Tag Archives: monitoring

timeShift(GrafanaBuzz, 1w) Issue 47

Post Syndicated from Blogs on Grafana Labs Blog original https://grafana.com/blog/2018/06/01/timeshiftgrafanabuzz-1w-issue-47/

Welcome to TimeShift We cover a lot of ground this week with posts on general monitoring principles, home automation, how CERN uses open source projects in their particle acceleration work, and more. Have an article you’d like highlighted here? Get in touch.
We’re excited to be a sponsor of Monitorama PDX June 4-6. If you’re going, please be sure and say hello! Latest Release: Grafana 5.1.3 This latest point release fixes a scrolling issue that was reported in Firefox.

Monitoring with Azure and Grafana

Post Syndicated from Blogs on Grafana Labs Blog original https://grafana.com/blog/2018/05/31/monitoring-with-azure-and-grafana/

Monitoring with Azure and Grafana What is whitebox monitoring?
Why do we monitor our systems?
What is the Azure Monitor plugin and how can I use it to monitor my Azure resources?
Recently, I spoke at Swetugg 2018, a .NET conference held in Stockholm, Sweden to answer these questions. In this video you’ll learn some basic monitoring principles, some of the tools we use to monitor our systems, and get an inside look at the new Azure Monitor plugin for Grafana.

Monitoring your Amazon SNS message filtering activity with Amazon CloudWatch

Post Syndicated from Rachel Richardson original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/compute/monitoring-your-amazon-sns-message-filtering-activity-with-amazon-cloudwatch/

This post is courtesy of Otavio Ferreira, Manager, Amazon SNS, AWS Messaging.

Amazon SNS message filtering provides a set of string and numeric matching operators that allow each subscription to receive only the messages of interest. Hence, SNS message filtering can simplify your pub/sub messaging architecture by offloading the message filtering logic from your subscriber systems, as well as the message routing logic from your publisher systems.

After you set the subscription attribute that defines a filter policy, the subscribing endpoint receives only the messages that carry attributes matching this filter policy. Other messages published to the topic are filtered out for this subscription. In this way, the native integration between SNS and Amazon CloudWatch provides visibility into the number of messages delivered, as well as the number of messages filtered out.

CloudWatch metrics are captured automatically for you. To get started with SNS message filtering, see Filtering Messages with Amazon SNS.

Message Filtering Metrics

The following six CloudWatch metrics are relevant to understanding your SNS message filtering activity:

  • NumberOfMessagesPublished – Inbound traffic to SNS. This metric tracks all the messages that have been published to the topic.
  • NumberOfNotificationsDelivered – Outbound traffic from SNS. This metric tracks all the messages that have been successfully delivered to endpoints subscribed to the topic. A delivery takes place either when the incoming message attributes match a subscription filter policy, or when the subscription has no filter policy at all, which results in a catch-all behavior.
  • NumberOfNotificationsFilteredOut – This metric tracks all the messages that were filtered out because they carried attributes that didn’t match the subscription filter policy.
  • NumberOfNotificationsFilteredOut-NoMessageAttributes – This metric tracks all the messages that were filtered out because they didn’t carry any attributes at all and, consequently, didn’t match the subscription filter policy.
  • NumberOfNotificationsFilteredOut-InvalidAttributes – This metric keeps track of messages that were filtered out because they carried invalid or malformed attributes and, thus, didn’t match the subscription filter policy.
  • NumberOfNotificationsFailed – This last metric tracks all the messages that failed to be delivered to subscribing endpoints, regardless of whether a filter policy had been set for the endpoint. This metric is emitted after the message delivery retry policy is exhausted, and SNS stops attempting to deliver the message. At that moment, the subscribing endpoint is likely no longer reachable. For example, the subscribing SQS queue or Lambda function has been deleted by its owner. You may want to closely monitor this metric to address message delivery issues quickly.

Message filtering graphs

Through the AWS Management Console, you can compose graphs to display your SNS message filtering activity. The graph shows the number of messages published, delivered, and filtered out within the timeframe you specify (1h, 3h, 12h, 1d, 3d, 1w, or custom).

SNS message filtering for CloudWatch Metrics

To compose an SNS message filtering graph with CloudWatch:

  1. Open the CloudWatch console.
  2. Choose Metrics, SNS, All Metrics, and Topic Metrics.
  3. Select all metrics to add to the graph, such as:
    • NumberOfMessagesPublished
    • NumberOfNotificationsDelivered
    • NumberOfNotificationsFilteredOut
  4. Choose Graphed metrics.
  5. In the Statistic column, switch from Average to Sum.
  6. Title your graph with a descriptive name, such as “SNS Message Filtering”

After you have your graph set up, you may want to copy the graph link for bookmarking, emailing, or sharing with co-workers. You may also want to add your graph to a CloudWatch dashboard for easy access in the future. Both actions are available to you on the Actions menu, which is found above the graph.

Summary

SNS message filtering defines how SNS topics behave in terms of message delivery. By using CloudWatch metrics, you gain visibility into the number of messages published, delivered, and filtered out. This enables you to validate the operation of filter policies and more easily troubleshoot during development phases.

SNS message filtering can be implemented easily with existing AWS SDKs by applying message and subscription attributes across all SNS supported protocols (Amazon SQS, AWS Lambda, HTTP, SMS, email, and mobile push). CloudWatch metrics for SNS message filtering is available now, in all AWS Regions.

For information about pricing, see the CloudWatch pricing page.

For more information, see:

Protecting your API using Amazon API Gateway and AWS WAF — Part I

Post Syndicated from Chris Munns original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/compute/protecting-your-api-using-amazon-api-gateway-and-aws-waf-part-i/

This post courtesy of Thiago Morais, AWS Solutions Architect

When you build web applications or expose any data externally, you probably look for a platform where you can build highly scalable, secure, and robust REST APIs. As APIs are publicly exposed, there are a number of best practices for providing a secure mechanism to consumers using your API.

Amazon API Gateway handles all the tasks involved in accepting and processing up to hundreds of thousands of concurrent API calls, including traffic management, authorization and access control, monitoring, and API version management.

In this post, I show you how to take advantage of the regional API endpoint feature in API Gateway, so that you can create your own Amazon CloudFront distribution and secure your API using AWS WAF.

AWS WAF is a web application firewall that helps protect your web applications from common web exploits that could affect application availability, compromise security, or consume excessive resources.

As you make your APIs publicly available, you are exposed to attackers trying to exploit your services in several ways. The AWS security team published a whitepaper solution using AWS WAF, How to Mitigate OWASP’s Top 10 Web Application Vulnerabilities.

