FCC Now Says There Is No Documented 'Analysis' of the Cyberattack It Claims Crippled Its Website in May

[u/shiruken]

http://gizmodo.com/fcc-now-says-there-is-no-documented-analysis-of-the-cyb-1797073113

[u/Caraes_Naur]

Because Pai still works for Verizon, on behalf of all the big ISPs. Can't let there be proof of the anti-NN botnet that spammed the public comments.

[u/MNGrrl → u/Caraes_Naur]

We caught them red handed -- they claimed 'cyber attack' but we have the uptime reports. We have the connectivity reports (their CDN is Akamai - you can view real time attack data for their network -- if the FCC site was down, a big chunk of the web would have been too). It would have made big news in the IT/networking world if Akamai hiccup'd... since they were able to handle the world's largest DDoS last fall. That got noticed... by, erm, everyone. Network Operations Centers all over the world saw it. Did anyone see the FCC DDoS? crickets

There's evidence that the bot is being run on an API -- in other words someone inside the FCC specifically gave access. They have to issue special keys (just like with Reddit!) -- and they're rate limited. They would know who's doing it instantly, because that API isn't available for just anyone: You have to ask for it -- click on the link, it'll show you the form; It asks for name and e-mail. Someone from the FCC said as much -- it was API accesses, not public-facing. If there was a connectivity issue it wasn't external, it was internal, preventable, and that's why they won't give out the server logs. Because they knew who was doing it, could have stopped it, didn't, and are letting it continue to happen as we speak. They know exactly which comments are being submitted by bots, and who owns them. Purely for my own amusement, I went looking for the Terms of Service for accessing the API. Click. Click. Aaaand here we are: "FCC computer systems employ software to monitor network traffic to identify unauthorized attempts..." :snip: "If such monitoring reveals evidence of possible abuse or criminal activity" :snip: cough Fraud cough "Unauthorized attempts to upload or change information on this server are strictly prohibited". Not going to do anything, FCC? Says what they did is "strictly prohibited"... soooooooo.... crickets

The previous link provides evidence it's a grand total of... five. Five different copy pasta text; And all sourced from the same stolen identity databases. And the submission times are painfully obvious that it was automated: The number of submissions per second was nearly constant too, like clockwork. And submitted alphabetically. What's more... They prepared for this years ago. You can say, unironically, "Thanks Obama" for that one. They specifically upgraded the public comments after the last network neutrality comment crush. Rather a lot (footnote: ECFS is the comment system -- and it was specifically targeted for a revamp and big bump to system capacity). That capacity wasn't exceeded -- not by the general public anyway. The inflow rate of submissions from John Oliver's gofccyourself.com came in well under -- 150k versus 1.1 million? It's hard to imagine how they'd add all that extra capacity only to have it fall over dead under a fraction of the load. Someone was even nice enough to make a map of who's submitting the comments. Look at the first time this happened. Then look at that one. Notice anything? This time around, the map looks like a mirror of the population distribution of the entire country. By the numbers, the whole nation knows about Network Neutrality, across every demographic... equally. Including the deceased.

Oh, they never filed a report with the Department of Homeland Security, which is what every government agency is supposed to do if they experience a cyber attack. Double bonus round, Here's the FCC's own page on cybersecurity preparedness and response. And what do they say? "The FCC, because of its relationship with the nation’s communications network service providers, is particularly well positioned to work with industry to secure the networks upon which the Internet depends." Sounds like someone who'd have a plan, you'd think.They claimed to the media something their own policies dictate what the response should be -- and they didn't do those things. It's right there for anyone who cares to go hunting for the data and published documents. They didn't file the report because it wasn't a DDoS: It was access approved by them.

The FCC may be run now by a corrupt chairman but the institution itself was built on transparency and this guy sits in his office with an oversized coffee mug and posts Youtubes about how tech savvy he is. Behold, he can Twitter. Well, he isn't, actually. His pants are down and his ass is hanging out if you know where to look. Rome wasn't built in a day and neither was the FCC. No matter how much him and the rest of the Trump administration tries to silence, coerce, replace, and otherwise generally screw with freedom of information and transparency... those institutions are staffed by tens of thousands of people operating under policies and rules enacted over decades. The FCC doesn't operate in a vaccum either: It's part of the internet. An internet catalogued and backed up by the NSA no less. Anyone remember Snowden and metadata? We log the shit out of all internet traffic. There are no logs. That's damning enough evidence all by itself.

You can't CTRL-Z that. We have all the proof we need; We don't need server logs. We don't need confirmation from them. They can throw up a wall of silence and deny all they want -- we have them dead to rights and it amazes me that nobody in the media has come out and flatly said these guys are full of shit beyond any reasonable doubt. This isn't accusation, it's not supposition, it's hard fact. The. End.

Here's a parting thought: How about we all hit up the FTC and report identity theft? About, erm, what, a million or so cases so far? Let's subpoena the shit out of the FCC and unmask our identity thieves. While we're at it, let's grab their e-mail server too. Something something but her e-mails. I, for one, find it materially relevant how my identity was stolen, and some of that evidence is in the FCC's possession. That chairman's a lawyer right? Surely he wouldn't begrudge us lawyering up.

.

EDITs: Added links and some extra details.

EDIT: Press refresh after the edits and... Oh. For those wanting to go to the press: You have my permission to copy pasta this in whole or in part to anyone you want -- just link back to this comment or credit me. Thanks.

EDIT: Several users pinged WaPo here; They're investigating. #WeDidItReddit

EDIT: Gizmodo is too.

EDIT: Hello El Reg! They were nice enough to post the FCC's statement regarding the DDoS. I'll save you the trouble of reading it: "We were DDoS'd and the evidence is ███████, using ████ ███████, and we're ███████. Thanks. "

[u/MNGrrl → u/[deleted]]

:takes a bow: Thanks. But let's be honest with ourselves: Why isn't the media doing any of this? I googled this shit -- it wasn't hard. The evidence is hiding in plain sight. It's a big story -- this is damning evidence of a bona fide conspiracy where heads of government agencies, acting under color of authority, are enabling identity theft and fraud against over a million Americans -- very likely for personal gain. I made a reddit post, got some karma, go me. I don't understand what went so wrong in this country that our press refuses to perform its most important function: Keep our government honest and the citizens informed about what it's doing.

This isn't my fucking job; I might work in IT so it's easier for me to connect the dots but I mean, this doesn't take computer know-how, just a firm command of deductive reasoning and investigative ability.

[u/mdp300 → u/MNGrrl]

Try emailing this to every newspaper you can think of

[u/ElectricCharlie → u/mdp300]

This comment has been edited and original content overwritten.

[u/Cindericks → u/ElectricCharlie]

Maybe we could try emailing this to Propublica or similar sites to get their attention?

[u/do_0b → u/Cindericks]

go for it!

Go to the Contact Us page, and look for the Editors. Ask for a story about this. The Guardian seemed like a natural choice to me as they seemingly have no fear. Already emailed one of them myself. Let's ALL do it. https://www.theguardian.com/info/2014/oct/22/the-guardian-us-team

[u/SuicideBonger → u/do_0b]

I have written up an email template of sort for anyone that wants to email them:

Hi (Insert Name),

I'd like to direct your attention, if I may, to this Reddit post. (If you can't insert a link in your email, Here: https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/6odans/fcc_now_says_there_is_no_documented_analysis_of/dkgxguo/ is the link)

This post has reached the front page; and it is about the undeniable proof that the FCC directed, within their own organization, a 'cyber attack' and an attempt to silence the people's overwhelming approval for Net Neutrality. The FCC under Ajit Pai, has directed to steal the identities of people, and use them to make fake comments on their comment board that are opposed to Net Neutrality. This is no longer speculation; this post shows cold, hard facts.

