Data Center Raid About Unpaid Telco Fees 174
craig writes "CBS11 News reports that the raid on Core IP networks is in the result of an investigation into unpaid telco access fees paid by CLECs and VoIP carriers to terminate calls on their networks. They also report that this raid is linked to the March 12th raid on Crydon Technology's datacenter, which also hosted VOIP providers. Anyone in the telco business will tell you access fees to other carriers are a total mess and lots of carriers have unpaid balances out there. It gives you the feeling that the FBI is acting as a collection agency for AT&T and Verizon."
Recession (Score:2)
Late payments are one of the signs that a company is about to go under. Is this another victim of the recession?
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
It is, but they'll blame the raid, not the lack of payment.
Backwards (Score:4, Insightful)
The main sign that a company is about to go under is when they get the law involved. For some examples see the record labels, film studios and patent trolls. Even Apple is infamous for being excessively litigious prior to their current windfall.
Normally business arrangements are reciprocal and it's in the best interests of a company to avoid publicizing that their partners are in breach of a contract. There are plenty of collections agencies in the private sector that they could have consulted instead, but instead it's being treated as a criminal matter. This is the sort of behavior you see when a company realizes that their business model is flawed.
Re:Recession (Score:4, Informative)
Late payments are one of the signs that a company is about to go under.
Not if lawyers are involved?
I'm seeing more and more of this in non-related businesses, but what it boils down to is this:
Customer finds a discrepancy and needs to get it worked out, so they call an audit and find a MAJOR snafu. To protect themselves, they bring in the lawyers.
All payments stop until the issue is resolved. Usually, the money is placed into an escrow during the legal proceedings, especially if the customer has the money to pay the bill.
Provider's lawyers work with the customer, but this takes time. Take too long, and the statute of limitations will run out.
More time passes. Customer has the money and can pay, but lawyers say no.
Provider sends a final notice: pay up.
Customer sends a letter: Our lawyers aren't done, and we can't send the money yet. Look! The money is right here in this account, just WAIT A FEW MORE DAYS!
Provider turns to their lawyer: If you wait one more day, the statute of limitations will expire and they could walk away scott free.
Now the provider has no choice? They MUST take action to protect their interests, so they seize the assets of the customer in some fashion. Most of the time this involves filing a lien on those assets, but in some cases-like this one-they can physically collect those assets.
Favors (Score:5, Interesting)
It gives you the feeling that the FBI is acting as a collection agency for AT&T and Verizon
Well, AT&T and Verizon did "favors" - Patriot Act - for the FBI, perhaps this is the FBI payin' them back?
Re:Favors (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Favors (Score:5, Insightful)
In that case, the NSA is probably on the way as well.
Or long gone without a trace!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Favors (Score:5, Insightful)
TFA mentions Verizon going to the FBI months ago, believing it had discovered a plan to defraud the telcos out of fees (i.e. illegal access to and use of the telephone network, hence the FBI involvement).
Seriously, it's days like this I hate Slashdot.
Re:Favors (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Favors (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps we should all quit contributing to the spin until the exact reasons for this raid are resolved.
The causes still seems pretty speculative, at this point. What's not speculation is that the FBI disrupted a whole lot of businesses in pursuit of what was apparently something that didn't involve all of them - which is wrong.
Seriously, it's days like this I hate Slashdot.
It's times like this that make me despise media journalists who don't bother to wait until the facts come out to get a story out, because they have to get "the scoop".
Why, yes, I just finished re-reading Varley's "Steel Beach". Why do you ask?
SB
Re:Favors (Score:4, Insightful)
There are stupid people everywhere, it's good that you're one of few to check sources and actually think about what you read. Keep it up, keep complaining - we need more of you.
still seems fishy (Score:4, Interesting)
Mr Simpson said that he found out that his home was raided as well.
You don't raid the HOME of the CEO of a company because you think their customers are involved in fraud. That makes less sense than the copyright violation speculation.
Re:Favors (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh COME ON. I know the feds have a bad rap on slashdot, but now you're accusing them of being back-scratching goons on behalf of AT&T?
"Court documents show it's all part of an alleged massive fraud scheme against AT&T and Verizon."
It's right there in the frikkin article. Large scale fraud is indeed the purview of the FBI, no conspiracy required.
Though now I'll get modded down for this won't I. I better come up with some ludicrous conspiracy scheme instead.