Regional API endpoints

Edge-optimized APIs are endpoints that are accessed through a CloudFront distribution created and managed by API Gateway. Before the launch of regional API endpoints, this was the default option when creating APIs using API Gateway. It primarily helped to reduce latency for API consumers that were located in different geographical locations than your API.

When API requests predominantly originate from an Amazon EC2 instance or other services within the same AWS Region as the API is deployed, a regional API endpoint typically lowers the latency of connections. It is recommended for such scenarios.

For better control around caching strategies, customers can use their own CloudFront distribution for regional APIs. They also have the ability to use AWS WAF protection, as I describe in this post.

Edge-optimized API endpoint

The following diagram is an illustrated example of the edge-optimized API endpoint where your API clients access your API through a CloudFront distribution created and managed by API Gateway.

Regional API endpoint

For the regional API endpoint, your customers access your API from the same Region in which your REST API is deployed. This helps you to reduce request latency and particularly allows you to add your own content delivery network, as needed.

Walkthrough

In this section, you implement the following steps:

  • Create a regional API using the PetStore sample API.
  • Create a CloudFront distribution for the API.
  • Test the CloudFront distribution.
  • Set up AWS WAF and create a web ACL.
  • Attach the web ACL to the CloudFront distribution.
  • Test AWS WAF protection.

Create the regional API

For this walkthrough, use an existing PetStore API. All new APIs launch by default as the regional endpoint type. To change the endpoint type for your existing API, choose the cog icon on the top right corner:

After you have created the PetStore API on your account, deploy a stage called “prod” for the PetStore API.

On the API Gateway console, select the PetStore API and choose Actions, Deploy API.

For Stage name, type prod and add a stage description.

Choose Deploy and the new API stage is created.

Use the following AWS CLI command to update your API from edge-optimized to regional:

aws apigateway update-rest-api \
--rest-api-id {rest-api-id} \
--patch-operations op=replace,path=/endpointConfiguration/types/EDGE,value=REGIONAL

A successful response looks like the following:

{
    "description": "Your first API with Amazon API Gateway. This is a sample API that integrates via HTTP with your demo Pet Store endpoints", 
    "createdDate": 1511525626, 
    "endpointConfiguration": {
        "types": [
            "REGIONAL"
        ]
    }, 
    "id": "{api-id}", 
    "name": "PetStore"
}

After you change your API endpoint to regional, you can now assign your own CloudFront distribution to this API.

Create a CloudFront distribution

To make things easier, I have provided an AWS CloudFormation template to deploy a CloudFront distribution pointing to the API that you just created. Click the button to deploy the template in the us-east-1 Region.

For Stack name, enter RegionalAPI. For APIGWEndpoint, enter your API FQDN in the following format:

{api-id}.execute-api.us-east-1.amazonaws.com

After you fill out the parameters, choose Next to continue the stack deployment. It takes a couple of minutes to finish the deployment. After it finishes, the Output tab lists the following items:

  • A CloudFront domain URL
  • An S3 bucket for CloudFront access logs
Output from CloudFormation

Output from CloudFormation

Test the CloudFront distribution

To see if the CloudFront distribution was configured correctly, use a web browser and enter the URL from your distribution, with the following parameters:

https://{your-distribution-url}.cloudfront.net/{api-stage}/pets

You should get the following output:

[
  {
    "id": 1,
    "type": "dog",
    "price": 249.99
  },
  {
    "id": 2,
    "type": "cat",
    "price": 124.99
  },
  {
    "id": 3,
    "type": "fish",
    "price": 0.99
  }
]

Set up AWS WAF and create a web ACL

With the new CloudFront distribution in place, you can now start setting up AWS WAF to protect your API.

For this demo, you deploy the AWS WAF Security Automations solution, which provides fine-grained control over the requests attempting to access your API.

For more information about deployment, see Automated Deployment. If you prefer, you can launch the solution directly into your account using the following button.

For CloudFront Access Log Bucket Name, add the name of the bucket created during the deployment of the CloudFormation stack for your CloudFront distribution.

The solution allows you to adjust thresholds and also choose which automations to enable to protect your API. After you finish configuring these settings, choose Next.

To start the deployment process in your account, follow the creation wizard and choose Create. It takes a few minutes do finish the deployment. You can follow the creation process through the CloudFormation console.

After the deployment finishes, you can see the new web ACL deployed on the AWS WAF console, AWSWAFSecurityAutomations.

Attach the AWS WAF web ACL to the CloudFront distribution

With the solution deployed, you can now attach the AWS WAF web ACL to the CloudFront distribution that you created earlier.

To assign the newly created AWS WAF web ACL, go back to your CloudFront distribution. After you open your distribution for editing, choose General, Edit.

Select the new AWS WAF web ACL that you created earlier, AWSWAFSecurityAutomations.

Save the changes to your CloudFront distribution and wait for the deployment to finish.

Test AWS WAF protection

To validate the AWS WAF Web ACL setup, use Artillery to load test your API and see AWS WAF in action.

To install Artillery on your machine, run the following command:

$ npm install -g artillery

After the installation completes, you can check if Artillery installed successfully by running the following command:

$ artillery -V
$ 1.6.0-12

As the time of publication, Artillery is on version 1.6.0-12.

One of the WAF web ACL rules that you have set up is a rate-based rule. By default, it is set up to block any requesters that exceed 2000 requests under 5 minutes. Try this out.

First, use cURL to query your distribution and see the API output:

$ curl -s https://{distribution-name}.cloudfront.net/prod/pets
[
  {
    "id": 1,
    "type": "dog",
    "price": 249.99
  },
  {
    "id": 2,
    "type": "cat",
    "price": 124.99
  },
  {
    "id": 3,
    "type": "fish",
    "price": 0.99
  }
]

Based on the test above, the result looks good. But what if you max out the 2000 requests in under 5 minutes?

Run the following Artillery command:

artillery quick -n 2000 --count 10  https://{distribution-name}.cloudfront.net/prod/pets

What you are doing is firing 2000 requests to your API from 10 concurrent users. For brevity, I am not posting the Artillery output here.

