I do wonder at their methods though, and if they involved ‘deep-packet inspection’ at the ISP side. Otherwise, blocking your browser from sending useragent, referring page and system information (as well as all scripts and cookies) and going in through an onion-skin proxy (or even using a custom rendering engine) would mean that even the real deal may get off scot-free. This would trap the unwary and internet neophytes, but it’s the clever criminals we need to get to. Be they sex-offenders, fraudsters, pirates or hackers…and Plod playing Tom Clancy probably isn’t the way to do it unless their own black/grey-hat hacking skills are mighty.

A laudable, if misguided, effort from the authorities then. If it wasn’t a completely secret operation (avoiding leaks from peripherally involved staff, and a fast operation over a short time-scale on secure servers) then the opportunities for misuse were too high for comfort and any legitimate convictions gained likely tainted as a result. The operation should have been as clean as a whistle, all the way down the line from genesis to execution. Imagine someone with the text of the hyperlink in their possession rick-rolling an enemy or rival into a click that they think goes elsewhere. Once ISP records had been subpoenaed at trial (or pre-trial, if that’s possible - I don’t think Matlock covered this) and the rick-roll discovered, then it would be too late for the defendant to save their reputation, family life or worse.

I hope the FBI did use an escalating involvement technique via an already suspect (but not obviously paedophilia-related - say extreme pornography, for instance) website or forum, else their hard work will go to waste. No matter the validity of the methods involved.