Verizon and AT&T did what they were told by our government overlords, and were protected. These companies didn't hand over their VOIP logs to the NSA like good little citizens, and now they have to pay. No doubt those records are on their way to the NSA right now! I bet they're looking for records of terrorist activies, and will just end up poring over the comm logs of honest upstanding americans, and sticking something on them when they don't find anything. And of course none of the mainstream media are covering it, they're in on it!
There, that should do it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
However, one of the responsibilities that we have as possessors of the right to bear arms is to not start shooting with out good reason and clear heads. You, I, and everybody else on Slashdot don't know yet what the purpose of the fed's action was. Maybe the CEO is a criminal, and a number of the businesses are fronts. Maybe there was some clear and eminent danger that required a (legally warranted) sear
Looking forward to more inflammatory articles (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Looking forward to more inflammatory articles (Score:5, Insightful)
Incidentally, isnt it sort of in the FBI's realm to investigate large-scale fraud?
Yes. We won't have any idea what the truth is until someone gets a copy of the federal warrants used in the raid, or until we get information that charges are being filed.
Re:Looking forward to more inflammatory articles (Score:4, Funny)
Yes. We won't have any idea what the truth is until someone gets a copy of the federal warrants used in the raid, or until we get information that charges are being filed.
In other words, we don't know the real story and people are dreaming up uninformed speculation based on their personal political biases? I'm shocked.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If there were no warrants why did he unlock the doors? If the FBI or anyone else showed up where I worked and asked me open up the data center for them I would ask to see a warrant before handing over my RFID badge and if they came without a warrant I would direct them to the office of our corporate council.
This is not because I have done, or think anyone else in my org has done anything wrong; quite the opposite in fact Its just common sense. You don't expose yourself to law enforcement without a reason
Re:Looking forward to more inflammatory articles (Score:5, Insightful)
Incidentally, isnt it sort of in the FBI's realm to investigate large-scale fraud?
Yes. But Slashdot users have a propensity for Libertarian anarchism.
If it's the FBI doing its job in enforcing copywrite law then they're henchmen for the recording industry Mafiaa.
If it's the FBI doing its job in enforcing fraud then they're henchmen for the telecommunications industry.
Remember the government should be small to non-existant. And instead of changing legislation we should just be ignoring the laws that are on the books.
Is it reasonable that a kid downloading a song is a felony? No. But that's a legislative and judicial issue. The FBI is in the executive branch and its job is to respect and uphold the law. That means if someone is believed to be breaking the law then they're obligated to enforce it.
What's the alternative? Police officers deciding to selectively enforce laws on a case by case basis (which unfortunately does happen). I would much prefer the executive branch was consistent in enforcement instead of cherry picking cases than them attempting to make decisions of guilt and innocence before there being a fair and open trial. Obviously there has to be some exceptions to this rule (otherwise everyone would get arrested and have a day in court every time a crime is commited) but by and large I support the FBI actually doing its job when fraud is reported.
Re:Looking forward to more inflammatory articles (Score:5, Interesting)
/. wasn't upset because the FBI was enforcing the law. Most /.ers were upset because the FBI went in on a trumped up over-broad warrant and seized an entire data center. If they legitimately need to seize voip servers, that may be acceptable. But it's not okay to take servers of everyone who happened to be unfortunate enough to be leasing servers in the same datacenter.
There's another angle to this as well. Would the FBI ever seize telco equipment that belonged to an ILEC? No. The FBI and the courts would recognize that telephone is an essential service, and you can't just cut off someone's telephone service because their provider has been naughty. So if that's true for an ILEC, why isn't it true for a voip provider? Telephone delivered via voip is still an essential service. It's the best way to request emergency services (911). So why did the FBI cut off voip service to customers because their provider had been naughty? This is seriously unacceptable behavior.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe because VOIP has NEVER BEEN A GOOD 911 OPTION.
What happens when the power goes out?
What happens when the internet goes out?
What happens when...
The list goes on and on and on and on which is why if you're really concerned about 911 you should have at least one land line phone plugged into an outlet. Why? Because the FBI doesn't need to worry about VOIP service. You should have a 911 phone available.
If 911 was REALLY a problem then Comcast shouldn't be able to cut anyone's internet access... ever.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Except the POTS network was made resilient 30 years ago by government regulation requiring it to be a reliable service with a specific service level. Phone companies get fined for not providing a high enough level of service.
