Technology

An unprecedented flood of citizens concerned about net neutrality is what took down the FCCcomment system last May, not a coordinated attack, a report from the agencyOffice of the Inspector General concluded. The report unambiguously describes the &voluminous viral traffic& resulting from John OliverLast Week Tonight segment on the topic, along with some poor site design, as the cause of the systemcollapse.

Herethe critical part:

The May 7-8, 2016 degradation of the FCCECFS was not, as reported to the public and to Congress, the result of a DDoS attack. At best, the published reports were the result of a rush to judgment and the failure to conduct analyses needed to identify the true cause of the disruption to system availability. Rather than engaging in a concerted effort to understand better the systematic reasons for the incident, certain managers and staff at the Commission mischaracterized the event to the Office of the Chairman as resulting from a criminal act, rather than apparent shortcomings in the system.

Although FCC leadership preemptively responded to the report yesterday, the report itself was not published until today. The OIG sent it to TechCrunch this morning, and you can find the full document here.

The approximately 25 pages of analysis (and 75 more of related documents, some of which are already public) relate specifically to the &Event& of May 7-8 last year and its characterization by the office of the Chief Information Officer, at the time David Bray. The investigation was started on June 21, 2017. The subsequent handling of the event under public and Congressional inquiry is not included in the scope of this investigation.

As the report notes, Bray shortly after the event issued a press release describing the systemfailure as &multiple distributed denial-of-service attacks.& A variation on this was the line going forward, even well after Bray left in October 2017.

However, internal email conversations and analysis of the traffic logs reveal that this characterization of the event was severely mistaken.

Here it ought to be said that in the chaos of the moment and with incomplete time and information, an accurate diagnosis of a major systematic failure is generally going to be an educated guess at first — so we mustn&t judge Bray and his office too harshly for its mistake, at least in the immediate aftermath.

But what becomes clear from the OIGinvestigation is that the DDoS narrative first advanced by Bray is not backed up by the evidence. Their own analysis of the logs clearly shows that the spikes in traffic correlate directly with activity from John OliverLast Week Tonight, which that evening and the following morning posted tweets and videos that garnered an immense amount of traffic and directed it at the FCCcomment system.

Chart showing traffic spikes correlating with John Oliver (JO) related events.

&These spikes in traffic are singular rather than sustained, that is, the unique IP addresses that visited the FCC domain and ECFS did not do so over a sustained period of time, at regular intervals (as would be expected during a DDoS),& the report explains in the caption for the graph above.

&The traffic observed during the incident was a combination of &flash crowd& activity and increased traffic volume resulting from [redacted] site design issues,& reads the report. I&ve asked for more detail on these design issues and how they contributed to the systemfailure.

Interestingly, it appears some at the FCC were aware that Oliver was planning a segment on net neutrality for that time period, but no one thought to brace for it. According to a colleague interviewed for the report, &Bray was furious that he had not been informed about the John Oliver episode.&

Email excerpts from the time of the event, collected by the FCCOIG.

In fact, however, even confronted with the fact that Oliversegment was likely directly driving traffic, Bray suggested that &trolls& and 4chan were the more likely culprit.

We&re 99.9% confident this was external folks deliberately trying to tie-up the server to prevent others from commenting and/or create a spectacle.

Jon Oliver invited the &trolls& & to include 4Chan (which is a group affiliated with Anonymous and the hacking community).

His video triggered the trolls. Normal folks cannot manually file a comment in less than a millisecond over and over and over again, so this was definitely high traffic targeting ECFS to make it appear unresponsive to others.

All this, and the description put in the press release and some subsequent communications, is ¬ accurate,& as the OIG put it.