After Artillery finishes its execution, try to run the cURL request again and see what happens:

 

$ curl -s https://{distribution-name}.cloudfront.net/prod/pets

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
<HTML><HEAD><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<TITLE>ERROR: The request could not be satisfied</TITLE>
</HEAD><BODY>
<H1>ERROR</H1>
<H2>The request could not be satisfied.</H2>
<HR noshade size="1px">
Request blocked.
<BR clear="all">
<HR noshade size="1px">
<PRE>
Generated by cloudfront (CloudFront)
Request ID: [removed]
</PRE>
<ADDRESS>
</ADDRESS>
</BODY></HTML>

As you can see from the output above, the request was blocked by AWS WAF. Your IP address is removed from the blocked list after it falls below the request limit rate.

Conclusion

In this first part, you saw how to use the new API Gateway regional API endpoint together with Amazon CloudFront and AWS WAF to secure your API from a series of attacks.

In the second part, I will demonstrate some other techniques to protect your API using API keys and Amazon CloudFront custom headers.

Monitoring for Everyone

Post Syndicated from Blogs on Grafana Labs Blog original https://grafana.com/blog/2018/05/23/monitoring-for-everyone/

Øredev – Carl Bergquist – Monitoring for Everyone What is monitoring?
What do the terms log, metric, and distributed tracing actually mean?
What makes a good alert?
Why should I care?
At a recent developer conference in Malmö, Sweden, I gave a presentation on monitoring and observability to discuss the high level concepts and common tools that are out there.
Monitoring and observability can easily become quite complex, but at the heart of it, we simply want to know how our systems are performing, and when performance drops – be able to find out why.

[$] An introduction to MQTT

Post Syndicated from corbet original https://lwn.net/Articles/753705/rss

I was sure that somewhere there must be
physically-lightweight sensors with simple power, simple networking, and
a lightweight protocol that allowed them to squirt their data down the
network with a minimum of overhead. So my interest was piqued when Jan-Piet Mens spoke at FLOSS
UK’s Spring
Conference
on “Small Things for Monitoring”. Once he started passing
working demonstration systems around the room without interrupting the
demonstration, it was clear that MQTT was what I’d been looking for.

What’s new in HiveMQ 3.4

Post Syndicated from The HiveMQ Team original https://www.hivemq.com/whats-new-in-hivemq-3-4

We are pleased to announce the release of HiveMQ 3.4. This version of HiveMQ is the most resilient and advanced version of HiveMQ ever. The main focus in this release was directed towards addressing the needs for the most ambitious MQTT deployments in the world for maximum performance and resilience for millions of concurrent MQTT clients. Of course, deployments of all sizes can profit from the improvements in the latest and greatest HiveMQ.

This version is a drop-in replacement for HiveMQ 3.3 and of course supports rolling upgrades with zero-downtime.

HiveMQ 3.4 brings many features that your users, administrators and plugin developers are going to love. These are the highlights:

 

New HiveMQ 3.4 features at a glance

Cluster

HiveMQ 3.4 brings various improvements in terms of scalability, availability, resilience and observability for the cluster mechanism. Many of the new features remain under the hood, but several additions stand out:

Cluster Overload Protection

The new version has a first-of-its-kind Cluster Overload Protection. The whole cluster is able to spot MQTT clients that cause overload on nodes or the cluster as a whole and protects itself from the overload. This mechanism also protects the deployment from cascading failures due to slow or failing underlying hardware (as sometimes seen on cloud providers). This feature is enabled by default and you can learn more about the mechanism in our documentation.

Dynamic Replicates

HiveMQ’s sophisticated cluster mechanism is able to scale in a linear fashion due to extremely efficient and true data distribution mechanics based on a configured replication factor. The most important aspect of every cluster is availability, which is achieved by having eventual consistency functions in place for edge cases. The 3.4 version adds dynamic replicates to the cluster so even the most challenging edge cases involving network splits don’t lead to the sacrifice of consistency for the most important MQTT operations.

Node Stress Level Metrics

All MQTT cluster nodes are now aware of their own stress level and the stress levels of other cluster members. While all stress mitigation is handled internally by HiveMQ, experienced operators may want to monitor the individual node’s stress level (e.g with Grafana) in order to start investigating what caused the increase of load.

WebUI

Operators worldwide love the HiveMQ WebUI introduced with HiveMQ 3.3. We gathered all the fantastic feedback from our users and polished the WebUI, so it’s even more useful for day-to-day broker operations and remote debugging of MQTT clients. The most important changes and additions are:

Trace Recording Download

The unique Trace Recordings functionality is without doubt a lifesaver when the behavior of individual MQTT clients needs further investigation as all interactions with the broker can be traced — at runtime and at scale! Huge production deployments may accumulate multiple gigabytes of trace recordings. HiveMQ now offers a convenient way to collect all trace recordings from all nodes, zips them and allows the download via a simple button on the WebUI. Remote debugging was never easier!

Additional Client Detail Information in WebUI

The mission of the HiveMQ WebUI is to provide easy insights to the whole production MQTT cluster for operators and administrators. Individual MQTT client investigations are a piece of cake, as all available information about clients can be viewed in detail. We further added the ability to view the restrictions a concrete client has:

  • Maximum Inflight Queue Size
  • Client Offline Queue Messages Size
  • Client Offline Message Drop Strategy

Session Invalidation

MQTT persistent sessions are one of the outstanding features of the MQTT protocol specification. Sessions which do not expire but are never reused unnecessarily consume disk space and memory. Administrators can now invalidate individual session directly in the HiveMQ WebUI for client sessions, which can be deleted safely. HiveMQ 3.4 will take care and release the resources on all cluster nodes after a session was invalidated

Web UI Polishing

Most texts on the WebUI were revisited and are now clearer and crisper. The help texts also received a major overhaul and should now be more, well, helpful. In addition, many small improvements were added, which are most of the time invisible but are here to help when you need them most. For example, the WebUI now displays a warning if cluster nodes with old versions are in the cluster (which may happen if a rolling upgrade was not finished properly)

Plugin System

One of the most popular features of HiveMQ is the extensive Plugin System, which virtually enables the integration of HiveMQ to any system and allows hooking into all aspects of the MQTT lifecycle. We listened to the feedback and are pleased to announce many improvements, big and small, for the Plugin System:

Client Session Time-to-live for individual clients

HiveMQ 3.3 offered a global configuration for setting the Time-To-Live for MQTT sessions. With the advent of HiveMQ 3.4, users can now programmatically set Time-To-Live values for individual MQTT clients and can discard a MQTT session immediately.

Individual Inflight Queues

While the Inflight Queue configuration is typically sufficient in the HiveMQ default configuration, there are some use cases that require the adjustment of this configuration. It’s now possible to change the Inflight Queue size for individual clients via the Plugin System.
 
