Slashdot Mirror


FCC Says It Was Victim of Cyberattack After John Oliver Show (thehill.com)

On Sunday night, John Oliver urged his viewers to visit a website called "GoFCCYourself," which redirects users to a section of the FCC site where people can comment on the net neutrality proceeding. As a result, the FCC's site temporarily crashed. Now, it appears that the FCC is claiming its website has hit by a cyberattack late Sunday night. The Hill reports: "Beginning on Sunday night at midnight, our analysis reveals that the FCC was subject to multiple distributed denial-of-service attacks (DDos)," FCC chief information officer David Bray said in a statement Monday. "These were deliberate attempts by external actors to bombard the FCC's comment system with a high amount of traffic to our commercial cloud host." The FCC's comments site went down in 2014 after the first time Oliver rallied his audience in support of net neutrality. In that case, it was widely believed the site went down because of the amount of traffic generated in the wake of Oliver's show. But Bray on Monday said that this recent instance was caused by a cyberattack and not a flood of people trying to give input. "These actors were not attempting to file comments themselves; rather they made it difficult for legitimate commenters to access and file with the FCC," he said.

21 of 205 comments (clear)

  1. The Federal Communications Commission by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Federal /Communications/ Commission could not handle the volume of communications they were receiving?

    Brilliant. And these people are supposed to be regulating the internet...

    1. Re:The Federal Communications Commission by omnichad · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Total number of comments (so far) is only 184,650. If you're serving the American people and you can't handle even 1% of the population commenting on something over the course of maybe a week (extrapolated), you have failed. Sure, maybe half of these comments came in the first hour. But does that matter?

    2. Re:The Federal Communications Commission by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's perfectly acceptable for a public agency to scale its system to a realistic workload

      I dare you to look up what they billed the taxpayer for the website and compare it to the workload it can handle. Then let's talk "perfectly acceptable".

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    3. Re:The Federal Communications Commission by Maritz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Less than half of what you said. Is it working now, by the way? You forgot to say. You just said it 'never worked'. It's not like you're trying to put a spin on these things, is it? Someone more suspicious than me might start to get that idea.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  2. IOW, the FCC site can't take a good Slashdotting. by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Remember when people used to call this phenomenon Slashdot Effect?

    On a more serious note, is the Trump Administration now going to call Slashdot Effect an "attack," and if so, how is this not a sign of them ramping up the authoritarianism?

  3. This is actually creepy by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    saying they were attacked instead of the obvious truth (that they were overwhelmed by demand) is the kind of thing I'd expect from the Iraqi ministry of information, not the US Government.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:This is actually creepy by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Regardless, it goes to show just how badly their (as in the Trump administration/etc) refusal to tell the truth on so many things reflects on them, that the first thing we think of when we hear them say that is "Oh, bullsh*t".

    2. Re:This is actually creepy by lucm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What's really creepy is that once again, a majority of liberals take their news from a comedy show and a majority of conservatives take their news from the Twitter feed of a reality TV star turned President.

      We're really heading into Idiocracy territory.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    3. Re:This is actually creepy by HeckRuler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Eh, I'd say that the comeback is "and the majority of conservatives take their news from angry talk show hosts". Trumps twitter is a recent thing. This has been going on for decades.

      It's not like... the ONLY news source most of them get is either news comedy or new... rage-induction? Some sure do, but most people on both sides probably get their news from a variety of sources. ...But those sources ALSO include comedians and hate-mongers.

      It's honestly hard to change your views on something, so the first time you hear about a topic is the most vital when it comes to bias and presumptions in all later development.

      It really is Idiocracy territory.

    4. Re: This is actually creepy by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your mistake is in thinking it it's a comedy show. It is one of the only legitimate news outlets actually. The others are comedy masquerading as news. Oliver's show outs news masquerading as comedy.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  4. Humor is good at dispelling fear by caseih · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Except that comedy news shows actually tend to be rather intelligent and their humor is often quite smart. And the shows I watch seem to make fun of politicians on all sides. It's entertaining as well as thought-provoking. Anything that can shed light on the dark places using humor (as in actual humor) is a very good thing indeed.

    I think, though, that some powerful figures in this world really don't like humor. Maybe because humor itself dispels fear, and fear is what some are trying to pedal for whatever reason.

    1. Re:Humor is good at dispelling fear by caseih · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't always share their view. Perhaps not even mostly.

