FCC stonewalls demands for evidence of cyberattack

The FCC swears that a denial of service attack hit its servers hours after Last Week Tonight ‘s John Oliver rallied support for net neutrality, but where’s the evidence? Well, don’t expect it any time soon. In an interview with ZDNet , the regulator’s David Bray says the FCC won’t release the logs that might show who was responsible for the incident. The logs contain private info like IP addresses, he says. Bray does note that there wasn’t a botnet involved, though — instead, the traffic came from commercial cloud services using the FCC’s public programming interface. But if it wasn’t a botnet, then who was involved? Some critics are concerned that the FCC isn’t exactly being forthright. The advocacy group Fight for the Future tells ZDNet that the FCC should disclose information “to the appropriate authorities and to journalists” to have them investigate the data while maintaining privacy. And if there’s an organization behind the attack, the group says, the FCC should divulge who it is. That it isn’t is worrying — does the Commission not know, or is it trying to hide the origins? Fight for the Future is concerned that the traffic is either from net neutrality supporters (and thus evidence that the FCC couldn’t/wouldn’t handle opposition to its net neutrality rollback ) or opponents trying to stifle criticism. And unfortunately, there’s circumstantial evidence that might support either theory. Anti-net neutrality bots recently flooded the FCC’s comments, and Chairman Ajit Pai even suggested that he might honor these obviously fake statements. It doesn’t help that the FCC has since gone into a “sunshine period” where it won’t take new public comments on decisions. And it’s no secret that telecoms are less than fond of net neutrality proponents, especially when they try to expose astroturfing campaigns . Simply put, both the current FCC and internet providers have a vested interest in downplaying net neutrality’s supporters while enshrining its critics. The FCC says it has since upgraded its website to better handle loads, so it isn’t completely unresponsive. Without more disclosures about what happened around the attack, though, it’s impossible to know just how honest it really is — and it’s not helping its case by being unresponsive to public outcries. Via: Gizmodo Source: ZDNet (1) , (2)

Link:
FCC stonewalls demands for evidence of cyberattack

AT&T ordered to pay $7.75 million for bogus directory assistance tools

US telecom providers have a pretty bad rap, and today we’re finding out that some AT&T customers ended up paying money they shouldn’t have thanks to some scammers. The FCC just released a statement noting that it reached a settlement with AT&T in which the carrier will pay $7.75 million after it accidentally allowed scammers to charge $9 a month to unsuspecting wireline customers for a “sham” directory assistance service. Adding insult to injury, it seems this service was set up as a tool to help launder money; the scam was originally uncovered by the DEA. AT&T said in a statement that “two companies that engaged in a sophisticated fraud scheme were apparently able to circumvent those protections and submit unauthorized third-party charges that were billed by AT&T.” According to the FCC, AT&T received a fee each time this fraudulent service appeared on a customer’s bill, but the so-called service provider never actually provided anything to these customers, most of which were small businesses. Out of the $7.75 million AT&T is paying up, $6.8 million will go towards refunds and a paltry $950, 000 will go to the US treasury as a fine. Given that AT&T pulled in $40.5 billion in revenue in its most recent quarter, it’s a stretch to call that fine even a slap on the wrist. This is hardly the first time US telecom providers have gotten in trouble for such shady practices — in 2014, AT&T itself paid a much larger $105 million settlement for cramming false charges onto its customers’ bills. T-Mobile also paid $90 million in a 2014 settlement , while Verizon and Sprint paid $90 million and $68 million, respectively, last winter. We’re hoping the FCC continues to pay close attention to these shady practices. AT&T’s full statement is below: “Consistent with industry practices, AT&T wireline telephone customers have been able to purchase certain telecommunications services from third parties and have charges for those services billed on their telephone bill. We have implemented strict requirements on third parties submitting charges for AT&T bills to ensure that all charges are authorized by our customers; indeed, those requirements go beyond the requirements of FCC rules and impose safeguards that the FCC proposed but never adopted. Nonetheless, unbeknownst to us, two companies that engaged in a sophisticated fraud scheme were apparently able to circumvent those protections and submit unauthorized third-party charges that were billed by AT&T.” “Today, we reached a settlement with the FCC to resolve all claims associated with these companies and the related charges. Pursuant to the settlement, we will provide refunds for all charges on behalf of these two companies going back to January 1, 2012. Affected former and current AT&T wireline telephone customers will receive these refunds via check within 90 days. We stopped billing for these entities as of June 2015 and will also cease wireline third-party billing for other third parties, with limited exceptions.” Source: FCC