 

Plugin Service Overload Protection

The HiveMQ Plugin System is a power-user tool and it’s possible to do unbelievably useful modifications as well as putting major stress on the system as a whole if the programmer is not careful. In order to protect the HiveMQ instances from accidental overload, a Plugin Service Overload Protection can be configured. This rate limits the Plugin Service usage and gives feedback to the application programmer in case the rate limit is exceeded. This feature is disabled by default but we strongly recommend updating your plugins to profit from this feature.

Session Attribute Store putIfNewer

This is one of the small bits you almost never need but when you do, you’re ecstatic for being able to use it. The Session Attribute Store now offers methods to put values, if the values you want to put are newer or fresher than the values already written. This is extremely useful, if multiple cluster nodes want to write to the Session Attribute Store simultaneously, as this guarantees that outdated values can no longer overwrite newer values.
 
 
 
 

Disconnection Timestamp for OnDisconnectCallback

As the OnDisconnectCallback is executed asynchronously, the client might already be gone when the callback is executed. It’s now easy to obtain the exact timestamp when a MQTT client disconnected, even if the callback is executed later on. This feature might be very interesting for many plugin developers in conjunction with the Session Attribute Store putIfNewer functionality.

Operations

We ❤️ Operators and we strive to provide all the tools needed for operating and administrating a MQTT broker cluster at scale in any environment. A key strategy for successful operations of any system is monitoring. We added some interesting new metrics you might find useful.

System Metrics

In addition to JVM Metrics, HiveMQ now also gathers Operating System Metrics for Linux Systems. So HiveMQ is able to see for itself how the operating system views the process, including native memory, the real CPU usage, and open file usage. These metrics are particularly useful, if you don’t have a monitoring agent for Linux systems setup. All metrics can be found here.

Client Disconnection Metrics

The reality of many MQTT scenarios is that not all clients are able to disconnect gracefully by sending MQTT DISCONNECT messages. HiveMQ now also exposes metrics about clients that disconnected by closing the TCP connection instead of sending a DISCONNECT packet first. This is especially useful for monitoring, if you regularly deal with clients that don’t have a stable connection to the MQTT brokers.

 

JMX enabled by default

JMX, the Java Monitoring Extension, is now enabled by default. Many HiveMQ operators use Application Performance Monitoring tools, which are able to hook into the metrics via JMX or use plain JMX for on-the-fly debugging. While we recommend to use official off-the-shelf plugins for monitoring, it’s now easier than ever to just use JMX if other solutions are not available to you.

Other notable improvements

The 3.4 release of HiveMQ is full of hidden gems and improvements. While it would be too much to highlight all small improvements, these notable changes stand out and contribute to the best HiveMQ release ever.

Topic Level Distribution Configuration

Our recommendation for all huge deployments with millions of devices is: Start with separate topic prefixes by bringing the dynamic topic parts directly to the beginning. The reality is that many customers have topics that are constructed like the following: “devices/{deviceId}/status”. So what happens is that all topics in this example start with a common prefix, “devices”, which is the first topic level. Unfortunately the first topic level doesn’t include a dynamic topic part. In order to guarantee the best scalability of the cluster and the best performance of the topic tree, customers can now configure how many topic levels are used for distribution. In the example outlined here, a topic level distribution of 2 would be perfect and guarantees the best scalability.

Mass disconnect performance improvements

Mass disconnections of MQTT clients can happen. This might be the case when e.g. a load balancer in front of the MQTT broker cluster drops the connections or if a mobile carrier experiences connectivity problems. Prior to HiveMQ 3.4, mass disconnect events caused stress on the cluster. Mass disconnect events are now massively optimized and even tens of millions of connection losses at the same time won’t bring the cluster into stress situations.

 
 
 
 
 
 

Replication Performance Improvements

Due to the distributed nature of a HiveMQ, data needs to be replicated across the cluster in certain events, e.g. when cluster topology changes occur. There are various internal improvements in HiveMQ version 3.4, which increase the replication performance significantly. Our engineers put special love into the replication of Queued Messages, which is now faster than ever, even for multiple millions of Queued Messages that need to be transferred across the cluster.

Updated Native SSL Libraries

The Native SSL Integration of HiveMQ was updated to the newest BoringSSL version. This results in better performance and increased security. In case you’re using SSL and you are not yet using the native SSL integration, we strongly recommend to give it a try, more than 40% performance improvement can be observed for most deployments.

 
 

Improvements for Java 9

While Java 9 was already supported for older HiveMQ versions, HiveMQ 3.4 has full-blown Java 9 support. The minimum Java version still remains Java 7, although we strongly recommend to use Java 8 or newer for the best performance of HiveMQ.

timeShift(GrafanaBuzz, 1w) Issue 43

Post Syndicated from Blogs on Grafana Labs Blog original https://grafana.com/blog/2018/05/04/timeshiftgrafanabuzz-1w-issue-43/

Welcome to TimeShift This week, Grafana Labs was happy to speak at and sponsor KubeCon + CloudNativeCon EU in Copenhagen, Denmark. We got to chat with a ton of Grafana users, attended amazing talks, and generally had a blast! From Grafana Labs, Goutham Veeramanchaneni gave two talks focusing on TSDB – the engine behind Prometheus, and Tom Wilkie discussed a technique for using Jsonnet for packaging and deploying “Monitoring Mixins” – extensible and customizable combinations of dashboards, alert definitions and exporters.

Hard Drive Stats for Q1 2018

Post Syndicated from Andy Klein original https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-stats-for-q1-2018/

Backblaze Drive Stats Q1 2018

As of March 31, 2018 we had 100,110 spinning hard drives. Of that number, there were 1,922 boot drives and 98,188 data drives. This review looks at the quarterly and lifetime statistics for the data drive models in operation in our data centers. We’ll also take a look at why we are collecting and reporting 10 new SMART attributes and take a sneak peak at some 8 TB Toshiba drives. Along the way, we’ll share observations and insights on the data presented and we look forward to you doing the same in the comments.

Background

Since April 2013, Backblaze has recorded and saved daily hard drive statistics from the drives in our data centers. Each entry consists of the date, manufacturer, model, serial number, status (operational or failed), and all of the SMART attributes reported by that drive. Currently there are about 97 million entries totaling 26 GB of data. You can download this data from our website if you want to do your own research, but for starters here’s what we found.