IP networks are not at this level. Your office my use POE, pretty much everyone else doesn't. I don't know of any home anywhere that uses POE.
Yes we can make VoIP more reliable, Its also theoretically possible to achieve faster than light travel using the Alcubierre drive, but I'm no
Re: (Score:2)
The one and only time my old POTS line winked out was around 4:30 PM on 9/11/2001, and that's because I lived below 14th St. in Manhattan. It took that long for the fires in and around the WTC to partially shut down lower Manhattan phone service. (I still have photos of the temporary repair facilities set up by NYNEX/Verizon on the west side, and the rather huge fiber cables they pulled up to splice, in the weeks afterward.)
The several VOIP setups I used, over the years, have let me down countless times.
Re: (Score:2)
These systems that work for corporate offices can be scaled down into new residential construction. The primary reasons that it's infrequently done today are a) it
Re:Looking forward to more inflammatory articles (Score:4, Interesting)
Maybe because VOIP has NEVER BEEN A GOOD 911 OPTION.
What happens when the power goes out?
My UPS kicks in supporting the modem, the VOIP router and the phone.
What happens when the internet goes out?
I assume you mean when your internet connection goes out. I've got DSL and I've had it go out once in three years and that was during a pretty nasty storm. I'm pretty sure the phone was out also though I had no way of checking. So as long as the phone system works my DSL and VOIP are probably up.
What happens when...
The list goes on and on and on and on which is why if you're really concerned about 911 you should have at least one land line phone plugged into an outlet. Why? Because the FBI doesn't need to worry about VOIP service. You should have a 911 phone available.
Why should I be forced to subsidize an out of date POTS when I don't use it? Maybe we should all be forced to buy and maintain emergency radios so we can call first responders when the phone system goes out.
If 911 was REALLY a problem then Comcast shouldn't be able to cut anyone's internet access... ever.
Because the phone company has never disconnected anyone before either.
Re: (Score:2)
Because the phone company has never disconnected anyone before either.
Actually, cell phones without sim card and "disconnected" land lines can still be used to call 911.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe because VOIP has NEVER BEEN A GOOD 911 OPTION.
True. Of course, I have a cell phone and a 9mm. The cell phone is good for weather related emergencies, adn the 9mm is good for hostile humans. I live in a decent area, so I only really need to worry about bad weather.
Re: (Score:2)
What happens when a car crashes into the utility pole or pedestal or a gardener digs up buried cable, or any number of other things happens?
POTS isn't some magic that never has faults or vulnerabilities of its own.
Re: (Score:2)
So when the tornado comes through your roof comes off, your cable modem is rain soaked and no longer working and your wife is bleeding to death next to you ...
Are you going to be the guy that says 'sorry honey, our VoIP provider is being DoSed because they pissed off some script kiddy and they can't handle the traffic right now, I'm going to run to the neighbors wrecked house and see if they have anything' or are you going to be the guy who picks up the phone laying on the floor which is powered from the n
Re: (Score:2)
Are you going to be the guy that says 'sorry honey
No, I'm going to be the guy using his fucking mobile phone.
Many people here moving into a new house don't get a fixed line phone. Between mobile and Skype (for international calls) they have all their telephony needs met.
Which backwards country are you living in?
Re: (Score:2)
Most people here in Europe (well, at least in my country) have cellphones.
There are very cheap plans and prepaid cards and the 911 equivalent (112) works (in theory, never had the need to test) even without a plan or a SIM card in the phone, it should simply scan and use the first network for the emergency call.
At least in my country there are still problems with the 112 operators collaborating with the cellphone companies to determine very fast the location (the first is too lazy/slow to implement it and t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hello, didin't seize an entire data center! Get some fucking facts. Core IP was made up of SOME racks on one floor of a multi floor data center that housed MANY more machines.
You have bought into the marketing speak of a guy who bullshits people into thinking his company owns a data center. Renting a few cages in a data center does not mean you own a data center. Taking the machines in the racks of that one customer is not taking all the machines in a data center. They took all of Core IP's machine and
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes. But Slashdot users have a propensity for Libertarian anarchism.
Libertarians don't believe in anarchy.
However, I think most of us would agree that instead of convincing the FBI to raid these businesses, AT&T and Verizon could have filed a lawsuit against the alleged offenders, and handled this matter through normal channels. But when you have connections, I guess you can skip a few steps.