As a result, &we determined the FCC, relying on Brayexplanation of the events, misrepresented facts and provided misleading responses to Congressional inquiries related to this incident.&

Itworth noting that this has already been looked at by federal prosecutors:

Because of the possible criminal ramifications associated with false statements to Congress, FCC OIG formally referred this matter to the Fraud and Public Corruption Section of the United States AttorneyOffice for the District of Columbia…On June 7, 2018, after reviewing additional information and interviews, USAO-DC declined prosecution.&

In a way, as Chairman Ajit Pai wrote yesterday, this does somewhat exonerate his office for its year-long campaign of stalling, half-truths, and outright refusals to answer questions. If they took Braycharacterization as gospel, they had to stick to that analysis. Furthermore, with an investigation ongoing, what they could and couldn&t say was likely limited at the request of the OIG.

But thatonly a partial pardon. In the year and change since the event there has been ample time for reflection and revisiting of the data. Bray left in October; why did the new CIO not use the occasion to take a fresh look at a report that was plainly doubted by many in the agency

The CIOoffice, as the report notes, never actually issued a substantive report showing that its DDoS narrative was true. And shortly after the event, it was, as one staffer put it, &common knowledge& that the analysis was flawed. This knowledge was arrived at through &further research& after the fact — but then it turned out no &further research& was conducted.

What kind of operation is this Why was FCC leadership not foaming at the mouth asking for better information The Chairman was under fire from all sides — no one bought the story he was selling — why not walk over to the CIOoffice, now rid of its Obama administration&tainted head (Pai mentioned this association twice in his statement yesterday), and demand answers

Pai denies that he or his office was aware of these shortcomings and opted not to rectify them because they were advantageous to his plan to reverse 2015net neutrality rules. But how could such a demonstrably shoddy and undocumented analysis persist for so long, under such close scrutiny This wasn&t a minor technical glitch unworthy of leadershipattention. It was national news.

The optics of a confusing and incomplete DDoS report aren&t good. But the report, if it was wrong, as everyone seemed to consider it even day-of, could always be disavowed and its author blamed on Obama.

Whatworse are the optics of a wave of public opposition to a controversial proposal, so strong that it literally took down the system created — and recently upgraded! — to handle that kind of feedback. This narrative, of a flood of pro-net-neutrality commenters so large that not only did it break the system, but many of their comments were arguably unable to be posted and (notionally) included in the FCCanalysis — that, my friends, is a bad look.

Although this investigation has concluded, another by the Government Accountability Office is ongoing and may have a wider scope. If not, however, it seems unthinkable that the FCC and its current leadership can walk away from this unscathed. Ultimately this entire debacle took place under Ajit Paiwatch, and his handling of it is at best dubious. Citizens and no doubt elected officials are almost certain to ask hard questions — and this time, the Chairman might actually have to answer them.

Apple appears to be working on another personalized playlist for Apple Music subscribers & this time, one that shows you what your friends are listening to on its service, as opposed to a personalized playlist filled with editorial or algorithmic recommendations. The new &Friends Mix& playlist includes 25 songs and is updated on Mondays, according users who have gained access to this new feature and screenshots of the playlistdescription.

News of the playlist was first spotted by a user on Reddit, then reported by 9to5Mac,AppleInsider and several others, as a result.

Apple has not yet formally announced the addition, and many other Apple Music subscribers are not seeing the playlist at this time.

Apple isn&t commenting, but we&ve learned that the &Friends Mix& is rolling out toApple Music subscribers who are using a device with beta versions of iOS 12, macOS Mojave, or tvOS 12. It will become available to all Apple Music subscribers this September. (The exceptions will beChina, Russia, and Turkey because creating a profile to share music with friends is also unavailable in these countries.)

According to the original poster on Reddit, the playlist appeared in their Apple Music app on a device that was running iOS 12 beta & this could indicate itsomething that won&t launch to the public until the general release of iOS 12 later this fall.

The tester also noted they had just installed the iOS 12 beta, which could explain why they saw it first.

We reached out to the tester, Brad, who confirmed herunning iOSbeta 6, dev build16A5345f. He added that of the 25 songs on the Friends Mix, 7 were already in his library. But the playlist was largely music from the genres he listened to, with no weird additions.

This, we&ve also learned, is because the Friends Mix is customized to include only those songs that Apple Music thinks you&ll like, too.

