Broadband modems connections capable of much higher rates than published - DNC server connection?

a reply to: DigginFoTroof
Appologies if I came across as being ‘full of myself’ but if you’re trying to prove a point, especially in the IT realm I would only ask that you’ll explain your theory in a technical manner.

My best guess for your ‘very fast DSL speed’ would be an error on the computer measuring the speed.
As for the ‘DNC was hacked’ theory, the files would be coppied over months, easy does it, otherwise the IDS might get tripped. God I hope they had an IDS

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

But a packet transferred over the internet, is a packet. Doesn't matter what it is, encrypted or plain text. I don't doubt there is hardware that can do what you describe. But not in a cheap brand NIC designed to be a consumer item. It would, in my opinion, be elsewhere. At the node, rim, or exchange. And with services throttled over cable with congestion at the best of times, adding overhead like that would render an ISP running at a cost.

They wanted, at one point, to snoop on everyone's traffic here, to ensure they were not doing naughty things. But even the ISP's complained that it would not work. And my ISP at one point, were dead against any means to infringe on a customers privacy. Before TPG bought them out and turned them into a joke.

I just don't see it. It's not that efficient, as a whole. Just too many factors for it to be a thing, at least in my mind.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

megabits per second to megaBytes per second.

rather large difference.

originally posted by: AScrubWhoDied
I don't understand here?

Are you saying your modem has a higher throughput than what's advertised?
Higher line rate?
Or where you shocked to find out that your ISP is controlling the amount of bandwidth that's allocated to you?

Also remember that everyone thought that CPU's were secure but then

No, everyone didn't think this. Not knowing about a particular vulnerability does not default to a system being 'secure'. I'd wager there are more vulnerabilities that no one's talking about.

I dont' know if I can put it any more simply than this. I was getting higher transfer/download rates than what the VDSL2 protocol can support. Now what I'm provisioned or given by the ISP, but what the hardware is limited to.

It would be like a 1Gbps ethernet connection running at 2Gbps or faster. The fastest the network connection (1Gbps ethernet) can run is 1Gbps both ways in full duplex mode. Getting 2x the speed can't happen unless there is a very unique configuration where there isn't bi-directional (send/receive) communication and data can only flow one way, but my system wasn't set up that way.

This has nothing to do with any "broadband rate" I was sold, or that there were faster plans available, it was running MUCH faster than the protocol/hardware is reported to be able to run.

I know it is hard to wrap your head around becuase it really shouldn't be possible and it is difficult to think "I" don't know what I'm talking about but my profession was tech support, System/network admin, IT manager for a long time and I had never seen anything like this.

Another way of putting this would be like USB 2 (480Mbps max speed) running at about 1Gbps, which should be impossible due to the USB 2.0 protocol and the hardware.

Does that clear it up for you?

originally posted by: SummerRain
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

But a packet transferred over the internet, is a packet. Doesn't matter what it is, encrypted or plain text. I don't doubt there is hardware that can do what you describe. But not in a cheap brand NIC designed to be a consumer item. It would, in my opinion, be elsewhere. At the node, rim, or exchange. And with services throttled over cable with congestion at the best of times, adding overhead like that would render an ISP running at a cost.

They wanted, at one point, to snoop on everyone's traffic here, to ensure they were not doing naughty things. But even the ISP's complained that it would not work. And my ISP at one point, were dead against any means to infringe on a customers privacy. Before TPG bought them out and turned them into a joke.

I just don't see it. It's not that efficient, as a whole. Just too many factors for it to be a thing, at least in my mind.

Theres port mirroring which won't slow down your data as it goes down to the spooks and theres plenty out there of ISP rooms that are locked away from even the ISP's staff.

Most IT stuff is shall we say available of much more as theres no point designing anything that just hits the target, have worked on mainframes where your pew pew is dependent on your paying the reaper and if you need more its only a call and a command line option away.

a reply to: SummerRain

without throttling the service how can they pretend to offer the same service to everyone?

doesn't the ISP set the clock rate for individual interfaces from their end???

not sure how that works

a reply to: Maxatoria

At the cost of consistent speeds, yes. One call, your latency is lower (by a small margin) but your likely to get more packet loss over large downloads.

Still not gigabytes faster at the flick of a switch, and certainly not enough to transfer large amounts of data hidden in your average packet stream.

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: SummerRain

without throttling the service how can they pretend to offer the same service to everyone?

doesn't the ISP set the clock rate for individual interfaces from their end???

not sure how that works

They do limit the speeds at which you connect to. That is why you can upgrade, or downgrade your plan. Artificially limiting speeds is not new. For us, if we went over our monthly data allowance, they would limit us to a slower speed till the end of the billing month. Nothing new.

As I mentioned, my link to the exchange ranges from 12Mbps, 25Mbps, 50Mbps and 100Mbps. They don't build individual routes, it's all the same. They limit you on those to which plan you opt into.

If they could offer 300Mbps plans, you bet they would. Not keep it a secret just for the spooks to siphon off our datas and all..

Some areas are limited also by architecture. Some wholesale broadband can get much better speeds than retail. Telstra have Rims that are hard limited to adsl2 speeds, still. Some areas rely still on satellite DSL.

You speeds are more defined by the limitations of what you're using. It's too complicated to have a one size fits all subversive scheme running at the user end, in modems and routers and RJ45 connectors.