Hard Drive Reliability Statistics for Q1 2018

At the end of Q1 2018 Backblaze was monitoring 98,188 hard drives used to store data. For our evaluation below we remove from consideration those drives which were used for testing purposes and those drive models for which we did not have at least 45 drives. This leaves us with 98,046 hard drives. The table below covers just Q1 2018.

Q1 2018 Hard Drive Failure Rates

Notes and Observations

If a drive model has a failure rate of 0%, it only means there were no drive failures of that model during Q1 2018.

The overall Annualized Failure Rate (AFR) for Q1 is just 1.2%, well below the Q4 2017 AFR of 1.65%. Remember that quarterly failure rates can be volatile, especially for models that have a small number of drives and/or a small number of Drive Days.

There were 142 drives (98,188 minus 98,046) that were not included in the list above because we did not have at least 45 of a given drive model. We use 45 drives of the same model as the minimum number when we report quarterly, yearly, and lifetime drive statistics.

Welcome Toshiba 8TB drives, almost…

We mentioned Toshiba 8 TB drives in the first paragraph, but they don’t show up in the Q1 Stats chart. What gives? We only had 20 of the Toshiba 8 TB drives in operation in Q1, so they were excluded from the chart. Why do we have only 20 drives? When we test out a new drive model we start with the “tome test” and it takes 20 drives to fill one tome. A tome is the same drive model in the same logical position in each of the 20 Storage Pods that make up a Backblaze Vault. There are 60 tomes in each vault.

In this test, we created a Backblaze Vault of 8 TB drives, with 59 of the tomes being Seagate 8 TB drives and 1 tome being the Toshiba drives. Then we monitored the performance of the vault and its member tomes to see if, in this case, the Toshiba drives performed as expected.

Q1 2018 Hard Drive Failure Rate — Toshiba 8TB

So far the Toshiba drive is performing fine, but they have been in place for only 20 days. Next up is the “pod test” where we fill a Storage Pod with Toshiba drives and integrate it into a Backblaze Vault comprised of like-sized drives. We hope to have a better look at the Toshiba 8 TB drives in our Q2 report — stay tuned.

Lifetime Hard Drive Reliability Statistics

While the quarterly chart presented earlier gets a lot of interest, the real test of any drive model is over time. Below is the lifetime failure rate chart for all the hard drive models which have 45 or more drives in operation as of March 31st, 2018. For each model, we compute their reliability starting from when they were first installed.

Lifetime Hard Drive Failure Rates

Notes and Observations

The failure rates of all of the larger drives (8-, 10- and 12 TB) are very good, 1.2% AFR (Annualized Failure Rate) or less. Many of these drives were deployed in the last year, so there is some volatility in the data, but you can use the Confidence Interval to get a sense of the failure percentage range.

The overall failure rate of 1.84% is the lowest we have ever achieved, besting the previous low of 2.00% from the end of 2017.

Our regular readers and drive stats wonks may have noticed a sizable jump in the number of HGST 8 TB drives (model: HUH728080ALE600), from 45 last quarter to 1,045 this quarter. As the 10 TB and 12 TB drives become more available, the price per terabyte of the 8 TB drives has gone down. This presented an opportunity to purchase the HGST drives at a price in line with our budget.

We purchased and placed into service the 45 original HGST 8 TB drives in Q2 of 2015. They were our first Helium-filled drives and our only ones until the 10 TB and 12 TB Seagate drives arrived in Q3 2017. We’ll take a first look into whether or not Helium makes a difference in drive failure rates in an upcoming blog post.

New SMART Attributes

If you have previously worked with the hard drive stats data or plan to, you’ll notice that we added 10 more columns of data starting in 2018. There are 5 new SMART attributes we are tracking each with a raw and normalized value:

  • 177 – Wear Range Delta
  • 179 – Used Reserved Block Count Total
  • 181- Program Fail Count Total or Non-4K Aligned Access Count
  • 182 – Erase Fail Count
  • 235 – Good Block Count AND System(Free) Block Count

The 5 values are all related to SSD drives.

Yes, SSD drives, but before you jump to any conclusions, we used 10 Samsung 850 EVO SSDs as boot drives for a period of time in Q1. This was an experiment to see if we could reduce boot up time for the Storage Pods. In our case, the improved boot up speed wasn’t worth the SSD cost, but it did add 10 new columns to the hard drive stats data.

Speaking of hard drive stats data, the complete data set used to create the information used in this review is available on our Hard Drive Test Data page. You can download and use this data for free for your own purpose, all we ask are three things: 1) you cite Backblaze as the source if you use the data, 2) you accept that you are solely responsible for how you use the data, and 3) you do not sell this data to anyone. It is free.

If you just want the summarized data used to create the tables and charts in this blog post, you can download the ZIP file containing the MS Excel spreadsheet.

Good luck and let us know if you find anything interesting.

[Ed: 5/1/2018 – Updated Lifetime chart to fix error in confidence interval for HGST 4TB drive, model: HDS5C4040ALE630]

The post Hard Drive Stats for Q1 2018 appeared first on Backblaze Blog | Cloud Storage & Cloud Backup.

Danish Traffic to Pirate Sites Increases 67% in Just a Year

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/danish-traffic-to-pirate-sites-increases-67-in-just-a-year-180501/

For close to 20 years, rightsholders have tried to stem the tide of mainstream Internet piracy. Yet despite increasingly powerful enforcement tools, infringement continues on a grand scale.

While the problem is global, rightsholder groups often zoom in on their home turf, to see how the fight is progressing locally. Covering Denmark, the Rights Alliance Data Report 2017 paints a fairly pessimistic picture.

Published this week, the industry study – which uses SimilarWeb and MarkMonitor data – finds that Danes visited 2,000 leading pirate sites 596 million times in 2017. That represents a 67% increase over the 356 million visits to unlicensed platforms made by citizens during 2016.

The report notes that, at least in part, this explosive growth can be attributed to mobile-compatible sites and services, which make it easier than ever to consume illicit content on the move, as well as at home.

In a sea of unauthorized streaming sites, Rights Alliance highlights one platform above all the others as a particularly bad influence in 2017 – 123movies (also known as GoMovies and GoStream, among others).

“The popularity of this service rose sharply in 2017 from 40 million visits in 2016 to 175 million visits in 2017 – an increase of 337 percent, of which most of the traffic originates from mobile devices,” the report notes.

123movies recently announced its closure but before that the platform was subjected to web-blocking in several jurisdictions.

Rights Alliance says that Denmark has one of the most effective blocking systems in the world but that still doesn’t stop huge numbers of people from consuming pirate content from sites that aren’t yet blocked.

