Self hosting wasn’t popular nomenclature back then, but it was common for people to host web and mail on at home on DSL or even dial-up (ISDN or even analog if you were bold) 20-30 years ago.
I don't think you are missing anything. There's zero actually traceable evidence in this report.
Where are the web server access logs with source IP addresses and timestamps?
That's the kind of evidence that is needed to go to a provider's abuse department or sue to unmask the user behind a given IP, not attacker controlled (and falsifiable) strings.
I think this or similar accountability measures is where we'll need to end up with this kind of technology. It's too useful for catching vehicle theft rings and similar kinds of highly disruptive criminal networks to abandon the technology entirely.
LOVEINT has been a thing for as long as electronic surveillance has existed. We fire and/or prosecute people for it. We didn't turn out back on those capabilities.
I'd like to see someone using systems not available to the general public to to look up info on people without a legitimate purpose be treated as a kind of aggravated stalking.
Government employees should be held to a higher standard because they are in a position of public trust, but TBH people at companies like Google, Meta, Verizon, Comcast abusing internal tools for this should be similarly held accountable because they have access to resources far beyond e.g. one hobbyist logging TPMS IDs on passing vehicles.
Fair point, we don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, however I am fearful of a surveillance state. These trust issues seem to be stacking up, so I think statutory transparency is necessary.
