt -that- many cloners why do you think the network suddenly speeded up so much when they got kicked off? oh wait...because its only a small percentage of people doing it

6)If your talking about webuser, i have corrected them (and scanned documents as proof)

---------- Post added at 12:39 ---------- Previous post was at 12:13 ----------

Originally Posted by jtwn

Yes!! Over a THIRD of ntl's network is taken up from non-paying users!!



Seriously.

No, wait... I can't be bothered.

I suggest you re-read, most cloners are people who pay for minimum packages.