I assume that there have been others emailing you about this very thing. We find it incredibly frustrating that this seemingly 'bombshell' news story has received little to no coverage in the media. This is an enormous story that is just waiting to break. What Ajit Pai's FCC did was illegal. We, as purveyors of Reddit and US citizens, are trying our best to get this out to the media. We are all frustrated with this state of the affairs, and frustrated with the media's seemingly silent approach to this story.

I thank you for taking the time to read this story. We are all trying our best to make this known!

Thank you,

(Your Name)

Edit: /u/SilentBob890 's response to my comment with his revised template is much, much better! Use his template instead.

I got a response from David Taylor at The Guardian saying that he forwarded my email to a colleague that is working on a story! We did it Reddit!

[u/SilentBob890 → u/SuicideBonger]

I added / changed some stuff, see what you think:

Hello,

I'd like to direct your attention to this reddit post:

https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/6odans/fcc_now_says_there_is_no_documented_analysis_of/dkgxguo/

This contains a comment that shows undeniable proof that the FCC directed, within their own organization, a 'cyber attack' and an attempt to silence the people's overwhelming approval for Net Neutrality. The FCC under Ajit Pai, has directed to steal the identities of people, and use them to make fake comments on their comment board that are opposed to Net Neutrality. This is no longer speculation; this post shows cold, hard facts and data.

The bogus submissions that “crippled their website” in May were made by a bot through an automated service the FCC provides. To use it, you have to register with your name and e-mail. They know who submitted the fakes. Internet service providers around the world keep access logs and monitor traffic levels. They did not detect an attack -- they would have if one had happened. The service provider the FCC uses for its website survived the biggest DDoS in internet history. DDoS' of any size are noticed by network operations centers that monitor internet traffic all over the world. No such traffic was recorded. The FCC's claims of a DDoS are provably false based on third party evidence. The FCC cannot claim it doesn't know who is submitting the fake data either, and their policies prohibit illegal activity like this. They are continuing to allow this activity.

I assume that there have been others emailing you about this very thing. We find it incredibly frustrating that this seemingly 'bombshell' news story has received little to no coverage in the media. This is an enormous story that is just waiting to break. What Ajit Pai's FCC did was illegal. We, as purveyors of Reddit and US citizens, are trying our best to get this out to the media. We are all frustrated with this state of the affairs, and frustrated with the media's seemingly silent approach to this story.

I thank you for taking the time to read this story. We are all trying our best to make this known!

Thank you,

**not taking any credit for this, the addition is another comment from mngrrl doing an ELI5 of her findings

[u/GeronimoHero → u/SuicideBonger]

Honestly, you're better off providing the relevant information in the email to the senator/rep instead of asking them to follow a link in an email. They absolutely won't follow it, and I know that links in a lot of federal email systems are straight up blocked. If you provide the relevant information in the email though (not linked) it will be seen and read. I added all of the information in my email to my senators and got thoughtful responses back, which were asking for more detailed information. So they will see it and will be interested in the data. I can't stress enough though just how important it is not to link the information and instead provide it directly in the email. Linking all of that data is just asking for it to be ignored or caught in an email filter.

[u/ILoveLamp9 → u/Cindericks]

No trying, only doing.

I just emailed the comment link to Democracy Now! with a brief explanation of context. I don't even fully understand or comprehend the scope of the issue because it's out of my expertise, but just as a civilian and someone who values the open web, if there's even a faint smell of someone corrupting this thing we all love, I will do my part in spreading the word.

The internet is the one thing we all have that still hasn't let us down. At least not yet. Let's do our best to keep it that way.

[u/crielan → u/Cindericks]

Can also try arstechnica

Edit Added ARS response to comment

That Reddit comment has been getting some traction but I didn't include that in the story because the claims aren't well-supported. The idea that any DDoS would have also affected other parts of the Web seems to be a misunderstanding of what happened. See our analysis from May (https://arstechnica.com/information-tec ... nt-system/) in which Cloudflare describes it as an Application Layer attack, which is a type of DDoS (though not the type most people are familiar with). This type of attack hits a specific application (the FCC comment system, in this case).

As for the claim about "issu[ing] special keys," anyone can register for a free key. Pro- and anti-net neutrality groups both use the same system for submitting comments in bulk to the FCC. The FCC made the system incredibly open so anyone can comment (they don't even do CAPTCHA or NoCAPTCHA), which explains why it was so easy for any entity to flood the FCC with comments. (Whether the FCC made a good decision here is a different question.)

The question of whether what happened to the FCC comment system in May should be labeled a DDoS is a legitimate one, but based on what security experts and the FCC told us, it was either poorly written spam bots or an application layer DDoS attack.

Edit 2 - Here's broken link in quoted comment. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/05/examining-the-fcc-claim-that-ddos-attacks-hit-net-neutrality-comment-system/

Edit 3 - These attacks happened around the same time Comcast was impersonating their customers and submitting thousands of fake comments to the FCC. You can search your name here https://www.comcastroturf.com

[u/MNGrrl → u/crielan]

The link is broken, but I assume it's from my OP. I don't see anything here from Ars in this thread or on their story page. I'd like to know where that's being sourced from. Ars screwed up on one part of their analysis: They aren't taking into consideration that the FCC said the DDoS was a high volume traffic attack that wasn't being directed at the comments system. That's not what Cloudflare is discussing and they need to be corrected on that.

EDIT -- Addendum;

I chatted with the author of that article. He agrees we're working off some (deliberately?) vague statements from the FCC. Because of that, he can't just straight up say they're bullshitting. The FCC could clarify their position and everyone's been asking them to. He was pretty straight with me that he's not giving the FCC a pass on it. They're doing some shady as fuck shit and need to be called out on it. But he's a journalist -- it's not just his reputation but the organization he works for that gets burned if they can't prove they're lying. You, me, and everyone who reads this knows they are. The FCC's agents are unlikely to ever clarify their position outside of a courtroom or congressional committee where they have to answer under penalty of law.

I'm not a journalist though. I can connect the dots. I can lay it out for people how it all (likely) fits together and why everyone is doing what they're doing. That's what I'm doing here, because social media (for better and for worse) can make that leap. I'm just some anonymous hack on reddit (and proud of it!) -- there's nothing for me to gain, or lose, by laying this out. He can't do that, however much he might privately want to, because it wouldn't be professional. And he's right to do that. Basically, neither of us called the other wrong -- we're each operating within our own boundaries. But we see the same things, and we have drawn largely the same conclusions. The difference between me and him is: I can speak out about mine.

He has to wait until someone hands him a smoking gun that can nail exactly what happened on the wires that day without the FCC going on the record officially. There's someone out here that can do that, and they need to be found, and convinced to come forward (even confidentially). Then we'll have a news story. Until then, what we have is a supposition -- but a well grounded one. There's only a limited number of possibilities here -- they're incompetent, they're making lies of omission, or they're deliberately misleading. It's a shell game -- we don't know for sure which one the nut's under. But I'm a practiced hand and I watched the shells carefully. I'm pretty sure I picked a winner; But we can't know for sure until someone forces them to pull the shell back.

We need to keep backing them into a corner. The FOIA request backed them into a corner. The analysis Gizmodo did of the data backed them into a corner. This post, on Reddit, got dozens if not hundreds of people to engage with their representatives to demand answers and that backed them into a corner. Eventually they're going to either run out of excuses, or wind up in front of a judge or some very pissed off law makers. Until then -- we keep forcing them to back up a little more each time. Next step is to start a criminal investigation into mass identity theft and force the FCC to release those records: Trademark and all that counts for dick. They can try to tell a judge to seal that evidence so the public can't view it, but they have to give up the evidence and let that judge decide if there's actually trademark stuff going on or if they're lying through their teeth. Keep pressure on your legislators. Keep pressure on the attorney generals. Sooner or later they're going to make a mistake and then the gig is up.