Re:Looking forward to more inflammatory articles (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, plenty of Libertarians are into anarchy. Of course, anarchy can mean a lot of things, from bomb-throwing radicals who just want to destroy the rule of law to people who believe that ultimately what allows societies to work is that most people behave ethically, and that consequently there is no need for some single institution to have a monopoly on the rule of law. A lot of libertarians subscribe to this latter kind of anarchism. I'm sympathetic, personally, but don't think it's practical.
Re: (Score:2)
You can have a Libertarian Utopia with no government. No other political setup can operate with a complete lack of government (well, socialism works best without a government, like in many tribes, co-ops, and communes, but the definition is essentially where all members are equal and all part of the government, where everyone voluntarily does what's best for everyone, rather than themselves).
But, because it would work without a government, and many want "limited" go
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Selective enforcement is precisely a lot of the concern. If my damage deposit is not returned by my landlord in accordance with the contract, that's illegal; if my landlord deliberately fudged documents to do so, that's fraud. But you will not find the FBI doing much on these sorts of things; it's generally up to the wronged individuals to file civil suits themselves. On the other hand, the FBI does seem to frequently enter the battle on the side of large companies alleging what amounts to contract violatio
Re: (Score:2)
But you will not find the FBI doing much on these sorts of things; it's generally up to the wronged individuals to file civil suits themselves. On the other hand, the FBI does seem to frequently enter the battle on the side of large companies alleging what amounts to contract violations, sometimes with allegations of fraud involved as well.
Politics.
SB
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't buy this argument. The problem here is not that the FBI got involved with a fraud investigation - it makes sense that the FBI would get involved in a fraud investigation where the disputed amount is in the millions of dollars, and the crime was committed across state lines, but would not get involved with a case where the amount of the fraud was small and the fraud was committed within the confines of a single city.
What is wrong about this case is that the FBI didn't recognize the colo provider as
Re: (Score:2)
If you went to the local police they might well tell you that it was a "civil matter". They probably wouldn't be interested in the case even
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If the FBI seizes the colo, then it's acting on the warrant and seizing EVIDENCE. If it's seizing equipment belonging to all the clients of a colo, then either the mandate didn't tell it which client had done the crime, so they have to seize them all, get the evidence, and convict the one, maybe apologize to the other, or else they're operating on a theory that they were all conspiring to either commit the crime together, or help hide it.
I won't say we don't have a bias against the FBI doing anything but a
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. But Slashdot users have a propensity for Libertarian anarchism.
You are definitely new here.
SB
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. But Slashdot users have a propensity for Libertarian anarchism.
If it's the FBI doing its job in enforcing copywrite law then they're henchmen for the recording industry Mafiaa.
Firstly: it's "copyright".
Secondly: it's a civil matter (http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html), and so not in the general perview of law enforcement.
If it's the FBI doing its job in enforcing fraud then they're henchmen for the telecommunications industry.
We won't know until we see the warrant, but that part of "not paying the phone bill" involves criminal law or law enforcement? That would be another civil matter which should go straight to court.
This also seems to a failure to elucidate. It is the FBI's job to investigate (some types of) fraud. You've not established that this is fraud.
The FBI is in the executive branch and its job is to respect and uphold the law.
Not a very ty
Re: (Score:2)
What's the fraud? Even if what they are talking about here is true, is it fraud? No one lied, they just failed to pay fees in violation of law. Not fraud, but still illegal to fail to pay termination fees as required by law, if that is even it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
there are reports that it's related to video piracy, sparking unconfirmed speculation...
oh wait, we DO have more info, from CBS news--and its exactly that--
Court documents show it's all part of an alleged massive fraud scheme against AT&T and Verizon.
So again, isnt this exactly the sort of thing the FBI is SUPPOSED to be investigating? And if you dont think the "court documents" are a reliable source, then why the hell are people jumping to conclusions based on a report of them? All we know for sure is that the FBI raided a location, they had a warrant, and a news organization saw court documents indicating it was within their authority and
Re: (Score:2)
isnt it sort of in the FBI's realm to investigate large-scale fraud?
Even if it's their job to investigate fraud, what they did in both these cases seems unreasonable.
It would be like the FBI shutting down a shopping mall and confiscating all the inventory because one store was selling stolen goods.