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: SummerRain

without throttling the service how can they pretend to offer the same service to everyone?

doesn't the ISP set the clock rate for individual interfaces from their end???

not sure how that works

Oh and one other important factor in that! When they say they offer a set service, the fine prints will always include "Up to" as they cannot guarantee a service at a specific rate, only what the specifications are rated at. So as long as it is above the tier below it, regardless of whether or not it meets the advertised speeds, it is still legally binding.

With ADSL it was 8Mbps. So anywhere between 512kbps and 8Mbps was sufficient from an ISP standpoint. for ADSL2, it was 12Mbps, so anywhere between 8Mbps and 12Mbps. ADSL2+ it was 24Mbps, so anywhere between 12 and 24. etc.

The devil is in the detail, with an ISP.

a reply to: toysforadults

Now I'm not 100% sure they are using Cisco products but I'm pretty Damn sure they are

Safe bet.
Most do

Depends.
Copper or Fiber ?
Downstream routers or switches ?
Copper or fiber ?
NIC or HBA speed capability and architecture ?
Wireless or wired ? (If copper)
Total throughput ?

The speed of a network is only as fast as it's slowest link

The alleged speed the data was pulled off of the DNC server would have required one Hades of a connection .(If it was not done directly on the server.)

a reply to: Gothmog

so they don't set the rate on the individual serial interface on each connection like I would on my networks?

I'm assuming they have an SD-WAN controller now and they have a more granular approach to packet shaping to improve bandwidth and bottle necking

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: Gothmog

so they don't set the rate on the individual serial interface on each connection like I would on my networks?

Only the ISP on an internet connection device.
You get what you pay for.
Yet , if your connection is copper it is limited. Very limited.
It is a fiber bundle up to a point. Then copper going in.

My post was only for the alleged speed of the alleged hack of the DNC server compare to a speed of a "normal" internet connection

a reply to: Gothmog

oh yeah, anyone working on networks should know that

anyone claiming to be a network specialist or infosec analyst or something is lying or... something more sinister

a reply to: toysforadults

I'm assuming they have an SD-WAN controller now and they have a more granular approach to packet shaping to improve bandwidth and bottle necking

One can do anything they would like...
Only hardware matters enough.

This has been going on a long time, 25 years ago I downloaded Moby Dick from a west Coast server in about 3 seconds using a standard 56k dial up modem. Thought it must be some kind of compression algorithm or clock resonance like they use for the GPS tiers, never figured that one out.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Uh not exactly. Unless you know the underlying infrastructure could handle the bandwidth you wanted hacking a connection to increase the speed isn't feasible.

ISPs routinely traffic shape, bandwidth limit and offer tiered service using hardware. The DNC would not have a DSL or cable modem. They'd more than likely have T1 with some remote content hosting to offset the load on their webserver(s). Although it's entirely possible they may have had a T3 most are unwilling to pay that amount for a connection.

A T1 for sure could not move data fast enough to exceed the 20-25 megaBYTES per second at which the data was transferred off the server. It can only move 1.54 megaBITS per seconds. A megabyte is 8 megabits.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

About 10 years ago, when we built and moved into our house, we had a DSL connection but the tech when he came out to wire the exchange (a rural exchange about 700 meters away) said that he'd had problems as the exchange was full and would need to be expanded, but that he'd connected up everything, anyway.

After the techie was done and then testing the link, I was getting more than 30Meg/Sec and so I didn't complain as it was supposed to be a DSL 1.0 connection that is supposed to max out at 6 Meg.

When we had the original phone line disconnected a couple of years later, we couldn't call out, but our internet stayed up and running at full 30M/s speed.

We got the line reconnected and the technician said he didn't understand how we had still been getting internet. He later said that it looked like our lines had been 'piggybacked' onto 'the other side' of the exchange.

After that, our internet slowed to 5 Meg down. A short time later we went to VDSL and then to Vectored VDSL so we are getting about 30Meg/Sec down, again.

Hanging out for Gigabit fiber but we are semi-rural so not till next year.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Back in the day before the walled garden I setup a trivial ftp on my private network with the address the ISP used for their own tftp to push down a modified config to my cable modem. It worked for sure and the speeds were far greater than advertised. In more recent times this is not so easy to do. This is all I can say.

originally posted by: toysforadults
This is how I would assume they were doing it but I don't know anything about ISP's.

Most internet service has a cap on it, the same hardware is capable of providing multiple speeds, and all of those speeds are reduced from the maximum available. This is necessary in order to divide a line and ensure all customers get access.

Where I live though, our town is actually a testbed for national ISP rollouts so we get better service than is available elsewhere. For example, we have a 5 gigabit speed tier plan for about $100/month. However, in practice that plan is unlimited because they haven't actually figured out how to limit that speed on the modem. Two years ago when gigabit was new to the area, there was a similar problem in limiting it, and it was effectively unlimited.

Years ago, a very popular practice among people was to uncap their cable modems, and have essentially unlimited speed. ISP's figured that one out pretty fast though. You can still do it today actually, but you'll almost certainly face legal action for doing so.

When it comes to the OP's issue with DSL, DSL is capable of a max speed of about 500 megabits. Residential service will only be a fraction of that, but if you get the whole line to yourself without any hardware limitations you can hit it.