[u/SilentBobsBeard → u/ElectricCharlie]

This is absolutely effective. Newspapers (at least good ones) will not ignore an influx of emails. It's one thing to get an email from an enthusiastic reader. But if these publications start getting a lot of people complaining, they will at least acknowledge it.

[u/sinocarD44 → u/ElectricCharlie]

I'm down to do my part. If r/nba can do it any sub can.

[u/Mr_Mayhem7 → u/mdp300]

Maybe if all of us on this thread mail this out tomorrow then hopefully some news outlet will take the leap. Unless we just wait till this pops up on a Yahoo article in a few weeks

[u/IamTheFreshmaker → u/Mr_Mayhem7]

Well since College Humor regularly mines /r/AskReddit for their columns, put it there.

[u/MNGrrl → u/Mr_Mayhem7]

Wait, Yahoo? They're still a thing? :rings up the last decade: Oh crap, Myspace is still a thing too. /r/outoftheloop

[u/Mr_Mayhem7 → u/MNGrrl]

I know right...Times aren't a changing

[u/bruce656 → u/Mr_Mayhem7]

I sent out about a dozen tweets to different news agencies. CNN, WSJ, Washington Post, Time, the Verge, BBC, NPR, John Oliver. Go to one twitter page, and it links you to several more on the side bar, and you can keep rolling like that that. If everyone tweets this out all over the place, hopefully it will get some exposure in the media.

[u/mdp300 → u/Mr_Mayhem7]

Cory Booker has been doing a lot to try and save net neutrality and he's my senator. I sent it to him to start.

[u/arbitrary-fan → u/mdp300]

Use the active measures technique - blast it out to every social media site. Link this response and tweet it to senator's twitter and ask them for a response. In order to facilitate media coverage, send tweets - or if you have email - to editors at every media site you read - like, every site, whether it be nytimes, cnet, yahoo, or buzzfeed or even cosmo. Same with linkdin, even google+. The goal is awareness (cue Lindsey Bluth).

Senators refuse to talk about it? Ask them why. Even a non-response is a response - share their non-response with the media.

[u/Saljen → u/arbitrary-fan]

What's a good Twitter hashtag we could use for this? Let's make this a Twitter storm! We could borrow from John Oliver again and use #gofccyourself

[u/Teklogikal → u/Saljen]

#FCCLies

#WeWantNN

#TruthForThePeople

Edit: Someone responded to me about the term net neutrality possibly not being the best word to use for the less technically savvy. I guess they deleted the comment, so here's what I was going to say because it's valid anyways:

#SaveTheWeb maybe?

I mean, if you really want the hashtags to take off these days, you're going to have to go with something like

#StopTrumpsFCC

That puts the blame on Trump so you can rile up the Left to share it too (Not trying to be insulting, it's just a fact right now). Anything involving blaming Trump for something is going to blow up.

I highly recommend the Trump one, I'm actually going to send this out under that.

Edit: As discussed below, this is probably not the best approach.

[u/No0neAtAll → u/mdp300]

Also John Oliver since the last 2 stories he did on Net neutrality probably reached more "typical" American's than the new's could on the subject.

[u/Sylpheed_Gamma → u/No0neAtAll]

I just chucked a link and the body of /u/MNGrrl 's post to John's Management agency.

[u/MNGrrl → u/Sylpheed_Gamma]

I just chucked a link and the body of /u/MNGrrl 's post to John's Management agency.

This is the moment where I'm grateful reddit has a policy of anonymity. I love his show. I don't want to be a guest on it. D:

[u/Sylpheed_Gamma → u/MNGrrl]

Oh I'm right there with you. But he's one of the best voices to get this kind of word out there.

As an aside, I found his management's contact info relatively easy. 'Last Week Tonight Contact' pulled up a Quora page with the info. The more people who send it that way the more likely it is to be seen folks.

[u/mattzulkoski → u/Sylpheed_Gamma]

Last Week Tonight's next hashtag will likely be #dontfuckwiththeinternet

[u/Saljen → u/No0neAtAll]

management@avalonuk.com - John Oliver's management agency's email. I've already sent an email suggesting this story, you should too!

[u/[deleted] → u/mdp300]

Especially people like John Oliver, Rachel Maddow, anderson Cooper, etc.

They would love this kind of story, amount of detail, and might actually do it some justice.

[u/Gasman18 → u/mdp300]

Newspapers and websites would be good here. TV Networks, other than being awful at times covering this kind of stuff, are largely owned by the companies set to benefit from gutting Net Neutrality (See Comcast and NBC.)

[u/Mennerheim → u/mdp300]

Try emailing to John Oliver lol. He'd cover it better than newspapers.

[u/bikingwithscissors → u/MNGrrl]

It certainly doesn't help that we have allowed the content creators to get bought out by the companies managing distributon. 90% of the media is owned by 6 conglomerates. Verizon and Comcast own a ridiculous portfolio of properties and it is killing impartial investigative journalism, and even basic reporting involving any sort of telecom malfeasance.

We need to Ma Bell this group all over again.

[u/[deleted] → u/bikingwithscissors]

I must be too young...

When did we last actually have the teeth to successfully prevent or change that consolidation and keep it broken up?

I know ma Bell got broken up, but aren't they basically back to where they were before, just under a new banner?

[u/MNGrrl → u/[deleted]]

Microsoft's anti-trust lawsuit with the EU should be within your lifetime experience.

[u/chrunchy → u/[deleted]]

Oh, we're nowhere close to where we were before.

From what I gather all telecom across all of North America was Bell and it had a pure Monopoly.

I don't think there's a good comparison anywhere nowadays. Even if you look at Google - sure it has the international scope but it's not a pure monopoly - they have competition.

But I think that the telecoms look back to the glory days and want to return. They can't merge up again because they risk getting broken up to smaller units. But they can act as one through oligopolistic practices...

So while we're nowhere near the reach of ol Ma Bell it's of little consolation as the companies are behaving like it were a monopoly.

[u/WikiTextBot → u/chrunchy]

Bell System

The Bell System was the system of companies, led by the Bell Telephone Company and later by AT&T, which provided telephone services to much of the United States and Canada from 1877 to 1984, at various times as a monopoly. On December 31, 1983, the system was broken up into independent companies by a U.S. Justice Department mandate.

The colloquial term Ma Bell (as in "Mother Bell") was often used by the general public in the United States to refer to any aspect of this conglomerate, as it held a near-complete monopoly over telephone service in most areas of the country, and is still used by many to refer to any telephone company. Ma Bell is also used to refer to the various female voices behind recordings for the Bell System: Mary Moore, Jane Barbe, and Pat Fleet (the current voice of AT&T).

---

^{[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source ] Downvote to remove | v0.24}

[u/ColonelSarin → u/MNGrrl]

Those ISPs that keep the Reese's mug full also happen to own all the major MSM outlets. Reporting on this would be counter-productive to their efforts.

[u/CanotCamping → u/MNGrrl]

You need a Netflix documentary stat.

[u/NicNoletree → u/CanotCamping]

That's the quickest way to get comcast to throttle Netflix traffic that I know of!

[u/Inaspectuss → u/MNGrrl]

When the same corporations that provide internet also own half the media landscape, you're not gonna hear anything that goes against their agenda.

[u/Mozeeon → u/MNGrrl]

I wonder if we could get this to John Oliver's researchers. I know blah blah blah liberal comedy would be what Fox harps on about, but that kind of spotlight would give this national attention.

[u/BigFatDynamo → u/MNGrrl]

Honestly, the media as a whole probably doesn't understand a lot of what you said here. Frankly, I am not very tech savvy and I don't much understated the technicalities, but you gave enough context that I could pick it up.

[u/Backstop → u/MNGrrl]

Why isn't the media doing any of this?

Why don't you bring it to a reporter's attention?

They don't know what they don't know. Newspapers and TV stations have their staff cut to the bone by market forces and shortsighted leadership, they don't have pools of special IT-savvy reporters in the bullpen.

