It does a lot: You aren't exposing our network to security threats or legal liability. I don't care what you do with your phone on your own Internet connection. But if you want to connect it to my Wi-Fi then it has to follow my rules.
It depends. Obviously a lot of effort by certain monopolistic advertising companies have gone into ensuring the web platform is increasingly opaque and difficult to manage or monitor, but it's entirely in the purview of a network owner to disable or block anything that can't be inspected to satisfaction.
There is no reasonable expectation of privacy on someone else's network, particularly an employer's. Arguably network operators have the ultimate authority on what should and shouldn't happen over their networks on their equipment.
I understand that ad companies have a vested interest in circumventing this and trying to move internet standards to opaque protocols, but until that particular fiefdom is unseated, we have to make reasonable tradeoffs.
In the meantime, we block a massive amount of malware by blocking their ad domains.
> Arguably network operators have the ultimate authority on what should and shouldn't happen over their networks on their equipment.
I think the point here is you write on their equipment. I was talking about cases where the network owner don't control the endpoints, that is allowing private devices to connect. snooping in that data can be problematic.
> There is no reasonable expectation of privacy on someone else's network, particularly an employer's.
This is a massive [Citation needed]. Do you have a court precendence case where you can prove that admins have the right to snoop through private and sensitive data of users that are just connected to some network?
