Was Your Name Stolen To Support Killing Net Neutrality? (dslreports.com) 128
An anonymous reader quotes a report from DSLReports: New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has launched a new tool for users interested in knowing whether their identity was stolen and used to fraudulently support the FCC's attack on popular net neutrality rules. The NY AG's office announced earlier this month that it was investigating identity theft and comment fraud during the FCC's public comment period. Researchers have noted repeatedly how "someone" used a bot to fill the comment proceeding with bogus support for the FCC plan, with many of the names being those of folks who'd never heard of net neutrality -- or were even dead. The new AG tool streamlines the act of searching the FCC proceeding for comments filed falsely in your name, and lets you contribute your findings to the AG's ongoing investigation into identity theft.
"Such conduct likely violates state law -- yet the FCC has refused multiple requests for crucial evidence in its sole possession that is vital to permit that law enforcement investigation to proceed," noted Schneiderman. "We reached out for assistance to multiple top FCC officials, including you, three successive acting FCC General Counsels, and the FCC's Inspector General. We offered to keep the requested records confidential, as we had done when my office and the FCC shared information and documents as part of past investigative work." "Yet we have received no substantive response to our investigative requests," stated the AG. "None." As such, the AG is taking its fight to the public itself.
"Such conduct likely violates state law -- yet the FCC has refused multiple requests for crucial evidence in its sole possession that is vital to permit that law enforcement investigation to proceed," noted Schneiderman. "We reached out for assistance to multiple top FCC officials, including you, three successive acting FCC General Counsels, and the FCC's Inspector General. We offered to keep the requested records confidential, as we had done when my office and the FCC shared information and documents as part of past investigative work." "Yet we have received no substantive response to our investigative requests," stated the AG. "None." As such, the AG is taking its fight to the public itself.
I checked and (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I'm sure John Smith, Jane Doe, etc. at 123 Fake St, 987 Fuck Yerself Ave, etc. are terrified of that. Consider calling them at 800-555-1234 to reassure them.
I don't want to victim blame, cause that's next to Nazism these days, but surely you knew this was a possibility when you selected that email address?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Idiots. Well, what can I say. Someone *is* making *me* look like a total idiot. Well, for anyone that knows my name and that I live in this zipcode.
Checking (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, my god--a hit! *click*
It has my actual address! I can't believe someone used my name to post a comment
Re: (Score:2)
I too was pleased to see that it found my comment. At least we know it works.
Sue the FCC for identity theft/fraud (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Trump would probably just pardon them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/17/us/politics/obama-commutes-bulk-of-chelsea-mannings-sentence.html?_r=0
Re: (Score:2)
Trump can pardon criminals who violated Federal law. He can, within limits, have the Department of Justice refuse to investigate something. He can't pardon offenses against state law (that's usually the state governor's prerogative). He can't dismiss civil lawsuits. If there's ground to file civil lawsuits against the FCC or anyone in it, they would go ahead despite what Trump could do.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What the actual crap (Score:3)
Yep, got me here too; even though I have a previous accepted, disseminated comment supporting the Title II restrictions. Funny though how the duplicate got nearly everything right, except where I actually live, and that I might actually not be braindead.
I shouldn't say I'm surprised, I'm not, just oh, oh so jaded.
Re: (Score:2)
I got a hit - it just so happens that the comment is pro net neutrality, which I agree with. I suppose there are spambots on both sides of the fight. It could also be someone with the same name, though, so unless you've got a tremendously unique name, I'm not sure how you prove that the comment is fabricated.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, in my case at least the first comment (the one I made) actually has the proper information, and is diametrically opposed to the fake one; so at least in my case it's easy to prove that at least 1 is fake.
If it'd remove the stain from my name, I'd gladly see both of them go away (as my proper name is well, unique... can't blame the stupid on someone else if you're the only person on the planet with that name.)
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose there are spambots on both sides of the fight.
While using the tool to look for comments from me, I was shown pages and pages and pages of comments from the same guy with the same address with the same comment. Probably a couple hundred or more. All in favor of net neutrality.
So yes, the spambots were running on both sides. What do you expect for an issue that has to do with computers using a forum that has no authentication at all? Does the FCC even have a captcha on the submission system?
Re: (Score:2)
If it is a different address it is just a different person. There are probably 10s of thousands of people with your name.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, just the one. It's disappointing I know, but I'm the only one. (Made sure my kids have proper sounding, but globally unique names as well [at time of birth, YMMV, etc.])