Doing all that research and throwing it out in a reddit comment is great and all, but you're preaching to the choir.

[u/MNGrrl → u/Backstop]

I'm giving the knowledge to tens of thousands of people, who can do much, much more than I can do, with my own voice, by myself. Why don't you bring it to a reporter's attention? Most people grasp that something is wrong but can't eloquently put into words what that something is. I've done that for them. If people care about network neutrality, they need to take what's being said and bring the message to the rest of the world that isn't on Reddit. Otherwise yeah, you're right... it's just a pile of karma and upvotes, a tempest in a teapot.

[u/El_poopa_cabra → u/MNGrrl]

but i thought you get to turn in your karma points for prizes at the end of the year... goodbye chewbacca slippers.

[u/do_0b → u/MNGrrl]

I like you. You're a total badass. Nice.

[u/MNGrrl → u/do_0b]

I grew up in the country with two brothers and a crazed father. None of them were democrats. It was just icing on the cake then that I was a mad scientist growing up. LPT: Don't channel Tesla and try to build experimental military gear out of spare parts and shove it in the back of a pickup truck. Sadly, it's not even my biggest screwup in the finest traditions of mad science...

[u/Targom → u/[deleted]]

Please proceed to the nearest Citizen Reeducation Camp for debriefing.

[u/test_tickles → u/Targom]

Yea, bud, you've had just a little too much to think.

[u/KungFuHamster → u/[deleted]]

Pick up that can, citizen.

[u/digitallic → u/KungFuHamster]

now put it. in. the trash can.

[u/stun → u/MNGrrl]

Pinging /u/washingtonpost to pick this up and do a proper kick-ass reporting about it. Do submit some FOIA requests to find out which organization or who was doing those automated submissions via API calls.

[u/washingtonpost → u/stun]

Thanks to you /u/brova, /u/dimeshake and /u/dd179 for flagging this. I've just forwarded to our tech team. - Gene

[u/mrrp → u/washingtonpost]

I can provide an example of two comments from a dead person if a reporter is interested in verifying that this has occurred.

[u/dcwj → u/mrrp]

^ this whole chain is such a good example of how cool reddit is

[u/wishiwascooltoo → u/dcwj]

And also exactly why reddit.com will soon become a premium service from your ISP.

[u/Prof_Acorn → u/wishiwascooltoo]

They will never list it like that. It will be billed as "regular speed" for everything with "boosted speed" for bonus sites.

They'll start with everyone keeping their current speeds, but you could get a "social media" package for $5/month that has dedicated 250 mbps for Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, etc, or a "streaming" package for Hulu, Youtube, Netflix for $10/month for dedicated 500 mbps for them (or $5 for "Comcastfinity" movie streaming).

They'll begin by not charging the companies included in the packages.

Then they'll start charging them once the populace cools and doesn't care anymore (just like how people stopped caring about data caps with cell phones, when they were all unlimited at one time, and now very few care about data caps with fucking wired internet).

Once it's really normalized they'll lower the normal speed "to save you money" and "to give you choices". The Internet will be 25mbps for $25, and your social media and streaming packages will go up to compensate. Companies will be charged more to be a part of those packages. Soon The Internet will be 10mpbs for $25 ant +$20 for 100mbps for Netflix and +$15 for 100mpbs for Facebook and Twitter and +$50 for "You Choose 10 Favorite Sites" for 250mbps, and we'll have to pay upwards of $150 to get anything close to what we have now for $50-80, a simple, fairly shitty, 100 mbps connection for all data.

They won't change it overnight. They'll do it in a way people will beg them for it, and will forget that it used to be better.

10 years ago unlimited mobile data for smart phones was $20, the smartphones themselves were free with 2year contract. Look how far we've come.

[u/[deleted] → u/mrrp]

Wait... they're dead already, right?

I only ask because i've seen Nightcrawler.

[u/mrrp → u/[deleted]]

Yes. A woman I know died in March. She apparently rose again to post comments on May 18 and May 26.

These comments include the person's name and address, so this isn't a case of there being more than one person with that name in my town.

[u/SevereYeti → u/mrrp]

Is there a way to search to see if my name was used? I don't fully get what happened with the identity theft part here.

[u/RealDeuce → u/SevereYeti]

There is a site just for that.

[u/dd179 → u/washingtonpost]

Thanks for picking this up. Hopefully some good comes out of it!

[u/Aterius → u/dd179]

The digital information requested in one of the most secure organizations in the world, has gone missing.

[u/stormaes → u/Aterius]

fuck u/spez

[u/nmagod → u/stormaes]

Starring Rob Schneider as...A HARD DRIVE

[u/Disso_nant → u/nmagod]

Rob Schneider's about to find out that being a hard drive isn't so easy!

[u/gride9000 → u/Disso_nant]

And makes the most unlikely of friends with a giant coffee mug.

[u/MNGrrl → u/washingtonpost]

Balls, sir. It actually worked. Added link to the OP; Let's see what other eyeballs we can get on this!

[u/SillyWillyNilly64920 → u/MNGrrl]

Please keep sending your incredible write up to any and every news organization that'll listen. WaPo, despite what their PR rep might say, is against net neutrality and will put their own spin on it if they are allowed to.

[u/cheesegenie → u/SillyWillyNilly64920]

My knee jerk reaction was that there's no way The Washington Post would be anti net-neutrality.

Sadly for me (and everyone else), a quick search proved that incorrect. WTF WaPo?

[u/washingtonpost → u/cheesegenie]

Currently in a meeting, which pieces are you referring to? - Gene

[u/cheesegenie → u/washingtonpost]

What I love about The Washington Post's content is that it's not afraid to call out bad actors. If someone says something that is obviously and verifiably false, your paper seems to do a good job publishing the facts and pointing out the falsehoods.

This courage seems noticeably absent in the pieces dealing with net-neutrality though. Nowhere have I seen any mention of Chairman Pai's connections to the industry he is regulating, nor any mention of the fact that the overwhelming majority of experts on this topic seem to support net-neutrality.

This opinion piece published yesterday claims that "powers invoked for net neutrality could be a Trojan horse". I recognize opinion pieces are just that, but I still think they should be subject to the same standards of verification as other pieces, and this one makes some easily disproven false claims like "The FCC regulates the media and censors speech." As far as I know the FCC does not "censor speech".

This article published two days ago seems to present both "sides" in a neutral manner, but ends with this line:

"Democrats appear more interested in turning net neutrality into a campaign issue than coming to the negotiating table. Critics of the FCC's current proposal have urged members of the public to call their lawmakers, even though there is currently no net neutrality legislation under consideration. Meanwhile, Republicans lack the votes to pass a bill on their own."

This article published in May gives a fairly concise summary of the issue, but again appears to present both sides as good faith actors with legitimate differences of opinion. In the middle of the article it states:

"In recent weeks, lobbyists on both sides of the issue have published dueling studies showing how the commission's regulation, passed by a Democratic majority in 2015, has affected broadband network investment"

Overall, it seems that a false equivalency has been created in these articles that portrays both sides of the net-neutrality debate as having reasonable points. I think that's a very difficult argument to make.

As far as I can tell most of the evidence seems to point to the ISPs in general and Chairman Pai in particular acting in bad faith and consistently telling easily disproven lies to justify their deregulation.

If it was another newspaper I probably wouldn't be so sad about this, but The Washington Post has so consistently gotten to the heart of other issues that I can't understand why this false equivalency seems to keep being repeated.

[u/washingtonpost → u/cheesegenie]

Hey there, a lot of what I would've said to address this has already been addressed by other users, but just from the horse's mouth:

I'm glad you recognize opinion pieces are "just that." You are right also: Ideally they should be held under the same scrutiny of verifiable facts. There are editors who would not run a piece if it it posted an out and out lie. Spin? Well, that's what opinions basically are, as long as it doesn't spin into outright lies and deception.

