• You must be logged in to see or use the Shoutbox. Besides, if you haven't registered, you really should. It's quick and it will make your life a little better. Trust me. So just register and make yourself at home with like-minded individuals who share either your morbid curiousity or sense of gallows humor.

Satanica

Veteran Member
Bold Member!
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...hat-may-explain-net-neutrality-comment-fraud/
The Federal Communications Commission must stop withholding records that may shed light on fraudulent comments submitted in the FCC's net neutrality repeal proceeding, a US District Court judge ruled last week.

The ruling came in a lawsuit filed in September 2017 by freelance journalist Jason Prechtel, who sued the FCC after it failed to provide documents in response to his Freedom of Information Act (FoIA) request. Prechtel sought data that would identify people who made bulk comment uploads; many of the uploads contained fraudulent comments submitted in other people's names without their knowledge.

Prechtel called the ruling "a huge victory for transparency over an issue that has gone unanswered by the FCC and its current leadership for too long."

Making the documents public will allow scrutiny of the FCC's process for taking comments on the net neutrality repeal, said the ruling written by Judge Christopher Cooper of US District Court for the District of Columbia.

"In addition to enabling scrutiny of how the Commission handled dubious comments during the rulemaking, disclosure would illuminate the Commission's forward-looking efforts to prevent fraud in future processes," Cooper wrote.

Disclosure of the email addresses and .CSV files will enable interested observers to scrutinize that action (or its absence) by defining the scope of the problem. It may be the case, for example, that hundreds of comments were submitted in bulk .CSV files by plainly fake email addresses, or that the comments submitted through .CSV files were all above board and most problematic comments were submitted through other means. In either instance, Prechtel seeks information that sheds light on the suitability of the Commission's efforts to prevent future public-commenting fraud and abuse. It is surely in the public interest to further the oversight of agency action to protect the very means by which Americans make their voices heard in regulatory processes.

Disclosure "would clarify the extent to which the Commission succeeded—as it assured the American people it had—in managing a public-commenting process seemingly corrupted by dubious comments," Cooper also wrote.

While Cooper didn't give Prechtel everything he asked for, the judge's ruling ordered the FCC to turn over the email addresses that were used to submit .CSV files, which contained the bulk comments. Cooper also ordered the FCC to work with Prechtel on potentially releasing the .CSV files themselves—if the FCC can locate those files.

The FCC argued that revealing bulk submitters' email addresses would be an invasion of privacy. But during the net neutrality proceeding, the FCC warned bulk comment submitters that their email addresses and other information would be made public, "mitigating any expectation of privacy," Cooper wrote.

t's not clear whether the FCC still has the .CSV files. "The Court therefore directs the parties to meet and confer regarding the release of the .CSV files, applying the analysis set forth in this opinion to the relevant facts. If a dispute remains, the Commission may file a renewed motion for summary judgment on this issue," Cooper wrote.

Prechtel says he expects to get both the email addresses and .CSV files.

"I am confident that the FCC has access to the .CSV files I have requested and I won't have any trouble receiving them," Prechtel told Ars. "I believe the Court has effectively ruled that the FCC must produce the bulk .CSV comment files, should they be unable to prove they can't produce them."

However, Cooper ruled against Prechtel's request for FCC server logs.

"The judge ruled against my request for logs from the FCC's servers that would provide further details about which specific email addresses posted which bulk .CSV comments to their system," Prechtel wrote in a Medium post yesterday. "Similarly, the judge ruled in favor of maintaining the FCC's redactions in a suspicious email thread the FCC provided to me weeks after I filed my lawsuit."

Those redactions affected emails written by former FCC CIO David Bray to CQ Roll Call, which sought the FCC tech department's help with submitting millions of comments on behalf of clients that have not been identified publicly. Cooper accepted the FCC's argument that it could redact the emails because of the "deliberative process" exemption in public records law.
[....]
Bray is the same former FCC official who falsely claimed that the comment system was hit by multiple DDoS attacks.

The judge also ruled against Prechtel's request for server logs detailing the dates and times that .CSV files were submitted. The FCC argued that the logs contain both non-sensitive information and sensitive information related to how the FCC protects the system from attacks and that separating the two is too difficult. Cooper accepted the FCC's explanation.

When contacted by Ars, the FCC declined comment on the ruling and on whether it will appeal the ruling.