“Traffic to infringing sites is overwhelming, and therefore blocking a few sites merely takes the top of the illegal activities,” Rights Alliance chief Maria Fredenslund informs TorrentFreak.

“Blocking is effective by stopping 75% of traffic to blocked sites but certainly, an upscaled effort is necessary.”

Rights Alliance also views the promotion of legal services as crucial to its anti-piracy strategy so when people visit a blocked site, they’re also directed towards legitimate platforms.

“That is why we are working at the moment with Denmark’s Ministry of Culture and ISPs on a campaign ‘Share With Care 2′ which promotes legal services e.g. by offering a search function for legal services which will be placed in combination with the signs that are put on blocked websites,” the anti-piracy group notes.

But even with such measures in place, the thirst for unlicensed content is great. In 2017 alone, 500 of the most popular films and TV shows were downloaded from P2P networks like BitTorrent more than 15 million times from Danish IP addresses, that’s up from 11.9 million in 2016.

Given the dramatic rise in visits to pirate sites overall, the suggestion is that plenty of consumers are still getting through. Rights Alliance says that the number of people being restricted is also hampered by people who don’t use their ISP’s DNS service, which is the method used to block sites in Denmark.

Additionally, interest in VPNs and similar anonymization and bypass-capable technologies is on the increase. Between 3.5% and 5% of Danish Internet users currently use a VPN, a number that’s expected to go up. Furthermore, Rights Alliance reports greater interest in “closed” pirate communities.

“The data is based on closed [BitTorrent] networks. We also address the challenges with private communities on Facebook and other [social media] platforms,” Fredenslund explains.

“Due to the closed doors of these platforms it is not possible for us to say anything precisely about the amount of infringing activities there. However, we receive an increasing number of notices from our members who discover that their products are distributed illegally and also we do an increased monitoring of these platforms.”

But while more established technologies such as torrents and regular web-streaming continue in considerable volumes, newer IPTV-style services accessible via apps and dedicated platforms are also gaining traction.

“The volume of visitors to these services’ websites has been sharply rising in 2017 – an increase of 84 percent from January to December,” Rights Alliance notes.

“Even though the number of visitors does not say anything about actual consumption, as users usually only visit pages one time to download the program, the number gives an indication that the interest in IPTV is increasing.”

To combat this growth market, Rights Alliance says it wants to establish web-blockades against sites hosting the software applications.

Also on the up are visits to platforms offering live sports illegally. In 2017, Danish IP addresses made 2.96 million visits to these services, corresponding to almost 250,000 visits per month and representing an annual increase of 28%.

Rights Alliance informs TF that in future a ‘live’ blocking mechanism similar to the one used by the Premier League in the UK could be deployed in Denmark.

“We already have a dynamic blocking system, and we see an increasing demand for illegal TV products, so this could be a natural next step,” Fredenslund explains.

Another small but perhaps significant detail is how users are accessing pirate sites. According to the report, large volumes of people are now visiting platforms directly, with more than 50% doing so in preference to referrals from search engines such as Google.

In terms of deterrence, the Rights Alliance report sticks to the tried-and-tested approaches seen so often in the anti-piracy arena.

Firstly, the group notes that it’s increasingly encountering people who are paying for legal services such as Netflix and Spotify so believe that allows them to grab something extra from a pirate site. However, in common with similar organizations globally, the group counters that pirate sites can serve malware or have other nefarious business interests behind the scenes, so people should stay away.

Whether significant volumes will heed this advice will remain to be seen but if a 67% increase last year is any predictor of the future, piracy is here to stay – and then some. Rights Alliance says it is ready for the challenge but will need some assistance to achieve its goals.

“As it is evident from the traffic data, criminal activities are not something that we, private companies (right holders in cooperation with ISPs), can handle alone,” Fredenslund says.

“Therefore, we are very pleased that DK Government recently announced that the IP taskforce which was set down as a trial period has now been made permanent. In that regard it is important and necessary that the police will also obtain the authority to handle blocking of massively infringing websites. Police do not have the authority to carry out blocking as it is today.”

The full report is available here (Danish, pdf)

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.

timeShift(GrafanaBuzz, 1w) Issue 42

Post Syndicated from Blogs on Grafana Labs Blog original https://grafana.com/blog/2018/04/27/timeshiftgrafanabuzz-1w-issue-42/

Welcome to TimeShift Grafana v5.1 Stable is available! Two of the biggest new features include a native data source for MSSQL Server and heatmap support for Prometheus. Download the latest release and checkout other new features and fixes below.
Heading to KubeCon + CloudNativeCon Europe 2018 in Copenhagen, Denmark, May 2-4? Come by our booth and say hi! Also don’t miss Tom Wilkie’s talk on Prometheus Monitoring Mixins: Using Jsonnet to Package Together Dashboards, Alerts and Exporters, and Goutham Veeramanchaneni’s talks: TSDB: The Engine behind Prometheus and TSDB: The Past, Present and the Future Latest Release We received a lot of great suggestions, bug reports and pull requests from our amazing community – Thank you all!

Easier way to control access to AWS regions using IAM policies

Post Syndicated from Sulay Shah original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/easier-way-to-control-access-to-aws-regions-using-iam-policies/

We made it easier for you to comply with regulatory standards by controlling access to AWS Regions using IAM policies. For example, if your company requires users to create resources in a specific AWS region, you can now add a new condition to the IAM policies you attach to your IAM principal (user or role) to enforce this for all AWS services. In this post, I review conditions in policies, introduce the new condition, and review a policy example to demonstrate how you can control access across multiple AWS services to a specific region.

Condition concepts

Before I introduce the new condition, let’s review the condition element of an IAM policy. A condition is an optional IAM policy element that lets you specify special circumstances under which the policy grants or denies permission. A condition includes a condition key, operator, and value for the condition. There are two types of conditions: service-specific conditions and global conditions. Service-specific conditions are specific to certain actions in an AWS service. For example, the condition key ec2:InstanceType supports specific EC2 actions. Global conditions support all actions across all AWS services.

Now that I’ve reviewed the condition element in an IAM policy, let me introduce the new condition.

AWS:RequestedRegion condition key

The new global condition key, , supports all actions across all AWS services. You can use any string operator and specify any AWS region for its value.

Condition key Description Operator(s) Value
aws:RequestedRegion Allows you to specify the region to which the IAM principal (user or role) can make API calls All string operators (for example, StringEquals Any AWS region (for example, us-east-1)

I’ll now demonstrate the use of the new global condition key.