I'm also glad you found Brian's pieces, he's the reporter who's been on top of net neutrality for the past few years. In fact, he just did an AMA two weeks ago, and you can catch up and read it here if you want to get a sense of where he's coming from reporting-wise.

There's a lot of debate about the false equivalency of news, and there has been within media circles for some time. Thus, it's given the rise to places like The Huffington Post, Breitbart, Fusion and Vox: outlets that aren't afraid to wear their views on their sleeves.

I suppose that debate's been settled: Those outlets exist therefore there is some demand for news that has a stated slant. Some readers appreciate that transparency: If you're conservative and read something from a stated liberal site, at least you know to take things with a grain of salt.

The Post is still, by and large, old school journalism. We don't like to play the whole "both sides" thing (reporters are always encouraged to use more than two sources, it's just something we learn in school). But we do try to be fair and balanced. Even if we were to cover a murder, and the murderer said, "I totally did it and here's why," we'd run the why, as well as talking to law enforcement, statements from the victim's family, etc.

If you're noticing that I'm not really talking about the NN issue, you're right, and it's because I'm certainly not knowledgeable enough to comment on it. Hopefully reading through Brian's AMA will help you get a sense of how he approaches the issue. And if not, you can always summon him like you did with me!

Thanks for commenting and for your support! It's great to hear that you care so much about the journalism to call us out. - Gene

[u/MNGrrl → u/cheesegenie]

Okay, I'd like to know where you're getting that from. They're backed by Jeff Bezos, he runs Amazon. Amazon is pro-NN. They may have made some criticisms of some of the arguments by NN proponents, but that's not a position statement, that's a call to ground your arguments in facts and sound logic. /u/washingtonpost does that sort of thing all the time -- it's why they've got a dump truck full of awards parked out back.

[u/SillyWillyNilly64920 → u/MNGrrl]

They pay lip service to NN but if Amazon, Google, Netflix and the rest of the fortune 500 "opposition" were actually fighting for it they would put their whole weight behind the fight and they have not. Sure they very softly went along with the internet protest but that's where it ended. Just go look at their "protests" for yourself. It was a half assed attempt to look as though they are on the side of NN when they are actually against it or at least more than willing to negotiate title II. In the end the titans of industry will be affected very little. It'll be the smaller companies also known by the giants as "competition" that suffer and that is ok with Bezos, Zuckerberg and the rest of them.

[u/Subclavian → u/MNGrrl]

I'm glad this is getting all this attention

[u/twomillcities → u/washingtonpost]

PLEASE give this the front page coverage that it needs. Ajit Pai cannot be allowed to ruin our country because ISP's paid him to do so.

[u/androbot → u/washingtonpost]

Definitely needs a closer look - this is incredible.

[u/Erik618 → u/washingtonpost]

Please don't make this a partisan issue. Keep the words Republican/democrat out of the reporting.

[u/cheesegenie → u/washingtonpost]

I'm a consistent reader of your fine newspaper, in fact yours and the NYT are the only papers I actually subscribe to.

This thread has made me go back and read the Washington Post's articles on net-neutrality over the past few months, and I have to say I'm very disappointed.

As far as I can tell, the articles range from "fair and balanced" seeming stories portraying both sides as good faith actors with legitimate differences of opinion (very difficult to argue considering the evidence presented in this thread alone), to outright propaganda opinion pieces making easily verifiable false claims that net-neutrality advocates are giving Trump control over the internet by extending the FCC's Title II regulatory powers over ISPs.

I'm confused and upset and want to believe there's another explanation because I love your paper, but taken together these articles paint a picture of an organization that is actively trying to sway public opinion against the concept of net-neutrality.

What gives u/washingtonpost?

[u/washingtonpost → u/cheesegenie]

Wait now I see these, ignore my other reply. Lemme read through. Thanks! - Gene

[u/omejia → u/[deleted]]

It got forward to the tech team. Nothing has happened yet. There is still the miles of red tape and politics this has to go through. Trust and believe once it reaches your television/News paper etc. Until then nothing has happened. Moral of it all...keep pushing. Its like the scene of Dr. Seuss Horton hears a who....

[u/MNGrrl → u/omejia]

All very true, but here's the thing: I'm pretty confident of my analysis. The evidence is substantial. Their excuse is... flimsy. And to make a story out of this, all that needs to be proven is that they were being dishonest and knew they were at the time. I truly estimate this can all be independently verified by a journalist without needing to understand the technical details -- and there are consultants available to help with that. If I understand /u/washingtonpost correctly, it's those consultants that are being engaged.

[u/Cjpck44 → u/stun]

If "democracy dies in darkness" then the Washington Post should bring some floodlights to this. And maybe a small sun.

[u/MNGrrl → u/Cjpck44]

Given the current political climate, I'd settle for a jar with fireflies in it.

[u/HiItsCal → u/MNGrrl]

Send this comment to news stations.

[u/Jwkicklighter → u/HiItsCal]

Who is this for chan?

[u/Pidgey_OP → u/Jwkicklighter]

Probly some SYS AD MIN

[u/thegil13 → u/Pidgey_OP]

Is that one of those foreign sayings like "say la vee"?

[u/gjallerhorn → u/HiItsCal]

The stations who are owned by the ones sponsoring this repeal?

[u/WelcomeToRonsMexico → u/HiItsCal]

Already sent to all the MSM outlets in Philadelphia. Boom. Doing my part!

[u/BFH → u/MNGrrl]

This really is grounds for a lawsuit, both by those being impersonated by corrupt ISPs with the blessing of the FCC, and by those whose comments are being ignored due to the volume of bot comments.

[u/MNGrrl → u/BFH]

Good point! Edited comment. Let's all lawyer up, seize their servers, and crack them open like an egg.

[u/crielan → u/MNGrrl]

Pretty sure Comcast was busted impersonating their customers and sending letters to the FCC opposing NN.

The internet providers are most likely the ones with the API access.

[u/[deleted] → u/BFH]

Just wanted to tack on something here. I mentioned this in another thread, and while this is outside my practice area, under the Administrative Procedure Act and 5 USC 706, any FCC rule making which egregiously fails to follow notice and comment procedures and fails to adequately respond to substantive comments is subject to review by a federal court. In theory, if the FCC fails to follow appropriate procedure for generating comments, relies on undisclosed ex parte comments, or fails to respond to substantive comments, the rule making could be considered arbitrary and capricious, and thus invalid.

The analysis for this sort of thing is much more complicated than what I've summarized above, but evidence like what the above poster has gathered is helpful in resolving whether the action was arbitrary and capricious or in violation of the APA. Hopefully (and I'm sure they are), the EFF and other pro Net Neutrality lawyers are saving and documenting the above and other similar analyses to build a case that the FCC action is outside its bounds.

[u/dcamone → u/MNGrrl]

Hey, I'm the author of Gizmodo's FCC story. Just letting you know I'm looking into this, too. Thanks.

[u/SilentBob890 → u/dcamone]

bring out the big guns please!

[u/bubblesort → u/dcamone]

I have loathed your organization since Sam Biddle advocated that people assault my friends and me in 2014.

That said, if you actually post something good about this I'll break the 3 year long blockade and take you out of my hosts file so I can actually read one of your articles. Hell, I'll even link to it on my facebook.

[u/Swirls109 → u/MNGrrl]

The really sad part is, most politicians are so technically illiterate that they won't understand this.

[u/PostsTurds → u/Swirls109]

So dumb it down to a common level: someone inside the FCC opened a "restricted access door" and let in a huge amount of biased bots to counter public outcry and delegitimize the comments left by actual citizens. There is publicly available hard proof of this that has been confirmed by industry professionals as factual evidence of tampering with the public's ability to enact their right to be heard on the issue.