Prechtel said he doesn't know when he'll get the records but speculated that it could take months. He also said it's premature to talk about whether he'll appeal the parts of the ruling he lost, because the case isn't over.

"For now, the judge has declined to rule on the other bulk tool that is likely the biggest culprit for the mass FCC comment fraud—the Data.gov API (Application Programming Interface), which is maintained by a different federal agency, the General Services Administration (GSA)," Prechtel wrote.
After he receives all the public records he's able to obtain, Prechtel said he will analyze them and post them online.

"As you know, the whole point of this FOIA request-turned-lawsuit is to find out who exactly posted bulk comments to the FCC's public comment system and to see if any of the already confirmed fake comments can be linked to a particular bulk submitter's email address or API key registration info," Prechtel told Ars. "Whatever I ultimately win determines what kind of analysis I can do, but after I present my findings in whatever manner seems most appropriate, I will put the records online for others to conduct their own analysis."
 
no one that would be effected by this as far as the average citizen, would have been for the destruction of net neutrality and now we are paying in spades, I lost the perfect job over this and already there have been emergencies because they were able to lower our speed out here
 
Yeah, let's not forget how emergency responders had their data limited during the Carr Fire.

The entire net neutrality vote was a sham and made to sound like it would benefit the public when everyone knew otherwise. Pisses me off everytime I see that asshole, Ajit Pai, grinning like the bought jackass that he is.
 
My internet company is municipality or something like them owned. Double the speed of compost and I recently got an apologetic notice for a cable rate increase. It explained that the increase is due to broadcasters and they don't profit off it then the jaw dropped. It said they will assist us with cutting the cord and obtaining other services through internet like sling, YouTube etc. Top tier internet is only $59.00/month.
 
My internet company is municipality or something like them owned. Double the speed of compost and I recently got an apologetic notice for a cable rate increase. It explained that the increase is due to broadcasters and they don't profit off it then the jaw dropped. It said they will assist us with cutting the cord and obtaining other services through internet like sling, YouTube etc. Top tier internet is only $59.00/month.
Ha ha compost. Comcast. Close enough.
 
Back in 2017, the Federal Communications Commission invited the public to comment on the issue of net neutrality before it ultimately voted to kill net neutrality regulations. There's one minor problem: Some of those who commented in support of repealing net neutrality rules were dead at the time.

In fact, a huge number of comments may have been fake, which sparked requests for the FCC to share server logs that would identify where each and every comment originated. Fast forward to today, and a judge has ordered the FCC to provide those logs to two reporters who requested them, Gizmodo reports.

The comments were made against and in support of an FCC proposal titled "Restoring Internet Freedom." The proposal rolled back net neutrality regulations that prevented ISPs from engaging in certain behavior, such as creating so-called "fast lanes." In theory, without the protections in place, an ISP could throttle traffic from a service like Netflix while allowing its own streaming video service to run at full speed.
[....]
When the commenting period opened, many rallied in support of net neutrality, but the FCC ultimately passed its proposal with a 3-2 vote. The implication underlying concerns about the origin of some of the comments is that fake anti-net neutrality comments might have been used to help justify the repeal.

There have been multiple attempts to get the FCC to share server logs containing IP addresses and other information from the more than 22 million public comments it received. When the FCC refused to hand over the requested logs to New York Times reporters Nicholas Confessore and Gabriel Dance, they sued under the Freedom of Information Act. They have now won their case.


The FCC argued that revealing IP addresses and other information contained in the logs would amount to an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." However, District Judge Lorna Schofield was not convinced it would do any real harm, and while she didn't brush off the concerns entirely, she agreed that the logs could reveal if the entire process is "vulnerable to corruption."

"In this case, the public interest in disclosure is great because the importance of the comment process to agency rulemaking is great," the judge wrote. "If genuine public comment is drowned out by a fraudulent facsimile, then the notice-and-comment process has failed."

FCC commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel celebrated the decision on Twitter, saying "it's time for the agency to come clean."
[....]
Rosenworcel has been an outspoken critic of some of the FCC's actions and policies. Most recently, she lambasted FCC's broadband deployment report. In an op-ed posted to CNN, she said "the FCC's rosy view that all is well bears no relation to reality."

 

Latest posts

Back
Top