Example: Policy with region-level control

Let’s say a group of software developers in my organization is working on a project using Amazon EC2 and Amazon RDS. The project requires a web server running on an EC2 instance using Amazon Linux and a MySQL database instance in RDS. The developers also want to test Amazon Lambda, an event-driven platform, to retrieve data from the MySQL DB instance in RDS for future use.

My organization requires all the AWS resources to remain in the Frankfurt, eu-central-1, region. To make sure this project follows these guidelines, I create a single IAM policy for all the AWS services that this group is going to use and apply the new global condition key aws:RequestedRegion for all the services. This way I can ensure that any new EC2 instances launched or any database instances created using RDS are in Frankfurt. This policy also ensures that any Lambda functions this group creates for testing are also in the Frankfurt region.


{
    "Version": "2012-10-17",
    "Statement": [
        {
            "Effect": "Allow",
            "Action": [
                "ec2:DescribeAccountAttributes",
                "ec2:DescribeAvailabilityZones",
                "ec2:DescribeInternetGateways",
                "ec2:DescribeSecurityGroups",
                "ec2:DescribeSubnets",
                "ec2:DescribeVpcAttribute",
                "ec2:DescribeVpcs",
                "ec2:DescribeInstances",
                "ec2:DescribeImages",
                "ec2:DescribeKeyPairs",
                "rds:Describe*",
                "iam:ListRolePolicies",
                "iam:ListRoles",
                "iam:GetRole",
                "iam:ListInstanceProfiles",
                "iam:AttachRolePolicy",
                "lambda:GetAccountSettings"
            ],
            "Resource": "*"
        },
        {
            "Effect": "Allow",
            "Action": [
                "ec2:RunInstances",
                "rds:CreateDBInstance",
                "rds:CreateDBCluster",
                "lambda:CreateFunction",
                "lambda:InvokeFunction"
            ],
            "Resource": "*",
      "Condition": {"StringEquals": {"aws:RequestedRegion": "eu-central-1"}}

        },
        {
            "Effect": "Allow",
            "Action": [
                "iam:PassRole"
            ],
            "Resource": "arn:aws:iam::account-id:role/*"
        }
    ]
}

The first statement in the above example contains all the read-only actions that let my developers use the console for EC2, RDS, and Lambda. The permissions for IAM-related actions are required to launch EC2 instances with a role, enable enhanced monitoring in RDS, and for AWS Lambda to assume the IAM execution role to execute the Lambda function. I’ve combined all the read-only actions into a single statement for simplicity. The second statement is where I give write access to my developers for the three services and restrict the write access to the Frankfurt region using the aws:RequestedRegion condition key. You can also list multiple AWS regions with the new condition key if your developers are allowed to create resources in multiple regions. The third statement grants permissions for the IAM action iam:PassRole required by AWS Lambda. For more information on allowing users to create a Lambda function, see Using Identity-Based Policies for AWS Lambda.

Summary

You can now use the aws:RequestedRegion global condition key in your IAM policies to specify the region to which the IAM principal (user or role) can invoke an API call. This capability makes it easier for you to restrict the AWS regions your IAM principals can use to comply with regulatory standards and improve account security. For more information about this global condition key and policy examples using aws:RequestedRegion, see the IAM documentation.

If you have comments about this post, submit them in the Comments section below. If you have questions about or suggestions for this solution, start a new thread on the IAM forum.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

Announcing the new AWS Certified Security – Specialty exam

Post Syndicated from Janna Pellegrino original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/architecture/announcing-the-new-aws-certified-security-specialty-exam/

Good news for cloud security experts: following our most popular beta exam ever, the AWS Certified Security – Specialty exam is here. This new exam allows experienced cloud security professionals to demonstrate and validate their knowledge of how to secure the AWS platform.

About the exam
The security exam covers incident response, logging and monitoring, infrastructure security, identity and access management, and data protection. The exam is open to anyone who currently holds a Cloud Practitioner or Associate-level certification. We recommend candidates have five years of IT security experience designing and implementing security solutions, and at least two years of hands-on experience securing AWS workloads.

The exam validates:

  • An understanding of specialized data classifications and AWS data protection mechanisms.
  • An understanding of data encryption methods and AWS mechanisms to implement them.
  • An understanding of secure Internet protocols and AWS mechanisms to implement them.
  • A working knowledge of AWS security services and features of services to provide a secure production environment.
  • Competency gained from two or more years of production deployment experience using AWS security services and features.
  • Ability to make trade-off decisions with regard to cost, security, and deployment complexity given a set of application requirements.
  • An understanding of security operations and risk.

Learn more and register >>

How to prepare
We have training and other resources to help you prepare for the exam:

AWS Training (aws.amazon.com/training)

Additional Resources

Learn more and register >>

Please contact us if you have questions about exam registration.

Good luck!

Announcing the new AWS Certified Security – Specialty exam

Post Syndicated from Ozlem Yilmaz original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/announcing-the-new-aws-certified-security-specialty-exam/

Good news for cloud security experts: the AWS Certified Security — Specialty exam is here. This new exam allows experienced cloud security professionals to demonstrate and validate their knowledge of how to secure the AWS platform.

About the exam

The security exam covers incident response, logging and monitoring, infrastructure security, identity and access management, and data protection. The exam is open to anyone who currently holds a Cloud Practitioner or Associate-level certification. We recommend candidates have five years of IT security experience designing and implementing security solutions, and at least two years of hands-on experience securing AWS workloads.

The exam validates your understanding of:

  • Specialized data classifications and AWS data protection mechanisms
  • Data encryption methods and AWS mechanisms to implement them
  • Secure Internet protocols and AWS mechanisms to implement them
  • AWS security services and features of services to provide a secure production environment
  • Making tradeoff decisions with regard to cost, security, and deployment complexity given a set of application requirements
  • Security operations and risk

How to prepare

We have training and other resources to help you prepare for the exam.

AWS Training that includes:

Additional Resources

Learn more and register here, and please contact us if you have questions about exam registration.

Want more AWS Security news? Follow us on Twitter.

How Many Piracy Warnings Would Get You to Stop?

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/how-many-piracy-warnings-would-get-you-to-stop-180422/

For the past several years, copyright holders in the US and Europe have been trying to reach out to file-sharers in an effort to change their habits.

Whether via high-profile publicity lawsuits or a simple email, it’s hoped that by letting people know they aren’t anonymous, they’ll stop pirating and buy more content instead.