One of the reasons small sites colocate or go with dedicated servers is so the stupid actions of others on a shared hosting account won't bring their site down.
Civil vs criminal law (Score:3, Insightful)
"It gives you the feeling that the FBI is acting as a collection agency for AT&T and Verizon."
Wouldn't that be a civil matter rather than criminal? I call unlikely.
Now that we don't have a website... (Score:5, Informative)
During the raid, CMG's owner, Joe Condit, says his website and business went down. "It's crippled us completely. Now that we don't have a website, we have no business, and a lot of speakers are without representation."
Without saying that this raid should have occurred in the way that it did, what's stopping this guy from setting up a webserver elsewhere and getting his business back online?
In an emergency, I'm pretty sure I could have a basic but "adequate" webserver for most small businesses up and running on just about any Internet connection within about 6 hours, even if I had to buy a new computer to install it on and find another Internet connection. Point the DNS records to the new address and he's back in business.
He would be in exactly the same situation if the colo building burned down. Why risk your business that way? If it's important to you, back it up and have some idea of what you're going to do if it goes down.
Re:Now that we don't have a website... (Score:4, Funny)
Back up data? Hmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Re:Now that we don't have a website... (Score:5, Informative)
A lot of places are not prepared for a complete site loss. They may be very redundant within the site, with multiple hosts and backups and redundant power / AC / networking, but not have a single piece of equipment not located at that colocation center.
Consider that even if they did have off-site backups (which are really the bare minimum, although a lot of small operations overlook it anyway), they probably don't physically possess any equipment to run it on or have an agreement with another colocation center to put that equipment in.
So right now they need to put an order in with Dell and Cisco and whoever to get duplicate equipment (that they probably don't have a budget for), find another colo on short notice, wait for the equipment to arrive (1-2 weeks), do the physical installation work, and then restore all of their systems types from backups that may or may not represent the complete bare metal system image.
Most disaster recovery plans only account for disasters within a finite period of time (the power goes out for a few hours) or for partial losses (you lose 2 of 4 web servers), because redundancy is the most expensive part of any computer deployment.
Re:Now that we don't have a website... (Score:4, Informative)
Consider that even if they did have off-site backups (which are really the bare minimum, although a lot of small operations overlook it anyway), they probably don't physically possess any equipment to run it on or have an agreement with another colocation center to put that equipment in.
This sounds like a very small business that probably doesn't require Cisco gear and all the trimmings. A cable modem with a static IP and a computer purchased at Staples to run Centos, Apache and sendmail would carry the load for at least a short time. The owner could run it in his living room.
Even if it's slow, it's better than being out-of-business.
Once he's online again in any fashion at all, he has bought himself the time to find a "real solution", if he even requires one.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, I'm not sure what this particular site requires. I do know from prior professional experience that the 'second site' was always a very tough sell (and actually, of the places I've worked, only Yahoo was good about that sort of thing).
It's more than just the hardware too, it's the processes in place to ensure that there are very seriously no dependencies on one site. For instance, maybe you deploy everything simultaneously to both sites, you buy equal hardware in both places, you do BCP failover tests
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, sure. All these businesses that were being hosted there can just go and set up this themselves, or find someone on extremely short notice to do it for a price they can afford - on their local cable providers network (nevermind that the business owners cable provider probably doesn't allow servers, WHICH IS LIKELY WHY THEY HAD A OUTSIDE PROVIDER IN THE FIRST PLACE)
Right.
SB
Re: (Score:2)
That's a nice thought, but for the under-prepared business owner, they're just as likely to be shit-outta-luck. Especially if they don't possess the technical chops to piece it all back together. They'll have to go find the freelance programmer / sysadmin who set up all their customized shiznitz, to get it up-and-running again -- even with a backup.
The desktop machine-based website is good enough for a "Sorry, we're closed online until further notice" site. Especially if their website relied on any amoun
Re: (Score:2)
This makes for an interesting business opportunity. A service similar to Mozy Pro except with better provisions for encrypting data [1] before it gets sent to the cloud. Then, should a business lose its colocated servers, they can be rebuilt from another location.
[1]: Data encryption is solid, but what is needed is a good enterprise-level key management system so if one employee leaves or goes rogue, the data can still be recovered with another key, and the rogue key removed
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't you still have to wait for DNS caches to clear?