Re: (Score:3)
Naw, and California's naming conventions (and official paperwork) put a stop to that; It's a shame really Little double-dash, wildcard and backtick would have it so much easier if they didn't have to write their names out in longhand.
Re: (Score:2)
That's pretty much word-for-word what they posted under my name as well. Honestly, the whole ordeal tempts me to switch out this nice white hat I wear for a black one. That and a nice helping of dox pertaining to the guys who posted it would really ease my pain.
At least Flynn isn't stuck in the game anymore, so that's my bright spot for the day.
Re: (Score:1)
Some idiot spammed a comment box with fake names, but I don't see why it matters so much--this isn't a vote.
The real problem is that the Republicans sold us out to lobbyists on this one. I'd focus more on that being a stupid decision that leaves us at the mercy of predatory monopolies than who stuffed what in a public comment box that they ignored anyhow.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Is there ANYONE in the Trump administration, or being appointed by Trump, that is NOT under investigation for some thing or another?
Being investigated doesn't mean squat - other than that somebody in power feels like seeing if they can find anything that can be used to cause you trouble.
Been there. Had that done to me. (Try protesting the military draft while doing classified research some time.)
Re: (Score:2)
it's okay, give it a few decades and you'll be under sharia law my european friend.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't be naive ... (Score:1)
Do you really think the crooked industry shills running the FCC don't know this happened? Do you think they don't know it was the ISPs themselves or someone hired by them who did this?
The entire fucking FCC is pretty much on the payroll of the large ISPs/cable companies, was on the payroll of the large ISPs/cable companies, or will return to being on the
Re: (Score:2)
Make no mistake about it, the FCC is refusing to participate because they know the comments are fake, they just don't care because that is the outcome which was paid for.
Sorry, but you're the naive one: the comments are not a popular vote. They did not produce any outcome.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but you're the naive one: the comments are not a popular vote. They did not produce any outcome.
Of course they did; everything has an outcome. They didn't produce a decision, for the reasons you mentioned, but the outcome they produced was to give the anti-net neutrality people the illusion of having popular support for their plans.
Re: (Score:2)
but the outcome they produced was to give the anti-net neutrality people the illusion of having popular support for their plans.
I could buy that if there was the first glimmer of anyone keeping score on comment volume other than the the bitter, disgruntled NetNeut fanbase. Are you aware of any source at all that said anything close to "yay -- we got the most votes -- we win"?
It changes nothing (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It changes nothing because the comments aren't a popular vote.
The millions of cut-and-paste submissions that came in on both sides were completely worthless to the rulemaking process, as well as a royal pain to sort through.
Re: (Score:2)
Reflexively mod me down all you want, rabid NetNeut mob -- it will still be true that comments are not a popular vote [slashdot.org].
WTF. My name is on there as anti-net-neutrality. (Score:2)
Motherfsckers.
Well, this could be a fun Slashdot poll.
Anybody know how I object to this, besides filling out the NY form?
Re: (Score:2)
Ajit Pai
4868 Old Dominion Dr
Arlington, VA 22207-2743
What you do with that information is up to you. But to get you started, here is an idea... [bombshock.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's essentially been the status quo since the Eisenhower administration =/
Re: (Score:2)
"Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day." -- Theodore Roosevelt - An Autobiography, 1913
I'd say its been the status quo further back than Eisenhower.
Pretty much Yes it was (Score:1)
But not the name you're seeing here.
And the comments are so botty.
Found my real comment and a fake (Score:1)
I'm glad I saw this. Found both my real comment (pro NN) at my home address and that really common fake anti title II comment using my work address.
The fake was submitted in august. Sometime in the last 3-6 months I started getting spam phone calls to my work, using my name. Makes me wonder if they are related.
I filled out the AG's complaint page for whatever that is worth, even though I don't live in NY
Re: (Score:2)
Even if you don't live in NY I think it will still be useful information for their case.
This is absurd (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Do their opinions sound like this:
Before leaving office, the Obama Administration rammed through a massive scheme that gave the federal government broad regulatory control over the internet. That misguided policy decision is threatening innovation and hurting broadband investment in one of the largest and most important sectors of the U.S. economy. I support the Federal Communications CommissionÍs decision to roll back Title II and allow for free market principles to guide our digital economy.
The curre
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone else concerned that his tool clearly lists out peoples names and addresses?
Yes, as American Airlines would say, those in favor of maintaining net neutrality would need to be reaccommodated. I don't doubt that my ISP will find a way to do so.
I have a pretty common name (Score:2)
58 hits and I can't see a way to filter out the city/state.