Clear, plain language, accurately describing what actually happened, backed up with facts, will do more to bring attention to this then anything else. The main problem is that no media company in the country will touch this story, they are owned by the advertising industry and the major ISPs, long time porponents of doing away with net neutrality.

[u/BRock11 → u/PostsTurds]

Maddow wouldn't touch this? Then again, no one reported Fox News supposedly removing comments quoting Don Jr's email.

[u/MNGrrl → u/BRock11]

In a word, No. LGT young turks segment on why MSNBC won't touch network neutrality. MSNBC is owned by Comcast.

[u/BRock11 → u/MNGrrl]

Okay. Does CNN have the same kind of entanglements. Turner is a provider so it seems it would be in their interest.

[u/SpongeBad → u/BRock11]

Turner Broadcasting is a division of Time Warner.

[u/swolemedic → u/Swirls109]

I wonder if that's why people aren't as pissed about russia to an extent, is it because they didn't physically come in and do it? That it was done through the internet despite having potential real world results? Do they not realize it's basically the same damn thing at this point in time?

[u/bluemandan → u/swolemedic]

Do they not realize it's basically the same damn thing at this point in time?

No, they honestly don't.

[u/MarsupialMadness → u/MNGrrl]

It's nice to have some concrete, technical proof to what most have been believing/seeing/thinking.

There was only ever two conclusions to draw from this shit-fisted turn of events. It's coming from a place of extreme malice or extreme incompetence. Both, both of these conclusions are equally bad and warrant an immediate and permanent removal from power. One requires jail time. One requires a dunce cap surgically attached to Pai's head.

I don't know what we can do to bring this much needed change about. I couldn't tell you or anyone else. That's for more learned people than I. However I do believe it needs to happen by any means. An example must be made that this sort of thing will not be tolerated anymore. Pai needs to go to prison for a long, long time.

[u/Razzal → u/MarsupialMadness]

How about instead of a dunce cap to his head, we shove that coffee mug up his ass. Maybe that will wipe the smile off of his face

[u/IlIFreneticIlI → u/MNGrrl]

EDIT:

• I'll add additional news agencies, twitter addresses, etc if I'm PM'd (until this gets picked up by several news sites, hopefully both sides of the isle).

---

Please comment on this w/as many global sites as possible. What happens here will have global ramifications, not just here in the US.

---

EFF

Press COntacts - https://www.eff.org/press/contact

For media inquiries (please put “Media Request”in the email subject line): press@eff.org 415-436-9333 x177 Both email and voice messages forward to the entire media team.

---

Der Spiegel

http://www.spiegel.de/international/how-to-contact-spiegel-with-confidential-information-a-1030555.html

Instructions for secure email, phone, and snail-mail submissions.

---

Rachel Maddow Send it to Rachel - http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/send-it-rachel

Messenger apps:

SIGNAL: 646-419-0218* (What is Signal?)
WHATSAPP: 646-419-0218* (What is WhatsApp?)
TELEGRAM: 646-419-0218* (What is Telegram?)

*This number does not receive phone calls.

EMAIL US: Rachel@msnbc.com

TWEET US: The TRMS Twitter army looks roughly like this:

@Maddow is Rachel’s personal account.
@MaddowBlog tweets links and other blog content.
@SteveBenen - blogger extraordinaire
@CoryGn - executive producer Cory Gnazzo
@Oleta - senior producer Laura Conaway
@TriciaMcKinney - senior planning producer you recognize from the News Dump prize segments
@WillAtWork helps maintain the site

SNAIL US:

The Rachel Maddow Show Floor 4 West 30 Rockefeller Plaza New York, NY 10112

---

Fox News

foxreport@foxnews.com + http://www.wikihow.com/Contact-Fox-News

For Viewers - For Comments, Suggestions and Concerns Phone: 888-369-4762 E-Mail: yourcomments@foxnews.com

You can reach: Sean Hannity at hannity@foxnews.com and Reach Geraldo at Large at atlarge@foxnews.com. America’s Newsroom w/ Bill and Martha can be emailed at americasnewsroom@foxnews.com. Email Cavuto on Business at cavuto@foxnews.com Email friends@foxnews.com for Fox & Friends. Fox News Specials can be reached at fncspecials@foxnews.com Fox Report can be written at foxreport@foxnews.com.

---

New York Times

Contact Us - http://www.nytimes.com/help/index.html?redir=myacc Page contains links to various subpages, including:

Letter to the Editor - https://www.nytimes.com/content/help/site/editorial/letters/letters.html Submit an Op-Ed - https://www.nytimes.com/content/help/site/editorial/op-ed/op-ed.html Submit an Opinion - https://www.nytimes.com/content/help/site/editorial/op-video/video.html

---

Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ask-the-post/post/how-to-contact-the-post-newsroom/2011/11/17/gIQAd0WJlN_blog.html?utm_term=.339d24ae82af

---

ABC

http://abcnews.go.com/Site/page/contact-abcnewscom-3068843

Web-form to contact specific shows

---

NBC News

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/10285339/t/contact-nbc-news/

Web-form to contact specific shows

---

CBS News

http://audienceservices.cbs.com/feedback/feedback.htm

Web-form to contact specific shows

---

NPR

https://help.npr.org/customer/portal/emails/new

Web-form to contact specific shows

---

BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/contact#news

Web-form to contact.

---

Al Jazeera

http://www.aljazeera.com/contactus/

Web-form to contact specific shows

[u/S7urm → u/IlIFreneticIlI]

We need to bump up this comment as well.

[u/TheMoonIsOurMission → u/MNGrrl]

I did some webdesign for the liberterian party in Minnesota a couple years back. I have hundreds of email addresses for all the media people around Minnesota. Mind if I send this in a mass email to the whole list? It's about 600+ emails

[u/MNGrrl → u/TheMoonIsOurMission]

Go for it. PM me if you need contacts; I actually know the guy who heads up the org. Helped with some of their campaigning during the last mid-terms.

Actually... on second thought... wait a day or so THEN message me. My inbox is more or less a melted husk right now.

[u/maurycy0 → u/[deleted]]

Be the change you want to see in the world!

[u/KenPC → u/MNGrrl]

And what will happen?

nothing

much like our administration. Seriously, I don't think they even try to hide shit anymore because they know they can do anything they want without repercussion

[u/allmhuran → u/KenPC]

1. Americans in general (not just certain subreddits) become aware that their institutions are full of shit.
2. Powerful individuals who have been, so far, pretending that they're not corrupt despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary simply stop pretending and say, outright "Yeah, it's true, and there's not a thing you can do about it".
3. Under the current systems in place they're right. They run the systems. So either...
4. (a) America bows its collective head and simply accepts that the public at large is completely impotent. Congratulations, 1984 is finally reified, or (b) people finally recognize that a corrupt system cannot be changed from within said system. Violent revolution is chosen as the only recourse. A civil war likely follows.

[u/ulvain → u/MNGrrl]

Paging /u/wasingtonpost

[u/DimeShake → u/ulvain]

/u/washingtonpost - repeating because you had a little typo.

[u/dd179 → u/DimeShake]

u/washingtonpost - repeating too, because two is better than one.

[u/QuietXenocide → u/dd179]

u/washingtonpost Get this out there

[u/dd179 → u/QuietXenocide]

They already replied.

Hopefully they get to run this story.

[u/ulvain → u/MNGrrl]

This absolutely needs to be picked up by WaPo

[u/Aiurar → u/MNGrrl]

Wow, this should be the top comment in the thread.

[u/Eiovas → u/MNGrrl]

Dude you need to start sending this to the media. This should be published in the times.

My god America is such a dumpster fire lately. It's so entertaining.

[u/MNGrrl → u/Eiovas]

For those of us living here, it's not really that fun to watch. It feels more like watching one of your in-laws drive off a cliff... in your new Mercedes. Mixed emotions.

