What the probing activity reveals about the apparatus¶

The external probing was methodical: routing anomalies consistent with path observation, traffic interception characteristic of mapping rather than attack, conducted over an extended period without disrupting services. In Ankh-Morpork terms, someone was quietly tracing which signals went where without knocking on the door.

They were announced anyway.

The apparatus detected and logged the probing, characterised its intent as reconnaissance rather than attack, identified the technical methods being used, and forwarded all of this to the undisclosed recipient as part of the general data flow. A system capable of characterising the intent of an external observer is one built by people who conduct such observations themselves and have thought carefully about how to recognise them in others. The MCLU notes the provenance implications.

The probers were not clients, had no relationship with the provider, accepted no terms of service, and were not informed their activity was being observed and reported. They are, nonetheless, in the data. The MCLU is considering what notification obligations, if any, exist in this direction. It is a novel legal question for Ankh-Morpork, and the MCLU has added it to the list of things we are pursuing through channels we invented for the purpose.