TC editor Matthew Panzarino, whoalso on the iOS 12 beta, now has the feature, as well. However, others here on the iOS 12 beta & and lower versions of iOS & do not yet.

Above: Friends playlist; image credit Reddit user reesyy

Personalized playlists are a key selling point for streaming music services, with Apple, Spotify, Amazon, Pandora, iHeartRadio and others all offering a variety of playlists for their subscribers. In Applecase, it already offers a handful of these, including &Favorites,& &New Music Mix,& and the latest addition, launched over a year ago, &Chill Mix.&

Itlong been time for Apple to expand its lineup of playlists further & especially given Spotifygrowing selection, which now includes its flagship playlist Discover Weekly, its Daily Mixes (plus a new variation, Your Daily Car Mix, apparently, Redditors also spotted), Release Radar, Your Summer Rewind, and Time Capsule.

Above: More screenshots, including the playlist description: &A selection of songs based on what your friends have been listening to. Refreshed every Monday.&

However, the value of a playlist of your friends& music is a little questionable.

Though social music was Spotifyoriginal aim, through integrations with Facebook and tools to find and follow others, it has stepped away from that in later years. Instead, itmore focused now on making the service feel individualized to each user & after all, your friends could be listening to some awfully terrible stuff, Spotify realized.

The arrival of the new playlist follows the recent news thatApple Music is leading Spotify in the North American market, announced by Apple CEO Tim Cook on the last earnings call. Cook also said Apple Music now tops well over 50 million current subscribers and free trial users; Spotify, by comparison, now has 83 million paying subscribers.

Updated 8/7/18, 9:50 PM ET will additional information.

Holy smokes! Disrupt San Francisco 2018, which takes place September 5-7, is less than one month away. We have important news for anyone who purchased Startup Alley,Founder, Investor or Insider passes: CrunchMatch — your gateway to efficient networking — is officially open!

If you haven&t yet grabbed a pass to Disrupt SF 2018, itnot too late to jump on the CrunchMatch train. Startup Alley, Founder and Investor passes are still available. Buy them right here.

Lest you&ve forgotten, CrunchMatch is the free business match-making service at Disrupt. Powered byBrella, this platform curates and connects early-stage startup founders and investors who share similar business interests and profiles.

The matching process is in full swing, so if you&re registered, keep your eyes peeled on your inbox for an invitation to create a CrunchMatch profile. For example, founders provide information about their early-stage startup — its tech category, funding stage, where itlocated and its current funding status. Investor profiles outline specific investment categories, the funding stage and preferred geographic locations. CrunchMatch takes all that information and works a bit of algorithmic voodoo to match compatible founders and investors based on the information they provide.

Once you receive those recommendations, the networking ball lands in your court. Send, receive, accept and decline invitations, set up appointment meetings and reserve private meeting space at the CrunchMatch meeting booth at Disrupt.

CrunchMatch also lets you act quickly in the heat of the moment. Say you see a particularly promising startup compete in Startup Battlefield. Use CrunchMatch to send an invitation and schedule a meeting in minutes. Boom! Hey, it worked for Michael Kocan, an early-stage investor at Trend Discovery.

&I get the most value from Disrupt at the intersection of CrunchMatch and Startup Battlefield. I can quickly schedule a meeting for later that day. I had over 35 meetings with startups that I pre-vetted using CrunchMatch, and I made a significant investment in one.&

Henot the only satisfied customer. Last year at Disrupt SF 2017, CrunchMatch facilitated more than 1,300 meetings and 97 percent of participants said they&d use the service again. With more than 10,000 attendees coming to Disrupt SF 2018, we fully expect to triple the number of meetings.

Disrupt San Francisco 2018 takes place September 5-7. Be sure to fill out your profiles when you receive your invitation. Or buy your Founder or Investor passes now. Youhave only three days atDisrupt SF to make potentially life-changing connections. Let CrunchMatchsimplify your networking — for free.