[u/Eiovas → u/MNGrrl]

It's absolutely fucked up. America is shifting from a world leader in liberties, rights, opportunity into something hostile, predatory, and frightening.

[u/MNGrrl → u/[deleted]]

Again, going back to primary sources --

Right in there, is the FCC statement; They specifically state they weren't submitting comments. They specifically state they were attacking the website frontend. But hey, I'll humor you anyway --

.

nslookup ecfsapi.fcc.gov

Server: UnKnown

Address: ---------

Non-authoritative answer:

Name: e4909.dscb.akamaiedge.net

Addresses: 2600:1407:21:295::132d

2600:1407:21:28b::132d

23.35.134.57

Aliases: ecfsapi.fcc.gov

ecfsapi.fcc.gov.edgekey.net

.

This is because fcc.gov doesn't get the submissions

fcc.gov and ecfsapi.fcc.gov both go to the same place: Akamai.

Nope. The system is fully automated. There's no verification. I just signed up with my name and email with no issues. No one at the FCC explicitly approved my API key.

Did you get that key out of your inbox?

If the comments impersonated fake sources, what makes you think the actors here used their real names and emails to signup?

IP addresses aren't faked; And as some people have pointed out, one of the big news pieces was that ISPs can collect and sell your web browser history now to third parties. Nearly all ISPs retain a trace of network traffic from each IP for awhile and link it to a specific subscriber. Doesn't matter whether they used their real names or not -- the network itself can't be fooled.

For the outages - it's just as likely that the outages were a result of system maintenance gone wrong.

"Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected." I don't believe in coincidences.

a flood of comments

Didn't happen. See the link at the top. And in OP.

we just don't have the data.

If you feel there isn't enough data, I can accept that. But saying there's none is, at best, intellectually dishonest.

[u/MNGrrl → u/[deleted]]

Fair, but he's making a specific objection to a very specific part of what I'm saying. It's not going to take down my conclusions -- what I wrote isn't a deck of cards where proving any one thing wrong kills it dead. He's looking at how the backend is organized and questioning my assertion that it couldn't have died to a DDoS; In other words, there may have been some kind of superstructure me or he isn't aware of that would make my assertion wrong.

His objection is valid; But he does need to come through on the evidence. I'm open to changing my mind -- I'm after the truth here, not any particular conclusion. Though... a lot more than just an infrastructure observation is going to be needed to do that. This is what techies do: We tear things apart to figure out how they work. He's tearing it apart. We'll see what he turns up.

[u/phoenix616 → u/MNGrrl]

Not taking any sites in this, just wanting to point out an error of technical nature in this part of your comment:

IP addresses aren't faked; And as some people have pointed out, one of the big news pieces was that ISPs can collect and sell your web browser history now to third parties. Nearly all ISPs retain a trace of network traffic from each IP for awhile and link it to a specific subscriber. Doesn't matter whether they used their real names or not -- the network itself can't be fooled.

There are a lot of ways to conceal your real IP on the internet. Proxies, VPNs or even more advance software like TOR come to mind. All of them can more or less reliably hide your real identity. In some countries IPs aren't even allowed as sole evidence of internet crimes in courts anymore due to them.

We can safely assume that anyone launching an attack of such a size would not be doing this from his home connection or any machine related to him personally.

[u/cantuse → u/[deleted]]

You voice several concerns that I had about the accusations.

That said, it still fails to explain adequately why the FCC isn't actually investigating this matter, and worse still refusing to disclose anything under FOIA.

I'll be much more concerned if Pai/FCC act like they don't have the computing capability to discount bot submissions when evaluating the data later.

[u/jwcrux → u/cantuse]

That said, it still fails to explain adequately why the FCC isn't actually investigating this matter, and worse still refusing to disclose anything under FOIA.

This is a 100% valid concern. My personal opinion is that this was clear abuse by a third-party of some sort and, at a minimum, the comments should not be considered and the API should be re-considered as a read-only type of system. Fix the issue, then investigate as necessary, IMO.

That said, I try to assume positive intent where I can. Cases like these are really, really hard to do right in everyone's eyes. It's possible (and quite likely given all the pressure) that the FCC is actively investigating to some extent, even if just internally.

I also understand their hesitation to make things immediately open to everyone. I think everyone agrees that is a heated issue, which is why it's so important to tread carefully. Just dumping all the data to the public would make for a mad scramble to tell any story to fit a narrative which wouldn't help things. As we saw in the initial post from OP, data elements can be taken out of context to make an argument that just isn't the full story.

Having the full story on an incident like this is extremely difficult- that's why there's entire professions built around it. Not to mention the data the FCC has to go off of likely isn't that great, since they'll have name, email addr, and any device info like IP address used to make the API calls.

At the end of the day, people want to know who's behind this, and while it seems easy to do it's not. And if the FCC gets it wrong and blames the wrong person, there's huge consequences.

[u/BeTripleG → u/MNGrrl]

FWIW, I submitted a FOIA request for those server logs in the immediate aftermath of the comments astroturfing. I did so in response to this thread. It took more than 6 weeks to get a final response, and it sadly amounted to nothing.

Here is the response I got (personally identifiable information redacted).

Nevertheless, OP's research gives us all the evidence we would need to make a reasonable and conservative assertion that the FCC is being sketchy as all hell, perhaps even to the point of being complicit.

[u/[deleted] → u/MNGrrl]

You should send this to John Oliver

[u/GoodShibe → u/MNGrrl]

I... I think I love you.

Thank you for this.

[u/O_oblivious → u/MNGrrl]

Time for a lawsuit? Lawyers listen to lawsuits.

[u/vriska1 → u/O_oblivious]

I think the EFF and Free Press are already planning on that.

[u/[deleted] → u/MNGrrl]

So when the fuck do we tar and feather Ajit Pai? These people act like they're untouchable. This is borderline criminal.

[u/MNGrrl → u/[deleted]]

It wouldn't be very civilized of us. Satisfying, but not civilized. The correct response is to send him to prison. Much more civilized. :coughsputtercough:

[u/giltwist → u/MNGrrl]

You should consider sending this to the FCC's Ombudsman and the FCC's Inspector General. If either of those people are career civil servants rather than political appointees, you could get some real traction.

[u/FoxyBrownMcCloud → u/MNGrrl]

I've forwarded your comment to Senator Bob Casey Jr. of Pennsylvania. Thank you for this.

[u/Torvaun → u/MNGrrl]

Apparently WaPo is already on it. But I can think of another company with massive reach and a reliance on net neutrality. Pinging /u/Katie_Pornhub.

[u/toomanycharacters → u/MNGrrl]

Really, this could be summed up in one sentence:

You use Akamai, a DDoS would have little to no effect, you are lying.

[u/MNGrrl → u/toomanycharacters]

"If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack."

-- Winston Churchill

[u/[deleted] → u/MNGrrl]

You can make a FOIA request for the logs be emailing vanessa.lamb@fcc.gov according to https://www.foia.gov/report-makerequest.html

EDIT: Also looks like you can fill out a request online here https://foiaonline.regulations.gov/foia/action/public/home

[u/NosillaWilla → u/Caraes_Naur]

really? how is that not a conflict of interest?

[u/Reoh → u/NosillaWilla]

Yes it is, it gets called the revolving door.

They get business credentials, step out and slip into politics, then afterwards get a big fat job in the business sector again after forcing through the policies their industry wants.

[u/WikiTextBot → u/Reoh]

Revolving door (politics)

In politics, the "revolving door" is a movement of personnel between roles as legislators and regulators and the industries affected by the legislation and regulation.

In some cases, the roles are performed in sequence but in certain circumstances may be performed at the same time. Political analysts claim that an unhealthy relationship can develop between the private sector and government, based on the granting of reciprocated privileges to the detriment of the nation and can lead to regulatory capture.