      I'm sure I agree that Dennis Miller is intelligent and his humor is erudite. I can recognize that and agree with you on that while disagreeing with his point of view. His humor, along with the humor of many others still helps to dispel fear, which is good. I haven't watched much TV in ages, so I'm unfamiliar with Miller but I will watch out for his clips on youtube. If one has a good sense of humor you can like a person without agreeing with him or her.

      I don't see very much true humor coming out the current administration, I must confess, which worries me. Just a lot of thin-skinned people, which is increasingly becoming the norm in public discourse.

      I didn't agree with much of what Bush did during his administration, but he did have a fairly warm sense of humor, even if he sometimes lacked nuance and maybe even competence. I found Obama's humor to be very good also and worked to his benefit. I really enjoyed watching the interview he did with Destin on Smarter Every Day (who is certainly not a liberal). I digress.

    2. Re:Humor is good at dispelling fear by Maritz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What was Oliver's blind spot for this net neutrality segment? He didn't even mention party affiliation.

      I suspect Rakarra doesn't like Mr Oliver or his show or his opinions, and therefore Mr Oliver is one-eyed and biased. If he agreed with Rakarra, then he would be unbiased. So it appears.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  5. Attack on democracy by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 5, Insightful

    saying they were attacked instead of the obvious truth (that they were overwhelmed by demand) is the kind of thing I'd expect from the Iraqi ministry of information, not the US Government.

    Waitaminute...

    Didn't we just hear a raft of comments about how the left is evidence-based, using the scientific method in all that?

    Something about the EPA replacing half the scientists on a policy board with industry experts?

    How is labelling something an "obvious truth" with no evidence to the contrary any different from "there are no facts any more"?

    The *very probable* explanation is that someone heard John Oliver's screed, realized that many people were going to post opinions to the FCC website, and DDOS'd the site to prevent these people from registering an opinion.

    Of all the stupid things people say that are attacks on democracy, this one actually *is* an attack on democracy.

    A DDOS to prevent public feedback is much more serious than the base issue, and might become more prevalent in the future.

    Perhaps we should be discussing that.

  6. Mistaking a large # of people by presidenteloco · · Score: 5, Insightful

    checking out the comment section as suggested on the show for an automated botnet DDOS attack kind of just paints the FCC leadership as technoramouses (contraction of "technology ignoramous").

    Just the kind of duffoons you want deciding on tech regulation policy.

    "The Trump Administration - Preparing America for a Knowledge Freedom Economy"

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
    1. Re:Mistaking a large # of people by Rakarra · · Score: 4, Insightful

      checking out the comment section as suggested on the show for an automated botnet DDOS attack kind of just paints the FCC leadership as technoramouses (contraction of "technology ignoramous").

      Why are we just leaping to the conclusion that it couldn't actually be a DDOS?
      We have no idea. We're just assuming it was heavy traffic and saying "herp derp, FCC are dullards."
      It's just impossible that someone might have watched the John Oliver segment and took it as an opportunity to launch a DDOS?

    2. Re:Mistaking a large # of people by Obfuscant · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why are we just leaping to the conclusion that it couldn't actually be a DDOS?

      Because the FCC being incompetent to deal with IT issues is fodder for conspiracies and part of the current anti-administration dialog, while it being the target of a DDoS isn't.

  7. And remember... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Those of you who are calling the FCC incompetent for not knowing what a DDOS is vs cloud services... This is government in action.

    The same people you want in charge of your medical care.

  8. FCC forgot what ISPs did to Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seriously, the new guy at the head of the FCC said there was never any example of ISPs depriotizing traffic to services in favor of their own stuff... Well the crap that happened with Netflix, where a few ISPs in the US throttled the access speed of Netflix to an unwatchable level, until they came to a paid "agreement" and suddenly, at the flip of a switch, Netflix loaded just fine... As if we are to believe they truly allocated "more" bandwidth to Netflix instead of just "giving it the normal amount of bandwidth it should've had in the first place".

  9. They didn't forget by tekrat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They intentionally misrepresented (aka lied) the facts, because we now live in a fact-free country. They are manipulating their data because the FCC chairman doesn't want net neutrality because he a shilling for Verizon et al.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  10. Re:Trump Never Laughs by Maritz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When you're a narcissistic psychopath, most shit just ain't that funny.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.