FairPort Accused of Faking Network Readiness Test 144
wytcld writes "When Verizon spun off its Northern New England lines to FairPoint, FairPoint leased Verizon's computer network to manage them. This was costly, so FairPoint readied its own network. To prove its own network was ready for the switchover a demonstration was prepared for an outside auditor, Liberty. Now a whistleblower claims: '...when Liberty was watching what they thought was "flow thru" within a system and from one system to another, they were really only seeing a small program that was created to assimilate what they wanted the systems to do. They were not actually in the systems at the time nor were they in the test systems. They were in a newly created small program that used screen shots from the real system to deceive the audience into believing that they were watching a real demonstration.' How easy is it to find auditors who can be fooled by such a simple trick? Whether or not the test was faked, the network has proved so unready that FairPoint is close to bankruptcy, and may have its licenses to operate revoked in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont."
Help! (Score:5, Interesting)
The reports slamming Fairpoint have not been exaggerated, I work in the tech industry in NH, and I have seen countless problems with many of my clients who have fairpoint. I personally have had endless frustration-
A new 7.1 mbps service that took them 3 months and 1000 calls later to actually hook up! The techs there seem to have little idea of what's going on, and each promises a phone call back that never happens. They've mastered stalling techniques such as "Well I put it in the system, but we'll have to wait 24-72 hours for it to 'go through'"
"go through!?" Let me tell you guys something, this is the tech's way of not dealing with you. When my problem finally got fixed (I had finally gotten through to a top tier tech), he was on the phone with me and went, oh I see the problem, and it was fixed instantly. There is no magical factory of oompa loompas out back processing these cpu instructions- it's a fucking computer network run by
Techs decide what they can and cannot do in order to get off the phone with you as soon as possible, conveinently never having access to that part of the system that can FIX anything.
There's nothing good going on behind the scenes at fairpoint, and their staff are a bunch of jokers. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to get on the phone with their billing department and figure out why my auto-pay billing keeps billing but never charges the card! I've got over $300 in late fees.. and I don't know why!
Flown on an airline lately? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Very Easy (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Help! (Score:1, Interesting)
Whenever someone tells me I have to wait for things to go through, I ask to be transferred to the department of things going through. When the lie is discovered there and then, things change--"Oh, it's the XYZ department holding things up". Transfer me there. Eventually, you get somebody who can deal with the issue.
FailPoint is Fail (Score:4, Interesting)
Another unhappy FP customer... (Score:5, Interesting)
I got burned bad by this myself. In the interest of not having to retype a LOT, here's the complaint I sent to Maine's PUC, which got forwarded to someone high up at Fairpoint:
We initially contacted Fairpoint to establish DSL service near the end of January, 2009. We were informed that because of the computer system changeover, that someone would be contacting me in early February to complete our order and give us our install date, which was predicted to be roughly mid-February. After not hearing from a Fairpoint representative by mid-February, I called to follow up, and after several phone calls where I was basically told "we're still transitioning, and can't get to your order," our original order was found, and we were given an install date of March 3. On March 2, having not yet received the equipment for our DSL service, I called again, and after being on hold for roughly 5-10 min while the customer service rep was "checking on our order," I was told that we were still scheduled to have service turned on for March 3, and our equipment would most likely be recieved that same day.
After not receiving anything on March 3, I called Fairpoint again that afternoon. At that point, I was told that the computer was showing that the order was never completed because it was showing that service was not available. At this point, the rep offered to have a technician come out and check our area to see if this was actually the case. I was told that we would be called with the results of this check, and to expect a 7-10 day wait before hearing back. We were never called back with the results of this check.
In mid-March, I called to follow up on the supposed check that was done. They were not able to find our previous order anywhere in the computer system. After repeatedly being put on hold so they could try and find the previous order, eventually a new order was placed. At this point, we decided to sign up for both telephone and DSL service, as we were offered a bundle package at that time. This order was given the order number mentioned above, with the phone service date of April 2, and DSL service as of April 6.
As we had to go and purchase a phone, we were not able to test the telephone service until April 3. When the service was tested, it was not yet working. I placed another call to Fairpoint, where I was told that there was still an account from a previous tenant at our address in the system when our order was placed, and this placed a hold on our order. Note that we had lived at the service address since late January of '09, and in none of my previous calls had I been told about any existing account at this address. This hold was supposedly cleared, and they said that the phone should be working within a few days, and the DSL a few days after that.
A week later, we still had no service of any sort. I placed yet another call to Fairpoint, and was told this time that there were multiple orders in our name for our address, including one for another telephone number, but all of our information. I was also told that there was showing a problem with the third-party verification that Fairpoint uses, and this is now why our order was on hold. This issue was supposedly cleared, and again I was told to give the phone a few days, and to watch for the DSL equipment to arrive.
On April 17, we still had no service. I called Fairpoint yet again, and was again told that the previous account that was at our address was the source of the problem. After being put on hold for at least 10 minutes while the rep called to another department to try and get things worked out, I was told that everything was taken care of, and I should have a working phone by Monday or Tuesday of this week, and the DSL service would take a few days longer.