Visit site:
AT&T ordered to pay $7.75 million for bogus directory assistance tools

Phone companies ditching copper wires will have to follow the rules

The age of the copper land-line is nearing its end, but traditional phone lines aren’t going quietly: new rules from the FCC now require service providers notify customers of the impending removal and drawbacks of switching to a VOIP line three months before killing a copper network. It sounds like a reasonable move — customers need to know that the technology replacing their traditional land-line won’t work during a power-outage without an external power source — but not everybody at the FCC is happy with the new rules. “It appears that Chicken Little rules the roost, ” writes Commissioner Ajit Pai in a dissent to the updated transition rules. “By dragging out the copper retirement process , the FCC is adopting ‘regulations that deter rather than promote fiber deployment.'” Pai argues that the FCC is making it more difficult for companies to modernize their networks because lobbyists are claiming that retiring copper will cause the “sky to fall, ” disrupting services and hurting their business model. He has a point — but wouldn’t you want to be notified if the phone company was changing out your voice service worked? Check out the FCC’s official announcement at the source link below. [Image Credit: Raymond Kleboe via Getty Images] Filed under: Misc Comments Source: Verge , FCC Tags: copper, copperlandline, fcc, landline, phones, telco, telephone

View original post here:
Phone companies ditching copper wires will have to follow the rules

FCC confident in its mobile phone radiation limits, seeks second opinions

Cast your memory back to last summer. Sweep away memories of iPhone 5 leaks galore , and you might remember that the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) asked the FCC to reevaluate its radiation limits for mobile phones. Now a few seasons later, the FCC has finally wrapped up a report that responds to the GAO, and there are no changes to its RF radiation levels in sight because it feels comfortable with its current caps. “We continue to have confidence in the current exposure limits, and note that more recent international standards have a similar basis,” reads the report. However, given that its guidelines were adopted in 1996, new research on radiation and the proliferation of mobile devices , the FCC would like some feedback regarding its restrictions. It’s put out a call for comments from concerned parties and even federal health and safety bodies. Though the freshly-released document didn’t rock the proverbial boat, it made one change worth noting. The pinna (outer ear) is now classified an extremity, which means the FCC allows devices to hit the tissue with more radiation. Feel like poring through 201 pages of regulatory minutiae? Click the source link below for the commission’s full dossier. Filed under: Cellphones Comments Via: The Verge Source: FCC

Visit link:
FCC confident in its mobile phone radiation limits, seeks second opinions

911 tech pinpoints people in buildings—but could disrupt wireless ISPs

NextNav’s enhanced 911 technology locates people within buildings—but may interfere with millions of existing devices. NextNav Cell phones replacing landlines are making it difficult to accurately locate people who call 911 from inside buildings. If a person having a heart attack on the 30th floor of a giant building can call for help but is unable to speak their location, actually finding that person from cell phone and GPS location data is a challenge for emergency responders. Thus, new technologies are being built to accurately locate people inside buildings. But a system that is perhaps the leading candidate for enhanced 911 geolocation is also controversial because it uses the same wireless frequencies as wireless Internet Service Providers, smart meters, toll readers like EZ-Pass, baby monitors, and various other devices. NextNav , the company that makes the technology, is seeking permission from the Federal Communications Commission to start commercial operations. More than a dozen businesses and industry groups oppose NextNav (which holds FCC licenses through a subsidiary called Progeny), saying the 911 technology will wipe out devices and services used by millions of Americans. Read 37 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Read this article:
911 tech pinpoints people in buildings—but could disrupt wireless ISPs