Setting up the failover web site is the easy part. If you aren't planning for this in advance, though, your public internet services are still down.
Re: (Score:2)
I am trying to get a webhost (AT&T, incidentally) to give me permission to move a client's domain name onto one of my servers. AT&T is saying that they have to push the domain to my server.
I contacted my technical people and they confirm that.
Without explicit cooperation from both sides, CMG is SOL because his web hosting provider cannot push diddly in a "blackout" situation where the FBI agents have removed power pending the conclusion of their investigation.
My article on this issue is here. [examiner.com]
errr (Score:5, Interesting)
First the Wolverine story from yesterday, now this? I find it hard to believe that this is really over some unpaid bills.
Re: (Score:2)
Also you don't send the swat team to the house of a company's CEO because one of their customers didn't pay their bills on time.
This sounds fishier than the Wolverine story....
So to punish the colo (Score:2)
they take down every client colocated there?
Talk about punishing the innocent.
Government agencies as the long arm of capitalism (Score:5, Insightful)
> It gives you the feeling that the FBI is acting as a collection agency for AT&T and Verizon.
"I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents."
- Maj.Gen.Smedley Butler, 1935, awarded 2xCMOH
Discuss the use of Federal agencies in protecting commercial intersts of large corporations. 2000-3000 words. Citations in Harvard style.
Re: (Score:2)
The word you are looking for here is fascism, not capitalism.
Fascism is when you have merger of big business interests with government (usually military) muscle.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
As long as power is wielded at the discretion of human beings who can be influenced by wealth, capitalism will always tend toward fascism.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't it amazing how some people seem to think that society has become this magical nice place to live in all of a sudden? ;)
Great post.
SB
So what? (Score:2)
Would you rather live in America, benefitting from the fucking of others, or live in those places, being fucked for the benefit of America?
Sorry to tell ya, this is the way of the world. You either fight to get on top, fight to stay on top, or suffer at the bottom. You likely enjoy the standard of living you have today BECAUSE of the dirty deeds of your nation. This goes for France, Germany, England, Russia, the USA, Canada, the list goes on.
In capitalism, man exploits man. In communism, it's the exact oppo
Re:Government agencies as the long arm of capitali (Score:5, Insightful)
While poignant, I hardly think a quote from damn near a century ago is particularly relevant. You might as well be quoting Shakespeare.
Because the world is so different now?
Let's update it a little then:
"I helped make Iraq a decent place for the Haliburton boys to collect revenues in....I tried to bring light to Afghanistan for the Unocal Central Asian oil pipeline in 2002."
The first step in repeating history is failing to see the relevance of past lessons. Whenever someone says "but things are SO different now" my bullshit detector goes off. Human beings aren't any different now than they were a thousand years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
I tried to bring light to Afghanistan for the Unocal Central Asian oil pipeline in 2002.
So that's the reason we invaded Afghanistan? Makes me wonder what Maj.Gen.Smedley Butler was leaving out of the original version.
Re: (Score:2)
I tried to bring light to Afghanistan for the Unocal Central Asian oil pipeline in 2002.
So that's the reason we invaded Afghanistan? Makes me wonder what Maj.Gen.Smedley Butler was leaving out of the original version.
I take it you're referring to the attack on the Twin Towers. That was certainly a reason to go after Al-Qaeda - which was never a state or state instrument. Afghanistan however is not Al-Qaeda. The Taleban were certainly standing by Al-Qaeda when the world demanded they be handed over, yet invasion of a historically unconquerable place was never going to achieve the goal of routing Al-Qaeda out (perhaps leaning on the Saudi's to reign in the mullah's and Pakistan's ISI may have been more effective). By the
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but so what? The "capitalists" are the ones paying for most of the government. And they are doing it so that they can provide you will all the luxuries you enjoy every day. If everyone in the US suddenly got a clue and cut back, you can rest assured they would be out of there faster than hell. But right now, we want stuff and we want it cheap, and therefore the government helps them out as much as possible. Everyone KNOWS, it just isn't talked about a lot in public. But it has done a LOT for Ame
You bet! (Score:2)
And now Obama's elected, all that bad stuff is stopped and it's never gonna happen anymore!!
Re: (Score:2)
Hilarious. The guy was twice decorated with the Congressional Medal of Honour and literally dedicated his life to the service of his country, while you snipe at his contribution from the safety of an AC shield. Chickenshit. You think he earned those medals because daddy was a congressman? I don't think so.
