For last five years a continual number of irregularities? have occurred in relation to phantom communication jamming / barring and IP blocking of Network protocols to Laptop, PC and possibility Table systems within Australian.
These occurrences have generally been focused on Residents and Citizens of Australia with usage of Control Panel\Network and Internet\Network Connections section protocols required for Broadband Sticks, WI-FI and Wireless connections.
This however does not affect customer?s usage of Direct GSM connections on Mobiles to Network Providers, thus meaning interference whilst using mobiles directly for internet or data apps would not occur without network congestion or frequency hijacking (Peering issues to be addressed with PnP wireless broadband).
Under examination of the re-occurrence I have found that this problem may not reside with the Network Providers that customers are connected to for delivery of service.
Nethertheless this issue is operating illegally and targeting entities without known criminal profiles aka innocent Australians.
Furthermore this practise to inhibit, interfere and or data crawl personal systems being illegal additionally disrupts service providers in delivery of service to these customers and technical support costs attributed too.
Over four to five years numerous cross examinations of such happenings have been under taken with assistance of technical aid, supplied by providers from a number of Networks Providers within Australia whilst these issues are occurring and thereafter.
Origins would indicate a similarity to internet censorship of the Republic of China protocol, thus controlling and prohibiting media data and information of political nature, other than that authorised.
In mentioning this I am refer to a primary controller having the capabilities to bar and or censor/restriction of information to select or multiple persons and or businesses.
This above protocol was recently pushed as an amended policy option via the Australian Government, giving allowance to legalise internet censorship with additional technical powers given to investigation units to intrude on civilian?s and businesses privacy without warrant.
I mention this above as it is highly likely this practise has already been in play/use without Comlaw (attorney general) stamping in test or civilian inhabitation and privacy interference.
This protocol action could only be accessed, authorised and acknowledge via communications at the top end level additionally having grade 1 level encryption services for general use and IP shielding.
This in layman terms means general technical and wholesale staff of service providers, possibly even the Network Providers themselves would not have access or knowledge of these protocols in use, nor would such be detected via in house communication systems due to legalities and liability issues.
This protocol as mentioned has been in Active Play for more than 5 years within Australia, this in general use and or trail with civilian testing.
I had communicated with the main communications giant Telstra Australia on GSM access to other service providers, the email and phone correspondence returned indicted that Telstra had no access to other providers in relation to GSM Technologies?, such operated independently.
Additionally an intrusion trackback was made to the Microsoft Corporation server fixating on their atdmt folder located in Saint Louis, MO USA ISP: Colo4 this brought to US-Cert?s attention.
I have brought this up due to the fact that it is Microsoft that invented Network Protocols? and have the knowledge to technical capabilities to make behind the scenes alterations to file systems.
Though mentioned that Microsoft have the capabilities to invent these Network protocols, and additionally capable of applying back of house inhibitors and or intrusive data scans, without knowing the contents of Atdmt we could assume that this is their extent.
This reason is secured by the factors that for Microsoft to remove a protocol barring and or inhibitor such would require access via data to the system, whereas the case states that such barring and or inhibitors are lifted without data access prior to network connection.
The case study would show as mentioned the network protocol inhibitors and or barring are placed just prior to the customer/civilian accessing their Network Provider Service, with additional IP blocking in place where connection is made, as secondary protocol.
This on a customer/civilian?s system via use of Wi-Fi would indicate Access: Local Only with Unidentified Network (no data usage accessible or in operation at this time).
In relation to Broadband PnP Wireless Sticks these are signal jammed from network or deliver the same indication stated above with signal.
Working of scenario in work of being able to achieve this, one would need access to a primary network provider and their access points.
Access Points:
1. Telstra Australia communications system with high level access for override of Wholesale provider data systems.
2. Telstra Exchanges access allowing tagging, tapping and network inhabitation, this additionally housing all provider network access boxes.
3. Communication Towers access via Telstra, Government or National Security Divisions.
Such overrides would not interfere with the Service Provider as mentioned in general, yet provides interceptor allowances for protocol blocking/barring with addition to tapping of any service provider customer for data or screen leeching.
These areas are the weaknesses that indicate most likely in accordance to such happenings, other than frequency peering of Broadband PnP Sticks.
This solution was made via a setup use of Wi-Fi with hidden access, this accompanied by an access pass code, thus removing civilian hijacking from the big picture, without acknowledgement of Wi-Fi Hotspot Name or Code (undetectable to public).
Service Providers and Telco Recourse: I would state that as a provider of service to your customers, and your own network security you should audit your Raw Setup of communications for abnormalities and or primary access points.
As mentioned your systems general operation would not detect such interception or intrusion that not only is an inconvenience to your customers but that also of your service provider business alike (sales, support and allegiance).
This is an illegal protocol that is not authorised via Government, nor warrantable for non criminal entities at this point and a direct violation to Civilians Liberty and Freedom of Rights inclusive of Privacy Act, Communications Act, Cybercrimes Act and possibility Fair Trading Act (competitive competition).
Keep in mind that technical support for providers have stated they have no capabilities to block other than data run-outs and if service providers them self?s have been placing bars nevertheless to this correspondence on functions aka Network Protocols, Broadband or Mobile Wi-Fi functions, the above would also apply to you.
With exchanges I would recommend checking seal numbers and access points to box plug-ins for tampering or unauthorised abilities.
These occurrences in general become active at night around 15:00, to mornings anywhere up to a number of days later thereafter.
Customers have the right to the service in which they have purchased no matter of interest or purpose use and service providers have the right to uninterrupted service given to their client database.
Brett J Hutton
Source: http://forums.altnews.com.au/forums/brett-hutton/broadband-and-wi-fi-barring
ground hog day 2012 aaron carter