Re: (Score:2)
Gotta love politics (Score:3)
Eric Schneiderman, who is on record characterizing voter fraud as an "imaginary problem," has decided to beat his chest and make political hay out of the idea that people may have misappropriated identities for something that wasn't even a vote . I wish I could say I was surprised.
Holy Shit (Score:2)
Common name... (Score:2)
Proud to say my fellow namesakes all supported net neutrality.
There was one shill that didn't, but his first is my last and vice versa... and clearly a partisan hack.
Online polls are not reliable (Score:3)
doesn't matter if the feds are running it or not.
there were bogus names FOR and AGAINST NN.
Trying to figure out how many people support it or don't support it is not possibly by looking at the FCC's polling.
And more importantly, does anyone really care?
Let us say for the sake of argument that the polling were totally 100 percent accurate... would that change anyone's opinion on the matter? Nope. So why does it matter when its a dumpster fire? It doesn't.
Its a joke.
There is corruption on the issue everywhere. For AND against are both corrupt.
There are arguments to do it either way for various reasons.
The FOR campaign can point to bad behavior by monopolistic agencies that abuse consumers.
The AGAINST campaign can point to bad behavior by monopolistic agencies that abuse consumers.
BOTH sides accuse the other of being in the pocket of billion dollar mega corporations.
Consider that NN and anti-NN are both right at the same time for the same reason. Consider that the corruption is bigger and thus encompasses both positions at once.
Re: (Score:2)
Most shills are ACs... it makes it easier for one person to pretend to be lots of people.
For Net Neutrality (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't care what the other hundred fake me's might have spammed, here's the deal. I and most of my friends are conservative southerners, some more hardcore than others. A group of us had a discussion today on this and I was expecting to clash with them on the issue, but surprising enough, everyone seemed to be in unanimous agreement that Ajit Pai's argument was flawed or at least that ending net neutrality was bad. Some of us also find it concerning that particular republicans who were otherwise thought to be a voice of reason are on board with abolishing net neutrality, and that leaves us kind of conflicted.
Not sure where I heard this, but I remember a saying to the effect of... yall can do whatever you want to Americans, but don't ever get between their couch and their T.V. I kind of feel for similar reasons, railroading this could really backfire for Republicans. IMO, ending neutraility probably won't last because it would create too much of an uproar, but you can bet Republicans will have a hard time living down the mess from trying. This all doesn't make a lick of sense to me except that this guy is a crook. They need to drain this dude at the FCC with the rest of the swamp as far as I'm concerned. This whole thing stinks like a load of crap if you ask me.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:For Net Neutrality (Score:5, Insightful)
Fuck- my parents were in cahoots with the Russians (Score:2)
Before leaving office, the Obama Administration rammed through a massive scheme that gave the federal government broad regulatory control over the internet. That misguided policy decision is threatening innovation and hurting broadband investment in one of the largest and most important sectors of the U.S. economy. I support the Federal Communications Commission's decision to roll back Title II and allow for free market principles to guide our digital economy.
This is highly suspicious because these two don't agree on ANYTHING.
I'm in there 5 times (Score:2)
The pro neutrality ones were unique and well written, in general, maybe with one or two spelling mistakes. Short, and fairly to the point.
The anti-neutrality ones? well, here's an example of one of them. They were all like this or similar ones with words replaced. Its just a giant block of what looks to be randomly cut out of a muc
Futurama characters too (Score:1)
My wife's long-dead aunt opposes net neutrality! (Score:2)
I found this one, with my wife's aunt's correct name and address: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filin... [fcc.gov]
Only problem is that she died in 2006.
Needs more search functionality (Score:2)
What's the point? (Score:2)
I put in my name and got nearly 120 results found. But most of them didn't share either my first or last name. A lot of them did share my name though and everyone I checked put in something other than my own address. Okay, when I put my name in quotes I only got about 50 hits and most seemed to actually share my name but there's still no way to narrow it down further.
I have no reason to doubt that those people are real. But I couldn't punch in my name and ZIP code and I'm not going to click on that ma
There's even an API (Score:2)
The FCC has a published API for bulk submission of comments. Why is anyone surprised that someone took the phone book and posted a bunch of bogus comments from everyone from Aaron Aaronson to Zebediah Zywiec? https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/public-api-docs.html [fcc.gov]
149 results (Score:2)
Found my real comment and a fake (Score:1)
You can actually put your zip in the search box along with your name. It seems to be searching all the fields in the submission.