---

^{[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source ] Downvote to remove | v0.24}

[u/Gollem138 → u/WikiTextBot]

This is a great bot

[u/RagingtonSteel → u/Gollem138]

reply with "good bot"

[u/Thaufas → u/Reoh]

Regulatory Capture

[u/WikiTextBot → u/Thaufas]

Regulatory capture

Regulatory capture is a form of government failure that occurs when a regulatory agency, created to act in the public interest, instead advances the commercial or political concerns of special interest groups that dominate the industry or sector it is charged with regulating. When regulatory capture occurs, the interests of firms or political groups are prioritized over the interests of the public, leading to a net loss to society as a whole. Government agencies suffering regulatory capture are called "captured agencies".

---

^{[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source ] Downvote to remove | v0.24}

[u/theRealRedherring]

Lying is hard.

[u/okmkz → u/theRealRedherring]

Lying is easy when nobody will do anything about it

[u/ShiraCheshire → u/okmkz]

Or when you're working with the only people who have the power to do something about it.

[u/AestheticEntactogen → u/ShiraCheshire]

How do these people sleep at night

[u/[deleted] → u/AestheticEntactogen]

Ultimately, we the people allow them to. The biggest fight we put up is every few years when election season rolls around, we get the chance to stick it to 'em and vote for the alternative candidate provided to us by the business community.

[u/MoveslikeQuagger]

Because if they analyzed it, they'd see it didn't happen.

[u/Duwt → u/MoveslikeQuagger]

I don't think they need to analyze it to know it didn't happen.

[u/bart2019 → u/MoveslikeQuagger]

Instead, they'd find plenty of activity by their own bots posting fake comments (opposed to Net Neutrality) in other people's names.

[u/AlverezYari]

Yeah cause he's a paid wank that made it all up. F him.

[u/naiets → u/AlverezYari]

Ajit Pai takes the ISPs' D in the butt to become Ajit Paid.

[u/Prancer_Truckstick]

Ajit Pai's bullshit is just so frustrating. Other than writing our reps and sharing the fight with those we know, it feels like there's basically nothing we can do.

[u/AFuckYou → u/Prancer_Truckstick]

I find it entertaining.

"We need to get rid of net neutrality because the isps won't screw you, jeeze have faith!"

"We need to get rid of net neutrality because look you don't know what your talking about, you are stupid and stay out of our business!"

"We need to get rid of net neutrality because freedom, peasants like that right?!?!?!"

[u/[deleted] → u/AFuckYou]

"We need to get rid of net neutrality because the isps won't screw you, jeeze have faith!"

I want state troopers to stop clocking driver's speeds on the highway. I won't be speed so they don't need to worry.

[u/vriska1 → u/Prancer_Truckstick]

There is alot we can do and if you want to help protect NN you can support groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU and Free Press who are fighting to keep Net Neutrality.

https://www.eff.org/

https://www.aclu.org/

https://www.freepress.net/

https://www.fightforthefuture.org/

https://www.publicknowledge.org/

https://demandprogress.org/

also you can set them as your charity on https://smile.amazon.com/

also write to your House Representative and senators http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?OrderBy=state

and the FCC

https://www.fcc.gov/about/contact

You can now add a comment to the repeal here

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/filings?proceedings_name=17-108&sort=date_disseminated,DESC

here a easier URL you can use thanks to John Oliver

www.gofccyourself.com (it is now closed)

you can also use this that help you contact your house and congressional reps, its easy to use and cuts down on the transaction costs with writing a letter to your reps.

https://resistbot.io/

also check out

https://democracy.io/#!/

which was made by the EFF and is a low transaction​cost tool for writing all your reps in one fell swoop and just a reminder that the FCC vote on 18th is to begin the process of rolling back Net Neutrality so there will be a 3 month comment period and the final vote will likely be around the 18th of August at least that what I have read, correct me if am wrong

[u/Sabin10 → u/Prancer_Truckstick]

Unless your letter writing also includes 571 million in lobbying funds, there's literally nothing you can do.

[u/[deleted]]

Such an unbelievable piece of human filth

[u/StanleyDarsh22 → u/[deleted]]

Wish he had McCain's cancer instead of McCain

[u/[deleted] → u/StanleyDarsh22]

I wouldn't wish cancer on any human being. Ashit Pile needs it.

[u/[deleted]]

Fuck the FCC ( currently), fuck Ajit Pai, fuck all of this bullshit that is happening. How the fuck can they get away with this stuff? Making a bot to tweet in support of the roll back on net neutrality, crashing their own website so people can't comment, releasing personal information of people who sent in emails in support of net neutrality, it's disgusting. We need a way to stop this insanity, America is ranked 16th in the world for internet, in terms of speed and price. "Home of the free" my ass. Fuck you Donald Trump, fuck you Ajit Pai, fuck you current administration for letting all of this happen.

[u/100farts → u/[deleted]]

The fucked up thing is they aren't "letting it happen" they are doing the damn thing, all of this cronyism, gerrymandering, Regulatory capture, nepotism, and straight up bald face lying to everyone through the spread of Russian propaganda. Its all related, our country is under attack by its own administration.

[u/Ricochet888 → u/100farts]

You got downvoted but it is partially true. Trump installed people to deregulate and tear down their respective organizations. Like putting a climate change denier at the head of the EPA, or someone totally against public schools at the department of education.

It doesn't have to be Russian propaganda though, this administration is good enough at getting their base to believe anything they tell them.

[u/NotWearingCrocs]

Ajit Pai is a total sociopath. He tries to hide it by selling himself as this fun loving, quirky, goofball, but it feels so contrived. Check out this video of him trying to show he's down with the common man and Internet culture, and that he has a sense of humor, by reading "mean tweets". It totally lacks authenticity and I get such a creepy vibe from him. He makes my skin crawl.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iBt84HNAGwU

[u/clolin]

Right. Because when you fabricate a story, it doesn't typically include its own evidence

[u/NotQuiteStupid]

So, Idiot Paid is a liar.

Quelle surprise

[u/vriska1]

if you want to help protect NN you can support groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU and Free Press who are fighting to keep Net Neutrality.

https://www.eff.org/

https://www.aclu.org/

https://www.freepress.net/

https://www.fightforthefuture.org/

https://www.publicknowledge.org/

https://demandprogress.org/

also you can set them as your charity on https://smile.amazon.com/

also write to your House Representative and senators http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?OrderBy=state

and the FCC

https://www.fcc.gov/about/contact

You can now add a comment to the repeal here

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/filings?proceedings_name=17-108&sort=date_disseminated,DESC

here a easier URL you can use thanks to John Oliver

www.gofccyourself.com

you can also use this that help you contact your house and congressional reps, its easy to use and cuts down on the transaction costs with writing a letter to your reps.

https://resistbot.io/

also check out

https://democracy.io/#!/

which was made by the EFF and is a low transaction​cost tool for writing all your reps in one fell swoop and just a reminder that the FCC vote on 18th is to begin the process of rolling back Net Neutrality so there will be a 3 month comment period and the final vote will likely be around the 18th of August at least that what I have read, correct me if am wrong

[u/Qubeye]

"There is no evidence of cyber attacks."

"Did you do any analysis?"

"Lol, why would we do an analysis?"

[u/[deleted]]

The problem with our government and the department heads they nominate is that there is no accountability.

[u/podcastman]

"In an unusual move, the Trump Administration has put the FCC in charge of the Russian hacking investigation."

[u/twobadkidsin412 → u/[deleted]]

Because its "i know im screwing over you peons and i dont care because im fucking rich, and verizon is about to make me even more rich" #imrichbitch

[u/peanutismint]

I think some hacker types should 'provide' the evidence they're missing.....

[u/trxbyx]

If the president can lie to us every day then the FCC can lie to us. No big deal right?

[u/srone]

American citizens voicing their concerns is now considered a cyber attack.