These days of course, Generals tend to end up on the boards of the companies whose interests they serve so the embarassment that could arise from a new Smedley is vastly reduced.
Re: (Score:2)
Not that "Black Sabbath" is much of a non-anonymous identity either...
Everyone's identity here is anonymous (except to the admins and the authorities if they cared). The difference is that everyone with an ID carries the history of their postings which forms a record of their discourse. Whether I disagree with others here or not, I respect those that have the balls carry with them their past opinions. AC's wipe the slate clean with every post. With AC's I can't tell if I'm dealing with one or many. While there are definitely valid reasons for posting AC, as a longtime slashdo
Still unreasonable seizure - cause irrelevant (Score:4, Interesting)
Doesn't matter what the motive or rationalization is: Unreasonable seizure by the federal government is forbidden in the Constitution.
There's no way they needed all this "evidence" for some unpaid bills. Nice story, but I call bullshit.
God knows what is really going on here, but I hope it eventually sees the light of day. This is reminding me of Waco, with 98% less people being burned alive involved.
--
Toro
Re: (Score:2)
Thats a pretty good analogy actually.
I really don't buy that these guys are innocent, but, just like Waco, if the FBI would listen to some more experts in the area, they might have caused less collateral damage. Waco could have been a lot cleaner had the listened to the local cops telling the big bad FBI guys not to run in there thinking they could just overrun a bunch of dug in well armed men. A geek on staff might have saved them some time.
Personally, I would have taken all the equipment myself anyway i
Re: (Score:2)
The chain of evidence issues are enormous. How the hell do you secure a crime scene, with probable cause and warrant in hand, when it is potentially critical infrastructure, not to mention that the infrastructure simultaneously serves as physical records, physical assets, forensic evidence and perhaps a common carrier?
What the heck are the "rules of evidence" for that mess? It can't be the same as the rules for shutting down a moonshine operation. I imagine those rules are soon to be written.
--
Toro
This is from the CEO of the company.... (Score:5, Informative)
index
Matthew Simpson
Core IP Networks LLC
Dear Customers,
Today at 6:00am, the FBI conducted an unwarranted early morning raid of our 2323 Bryan Street Datacenters, on the 7th and 24th floors.
I received a phone call at 6:05am from our NOC that the entire network was powered off. I called Capstar Commercial and TELX, our landlord, and was told that the FBI was in the datacenter with a search and seizure warrant. I asked that the agent in charge call me immediately.
I received a call 15 minutes later from FBI Agent Allyn Lynd. Mr. Lynd would not tell me why he raided our datacenter or what he was looking for. He also accused me of hiding inside my house in Ovilla, Texas. I was actually in Phoenix, Arizona when this happened. I told him that, and he told me that he was "getting the dogs" after me, and hung up on me. I found out from an employee that there were 15 police cars and a SWAT team at my home in Ovilla.
The FBI has seized all equipment belonging to our customers. Many customers went to the data center to try and retrieve their equipment, but were threatened with arrest.
Neither I, nor Core IP are involved in any illegal activities of any kind. The only data that I have received thus far is that the FBI is investigating a company that has purchased services from Core IP in the past. This company does not even colocate with us anywhere, much less 2323 Bryan Street Datacenter.
Currently nearly 50 businesses are completely without access to their email and data. Citizen access to Emergency 911 services are being affected, as Core IP's primary client base consists of telephone companies.
If you run a datacenter, please be aware that in our great country, the FBI can come into your place of business at any time and take whatever they want, with no reason.
I can be reached for further comment at: mnsclec@gmail.com
Further information will be given as it becomes available.
Yours,
Matthew Simpson
CEO, Core IP Networks, LLC
direct link: http://sites.google.com/site/mnsclec/index [google.com] //Just made an account to post this.
Re: (Score:2)
Today at 6:00am, the FBI conducted an unwarranted early morning raid of our 2323 Bryan Street Datacenters, on the 7th and 24th floors.
A lie in the very first sentence? Sorry, fail. As myself and a few others pointed out yesterday when this story first popped up, sounds like something fishy is going on at Core IP.