As of today, the "Tuesday of Next week" mentioned above, we still have no service. Multiple calls to the "Installation Service" telephone number since 8am today of 866-980-0642 that the last Fairpoint rep I spoke to provided me with only get me a recor
Everybody around here hates fairpoint. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Very Easy (Score:1, Interesting)
Auditors are fine as long as you do what they expect. Any deviation from what they know causes them great pain. For example, I work with credit cards so I have to live with PCI auditors. You tell them that you are encrypting credit cards with AES-512. They read somewhere that AES-256 is recommended. They tell you so. But you tell them that AES-512 is 256 better. They tell you it isn't AES-256. And then they blink. They stare. They blink again. After I switched to AES-256 they were happy. Then next year when you get a new auditor whose never seen AES-256 used, you have to explain why you're not using TripleDES for encryption. And then they blink. They stare. They blink again. After I switched to TripleDES they were happy.
Then the next year yet another auditor wonders why you aren't using both thinking that it's extra secure to use both.
Oh well, it keeps my company in the black.
So the whistleblower is Borg? (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's what it says,
So it seems that the whistleblower is Borg. The only thing missing is the part about resistance being futile. Which it seems to be when you're dealing with Verizon, so maybe that part's implied.
Re:So what does this mean for end users? (Score:3, Interesting)
This lead to a certain amount of tension between Verizon employees who weren't part of the move to FairPoint and still worked in the building (a number of whom were to ultimately get laid-off by Verizion. I have no knowledge if that was the outcome), between former Verzion employees now working for FairPoint, and new FairPoint employees who didn't have an emotional stake in the transition. There were also a number of consultants brought in for various work, such as the initial database installation (Oracle) and configuration. FairPoint was racing to finish the code for the systems, which included customer billing and order processing, to be done prior to April of 2008, which is when the sale was to be final and FairPoint would start owning the lines and running the show. Apparently, they didn't make it.
Part of what was driving the race was the need to convert existing customer data from Verizon's old system to FairPoint's new one. I'm curious as to which part of the system was supposedly audited, and allegedly faked: the data conversion, the on-going operational functions, or both.
Re:Very Easy (Score:3, Interesting)
Your obviously not an IT Auditor...
I am.. unfortunately.. but hey, it pays the bills.. Well, I am an auditor when I am not doing security pen testing and network defense.. but thats besides the point.
Audits are generally point in time, you certify (I would not call the people who audited fairpoint auditors, more like observers) that the system (the one you actually put your hands on, and validated the configurations and controls.. yes I know FISMA is a joke...) is in compliance with whatever criteria was used during that audit, at that time. It is not going to be compliant a week later after 50 patches were released and the client did not test and install, or mitigate.
The point being, not all auditors are idiots.. many are, but not all.
Surprise? (Score:3, Interesting)
I remember when FairPoint was trying to take over, the local NPR station in Maine was coming out with an almost-daily feature on specific points of the FairPoint readiness plan. Some of them would have gotten me caught under the new Maine distracted driving law because they were so ridiculous I (as a non-FairPoint customer) was laughing so hard I almost drove off the interstate.
My favorite was the costs assumption. FairPoint, in their infinite wisdumb, decided that the cost of gasoline would remain fixed at $2 or less for a period of no less than seven years. Gas was about $2 at the time the report was written and was documented as such, and $3 when the report was evaluated by the various state legislatures. A few legislators even mentioned that point specifically after the NPR story on it broke. Then, suddenly, it was a non-issue even though the report never changed.
But there were LOTS of things like this. Assumptions that labor costs wouldn't change, assumptions that their customer base would increase by some incredible percentage while support costs would remain fixed or drop, assumptions on the cost of running new cable and upgrading Internet infrastructure that were apparently based on most of the work being done by elves while the workers slept and service being provided by the magical Internet Faeries instead of actual bandwidth from Level3.
FairPoint made up numbers for the auditors, that much is true. But most of their fabrications were obvious enough to be on the daily news. Obviously, the legislatures of Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont don't listen to NPR. Or FairPoint and Verizon executives could afford enough bribe money or had the incriminating photos. You choose.
We got what we (or FairPoint) paid for.
STILL glad I'm a Vonage customer.
FairPoint is a turd. (Score:2, Interesting)
Over the source of this summer, two Vermont areas have lost 911 service overnight with FairPoint having a lax attitude about fixing it. The first was an unspecified technical error limiting the Grand Isle region to calling out to one exchange, effectively nixing 911. The second incident involved a line breaking, cutting service to the town of Fair Haven completely. Despite many calls, FairPoint said it could wait until morning.
On top of this is an abundance of service outages and billing errors which, despite what they say, still persist. I truly hope the three states' PSB's kick this joke of a company out of New England for good.
Re:Flown on an airline lately? (Score:3, Interesting)