Slashdot Mirror
FCC Should Prove DDoS Attacks Stopped Net Neutrality Comments (networkworld.com)
New submitter Michelle Davidson writes: After John Oliver urged viewers of HBO's Last Week Tonight to fight again for net neutrality and post comments in support of it, people hit a wall — the FCC's site essentially crashed. Originally, it was believed that the number of people trying to access the site caused the problem, but then the FCC released a statement saying "multiple" DDoS attacks -- occurring at the same time Oliver sent viewers to the site -- caused the site to crash: "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. These actors were not attempting to file comments themselves; rather they made it difficult for legitimate commenters to access and file with the FCC." The group Fight for the Future doesn't buy it, though, and wants proof. It says the FCC should release the logs: "The FCC should immediately release its logs to an independent security analyst or major news outlet to verify exactly what happened last night. The public deserves to know, and the FCC has a responsibility to maintain a functioning website and ensure that every member of the public who wants to submit a comment about net neutrality has the ability to do so. Anything less is a subversion of our democracy." No word yet from the FCC on whether it will release its logs, leading the interwebs to speculate about whether it was actually an attack to prevent commenting or if the FCC is ill-prepared to handle large amounts of traffic and blamed DDoS attacks to cover their inabilities. People are even questioning whether the FCC's tech team knows what a DDoS attack is.
Which is more telling; lots of people trying to post comments for net neutrality or some organizations trying to block those people from posting those comments?
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Doesn't help much and by the time there is proof one way or another it will all be over either way.
Frankly I'm convinced it is a DDoS for one reason. If it wasn''t, Pai might be stupid enough to claim it was, but there are people are him who would convince him that making the claim it was not a smart thing to do. Hell, rumor has it Verizon is running an electro astroturfing campaign. Creating bots that that create false accounts and submit antiNN comments. Maybe their bots ran wild and created the DDoS.
Keep in mind this is not a referendum, even if the FCC receives negative comments totaling 99% of the US population, they can just blow it off.
When MS and the DoJ reached a settlement more then a decade ago. Before the judge could approve the settlement, they had to do something similar. They received a ton of comments that went something like "Microsoft sucks break it up.". The judge took a few substantive comments and tweaked the settlement a bit and approved it.
I think a better effort would be to make sure that people get a way to confirm their comments actually were submitted and reflect their actual comments. Just think of what would happen if Comcast were caught forging comments!
Something else they can do is get the comment period extended to compensate for the difficulties. Just like when there is a problem with a polling place in an election, a judge can extend the times the polls are open. The FCC, after all, does not have to abide by the comments, but they do, by law, have to receive the comments and listen to them.
A lot of people trying to access a resource at the same time.
We know this phenomenon as "slashdotting". And funny enough, it hasn't really happened a lot in the more recent past, maybe the FCC should get up to speed. Even though unlikely, it might suddenly get hit by a lot of traffic because suddenly a lot of people might get interested in that "net neutrality" thing.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Ahem, it's known as the right to petition.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
So you equate Democracy is Oligarchy? Because I can tell you for certain that Oligarchy doesn't care about anything but what Oligarchy can use to fulfill its dream to fully enslave all of humanity. Democracy however cares about hearing every voice and interpreting the meaning of the voice and then acting upon the majority's harmony.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Dudes - Adjit pai has your back on this! Calm down and relax!
Alternative facts not withstanding - who needs any sort of oversight or regulation of the Internet? It routes around total authoritarian control.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
Also one step away from "Millions of citizens with an opinion different from our own."
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
Anything less is a subversion of our democracy.
No, it's not. Democracy doesn't give a shit about comment forms on a website.
If Democracy doesn't give a shit, then perhaps they should stop hosting comment forms on their websites.
I am not a specialist but looking at the comments it seems that a bot has been posting the same text *against net neutrality* (starting with "The unprecedented regulatory power the Obama Administration imposed on the internet is smothering innovation..."). It looks like a bot because the messages appear to come from people that posted in alphabetical order of their first name/last name combination: Brittany Mccain, Brittany Proctor, Brittany Sharp, etc. in the view sorted by date posted. https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/searc...
Just incredible how this administration is basically trying to re-write history...
Whether or not it was a DDoS attack, the thing is, this already happened in the past, for the exact same reason. So regardless if there was a DDoS attack or not, the website would've come down the same way:
http://www.latimes.com/busines...
That link there? It's from 2014, despite looking exactly like past weekend. That was the moment when this matter should've been settled. No need for clowns with extremely punchable faces like Ajit Pai to try to reverse it in any way, if public comment even mattered. The public opinion has been heard on this, they are already ignoring whatever comments were made in the past. People don't need to be doubtful whether public comment is being heard or not... it clearly isn't.
Question is exactly the same, the fears are exactly the same of 2014, net neutrality did not change since then nor it's reasons to exist.
The companies along their greed to make more money on costumers also didn't change... if anything, it only grew.
Now they also have a whole lot more politicians in their pockets, people who are willing to go against public comments because they have their heads stuck in their asses. Remember people, it was only 3 years ago that the public outcry for net neutrality happened. All this administration is doing is reversing what people conquered. This would be unacceptable in any decent democracy, but here we are held prisioners by an administration that refuses to listen.
Fight for the Future has all the reasons to be suspicious about this, because pretty much anyone can claim that a website crash was not because of unpredicted access numbers but rather some coordinated attack of some form. But ultimately, the violation has already happened. When you have an administration that is this willing to bend over for corporations wishes, it doesn't matter if they revert something or not, they'll find a way to bend laws and turn a blind eye to violations. Net neutrality has ended as soon as Ajit Pai got the chair. Whether net neutrality crashes or not, I guarantee we'll be seeing problematic behaviours arising plenty soon.
It's not so much what's on paper, but rather the signals politicians send with stuff like these.
Joseph Goebbels would nod in the affirmative.
And a comment form on a website does a lousy job of providing any reasonable sampling of the majority. Nor does democracy actually typically yield good results. It's a good thing the US is a representational republic and not a democracy.
Just look at Trumps multiple survey's. That...oh wait he actually claims they were rigged because people didn't give the answers he wanted.
Why does it matter? Would the government be embarrassed if the website couldn't handle the traffic? Would they not want to admit that there was a massive barrage of comments from citizens opposed to their policies? Or are they just waiting a few days to blame it on the evil Russians?
Even if every single HBO subscriber wrote a comment to the FCC, the government wouldn't read more than a few (if they bother to read ANY) and certainly wouldn't do anything in response. We might get a new head of the FCC in a few years, but the career bureaucrats aren't elected and won't be up for re-appointment. They don't care what you think because they have no reason to care.
And which of those has this administration, as a whole, been showing lately?
During the 2012 election there was some news articles about Republicans trying to shake off the "old, rich, white-guy" persona since they had once again lost to - in their minds - the devil incarnate. Fast forward 4 years and they've doubled down on the persona. The FCC under Pai so far has been faithfully serving the partisan agenda, favoring big business over the little guy and public interests.
It gets even better when you realize the DDoS attack came from IoT devices all approved and certified by the FCC :)
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
The canonical argument against direct democracy is that the rabble might be swayed to elect a demagogue. /snark
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner. We took up some democratic ideals, but we are a representative Republic, more than a 'democracy'. All democracy means is all citizens are empowered to participate in governance. It doesnt really encapsulate how our government runs, only who can participate.
Good-bye