Re: (Score:2)
To him the raid had no justification and was groundless. Where's the lie?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/unwarranted [reference.com]
Hold on! something stinks about this (Score:2)
If verizon and AT&T were being defrauded, why not use the civil court system and file a law-suit? Why not just cut off services? What kind of fraud requires the FBI to raid datacenters right now, it's not like they're going anywhere? If they had enough evidence to raid, they should have had enough evidence to arrest the owners and press charges first at the very least.
How do you defraud ATT and verizon anyhow? splice into their network? reverse bill them? Set up a 2nd tier provider dummy corp, p
Re: (Score:2)
Presumably the idea is that if there's warning of the raid, whatever records exist on the machines could be erased. So you hav to go in, cut the hardline, and take all the machines, or else your data will be gone.
Although given that there was another raid on March 12, it's hard to imagine that someone who intended to erase records would not already have done so.
Whats with these guys? (Score:2)
Why is it every time I read a story related to these data center take downs, the people running the equipment write stories about the incident as if they were 12 year old kids who are trying to convince you that they didn't do anything wrong and it was someone else that was framing them.
They also seem to always be involved with companies that don't last very long for one reason or another.
In between their little 'its not my fault' whining and their history, these people are starting to look pretty questiona
McFeds. (Score:2)
"...It gives you the feeling that the FBI is acting as a collection agency for AT&T and Verizon.
Ah, after the obscene confiscation of a LOT of hardware, and potential impact to hundreds of thousands of people, I'd say I have more than a "feeling" here.
Note to self: Put the local FBI office on speed dial for the next time I get screwed in the fast food drive through. Since it seems damn near anyone can use these guys for strongarm tactics, I might as well jump in and take advantage of some of my tax money they're busy pissing away with shit like this.
In the last story... (Score:3, Interesting)
However, I was under the impression that, in America, it was no violation of the law to owe someone money; at least until that person or corporation showed that money was owed or a contract was breached in a CIVIL suit.
Or has the Federal Government legislated itself into that area as well?
IANAL, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Dodging a subpoena is contempt of court, and that IS a crime.
Also, if there is a scam or a fraud at the root of the non-payment, that too is a crime. They call that theft of services.
If its really about lost telco money (Score:4, Informative)
If its really about money owed to the telcos by these VoIP providers, the right way for Verizon, AT&T etc to get their money back is to cut off whatever VoIP->PSTN gateway setup is being used. If its a 3rd party gateway, the third party gateway should be responsible for paying the telco and then the VoIP provider should be paying the 3rd party gateway.
In any case, its possible to shut down whatever links are used to connect to the telcos networks
Re: (Score:2)
So the fix whatever is allowing them to commit th fraud. The guy committing the crime notices this happening and realize their on to him. Immediately he destroys all records of the fraud ...
I'm not a cop and I can come up with about 20 different reasons why the should do EXACTLY what they did, all of which are completely justified in the right context.
Too bad you're making assumptions without knowing any actual details.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, makes sense. If they cut them off, the dodgy VoIP providers will simply close up shop and reopen somewhere else under a new name and continue to find ways to place calls to the PSTN without paying for it.
Oh? (Score:2)
Why do nerds always think the world revolves around the stupid crap only they care about? It's embarrassing.
Re: (Score:2)
No, today its about VoIP fraud.
Yet there is still no real evidence about what happened.
Its good to see that news for nerds is just as sensationalist as fox news!
Covering story (Score:2)
I have been covering this story and hope to talk to the FBI and the CEO of Core IP on Monday. Any questions you want asked?
Story is here. [examiner.com]
800 Phone bills are unlikely to be the issue (Score:2)
First off, I am acquainted with the owner of Core IP, and am aware of what he was doing with 800 numbers in 2005-2006 (when the 800 rules changed). The FCC rules for intercarrier compensation are not clear and he thought he was exploiting a real loophole, to allow dial-up Internet access to rural areas.
The FCC writes orders and rules for specific point cases, not general rules, so as things change, the rules don't cover them. That's how VoIP happened -- it is not in the rules and you can argue about what
Re:Does this mean... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I think they shouldn't pull the servers until they've at least seeded 110%.
Concur (Score:2)
One of the original bits was that the FBI raided the house of the network service's CEO. This does not sound to me like an investigation of one of their customers. If it was, they would subpoena the information relating to the charges, and then determine what to do. Raiding the house of a corporate executive and siezing all computers under their control suggests that this is not about their customers at all.
This smells fishy.
But then, 911 changed everything. It was so bad, the FBI had to interrupt the s