Traditionally, most ISPs haven’t been that keen on passing infringement notices on. However, the BMG v Cox lawsuit seems to have made a big difference, with a growing number of ISPs now visibly warning their users that they operate a repeat infringer policy.

But perhaps the big question is how seriously users take these warnings because – let’s face it – that’s the entire point of their existence.

There can be little doubt that a few recipients will be scurrying away at the slightest hint of trouble, intimidated by the mere suggestion that they’re being watched.

Indeed, a father in the UK – who received a warning last year as part of the Get it Right From a Genuine Site campaign – confidently and forcefully assured TF that there would be no more illegal file-sharing taking place on his ten-year-old son’s computer again – ever.

In France, where the HADOPI anti-piracy scheme received much publicity, people receiving an initial notice are most unlikely to receive additional ones in future. A December 2017 report indicated that of nine million first warning notices sent to alleged pirates since 2012, ‘just’ 800,000 received a follow-up warning on top.

The suggestion is that people either stop their piracy after getting a notice or two, or choose to “go dark” instead, using streaming sites for example or perhaps torrenting behind a decent VPN.

But for some people, the message simply doesn’t sink in early on.

A post on Reddit this week by a TWC Spectrum customer revealed that despite a wealth of readily available information (including masses in the specialist subreddit where the post was made), even several warnings fail to have an effect.

“Was just hit with my 5th copyright violation. They halted my internet and all,” the self-confessed pirate wrote.

There are at least three important things to note from this opening sentence.

Firstly, the first four warnings did nothing to change the user’s piracy habits. Secondly, Spectrum presumably had enough at five warnings and kicked in a repeat-infringer suspension, presumably to avoid the same fate as Cox in the BMG case. Third, the account suspension seems to have changed the game.

Notably, rather than some huge blockbuster movie, that fifth warning came due to something rather less prominent.

“Thought I could sneak in a random episode of Rosanne. The new one that aired LOL. That fast. Under 24 hours I got shut off. Which makes me feel like [ISPs] do monitor your traffic and its not just the people sending them notices,” the post read.

Again, some interesting points here.

Any content can be monitored by rightsholders but if it’s popular in the US then a warning delivered via an ISP seems to be more likely than elsewhere. However, the misconception that the monitoring is done by ISPs persists, despite that not being the case.

ISPs do not monitor users’ file-sharing activity, anti-piracy companies do. They can grab an IP address the second someone enters a torrent swarm, or even connects to a tracker. It happens in an instant, at a time of their choosing. Quickly jumping in and out of a torrent is no guarantee and the fallacy of not getting caught due to a failure to seed is just that – a fallacy.

But perhaps the most important thing is that after five warnings and a disconnection, the Reddit user decided to take action. Sadly for the people behind Rosanne, it’s not exactly the reaction they’d have hoped for.

“I do not want to push it but I am curious to what happens 6th time, and if I would even be safe behind a VPN,” he wrote.

“Just want to learn how to use a VPN and Sonarr and have a guilt free stress free torrent watching.”

Of course, there was no shortage of advice.

“If you have gotten 5 notices, you really should of learnt [sic] how to use a VPN before now,” one poster noted, perhaps inevitably.

But curiously, or perhaps obviously given the number of previous warnings, the fifth warning didn’t come as a surprise to the user.

“I knew they were going to hit me for it. I just didn’t think a 195mb file would do it. They were getting me for Disney movies in the past,” he added.

So how do you grab the attention of a persistent infringer like this? Five warnings and a suspension apparently. But clearly, not even that is a guarantee of success. Perhaps this is why most ‘strike’ schemes tend to give up on people who can’t be rehabilitated.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.

IP Address Fail: ISP Doesn’t Have to Hand ‘Pirates’ Details to Copyright Trolls

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/ip-address-fail-isp-doesnt-have-to-hand-pirates-details-to-copyright-trolls-180414/

On October 27, 2016, UK-based Copyright Management Services (CMS) filed a case against Sweden-based ISP, Tele2.

CMS, run by Patrick Achache of German-based anti-piracy outfit MaverickEye (which in turn is deeply involved with infamous copyright troll outfit Guardaley), claimed that Tele2 customers had infringed its clients’ copyrights on the movies Cell and IT by sharing them via BitTorrent.

Since Tele2 had the personal details of the customers behind those IP addresses, CMS asked the Patent and Market Court to prevent the ISP from deleting the data before it could be handed over. Once in its possession, CMS would carry out the usual process of writing to customers and demanding cash settlements to make supposed lawsuits go away.

Tele2 complained that it could not hand over the details of customers using NAT addresses since it simply doesn’t hold that information. The ISP also said it could not hand over details of customers if IP address information had previously been deleted.

Taking these objections into consideration, in November 2017 the Court approved an interim order in respect of the remaining IP addresses. But there were significant problems which led the ISP to appeal.

According to tests carried out by Tele2, many of the IP addresses in the case did not relate to Sweden or indeed Tele2. In fact, some IP addresses belonged to foreign companies or mere affiliates of the ISP.

“Tele2 thus lacks the actual ability to provide information regarding a large part of the IP addresses covered by the submission,” the Court of Appeal noted in a decision published this week.

The problem appears to lie with the way the MaverickEye monitoring system attributed monitored IP addresses to Tele2.

The Court notes that the company relied on the RIPE Database which stated that the IP addresses in question were allocated to the “geographic area of Sweden”. According to Tele2, however, that wasn’t the case and as such, it had no information to hand over.

CMS, on the other hand, maintained that according to RIPE’s records, Tele2 was indeed the controller of the IP addresses in question so must hand over the information as requested.

While the Patent and Market Court said that Tele2 didn’t object to the MaverickEye monitoring software in terms of the data it collects on file-sharers, it noted that CMS had failed to initiate an investigation in respect of the IP addresses allegedly not belonging to Tele2.

“CMS has not invoked any investigation showing how the identification of the IP addresses in question is made in this case or who at Maverickeye UG was responsible for this,” the Court writes.

“Nor did CMS use the opportunity to hear representatives of Tele2 or others with Tele2 in mind to discover if the company has access to any of the current IP addresses and, if so, which.”

Considering the above, the Court notes that Tele2’s statement, that it doesn’t have access to the data, must stand.

“In these circumstances, CMS, against Tele2’s appeal, has not shown that Tele2 holds the information requested by the disclosure order. CMS’ application for a disclosure order should therefore be rejected,” the Court concludes.

The decision cannot be appealed so Copyright Management Services won’t get its hands on the personal details of the people behind the IP addresses, at least through this process.

The decision (Swedish, pdf)

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.