111–120 of 253 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To me that’s a diversification away from 8.8.8.8. I am absolutely not criticising google’s DNS, it’s a useful service. But I am happy to get more choice.
There's also Quad9 that I saw in an article earlier (not sure if it was on HN).
This is awesome to hear, and for all of the criticism Cloudflare has gotten in the past, they have spoken loudly against censorship, not just for people they like, but those they dislike as well. I'd much rather point my DNS at them than Google, an ad company where tracking is the whole business model.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Level 3's resolvers will return fake NXDOMAIN responses that redirect to searchguide.level3.com.
I thought NXDOMAIN responses indicated that the domain doesn't exist and there wasn't a way to actually direct the user anywhere. Your resolver could of course lie and return an IP instead of NXDOMAIN however. Perhaps I'm wrong.
# dig +short this-should-be-a-nxdomain.com @4.2.2.2
198.105.254.11
104.239.213.7
# dig +short why-does-this-resolve.example.com @4.2.2.2
198.105.254.11
104.239.213.7
Wonder how much it cost Cloudflare to buy 1.1.1.0/8 from China Telecom...
Where did you get China Telecom from? The IANA released 1.0.0.0/8 to APNIC in 2010 and 1.1.1.0/24 was assigned to APNIC-LABS. The IRR Netname is actually still APNIC-LABS too. See: https://stat.ripe.net/1.1.1.1#tabId=at-a-glance
This is consistent with information on the page.
> 1.1.1.1 is a partnership between Cloudflare and APNIC.
Well crap. I was used to going to 1.1.1.1 on my cellphone when on wireless APs that tried to redirect you an agreement page. Now there is a valid cert/website at that address. Guess I'll have to pick a new one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
to me thats almost the exception that proves the rule. if someone tells me they have a 100% SLA I write them off as a liar, but tell me you have a 99.995% SLA and have only ever had this one exception and here's why, that builds much more trust with me.
Your reasoning is like saying "the canary only disappeared once, and knowing that it can indeed disappear bolsters my confidence in it now that it has returned." It's plainly wrong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule
If you expect that the SLA has very likely been violated at some point, hearing that it has at some point means that the statement confirms to what you already believe to be true given your existing knowledge. That doesn't mean the statement is true, but since it's not obviously conflicting with what you already believe to be true, it at least allows you to believe it is not immediately false.
Instead of thinking about it increasing the likelihood of being entirely true, think about it as decreasing the likelihood it's entirely false. Depending on your point of view that may not be much, but it's something.
The concerning thing about this is that internet is increasingly dependent on Cloudflare, making it a single point of failure and exploitation. Somehow, people are not talking much about it, but a significant amount of sites have opted in for Cloudflare proxying, allowing it to see the traffic in plain text, while the visitors are made to believe that the connection is secure. Similarly, users will now use their fast…
What about akamai? They are a much larger CDN (no one talks about it on HN because they are not a startup). I agree with your assertion that it will become a single point of failure with many web properties but also I think that HN has a sort of filter bubble on startups (for obvious reasons) and I'm not sure cloudflare is as big as people make it out to be. Also, Google has 8.8.8.8 which could be for the same thing…
I think it's simply that a lot more people have used Cloudflare because it has a free plan, whereas Akamai is expensive in comparison.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not up to the website operator. If Cloudflare blocks TOR or annoys them with Captchas it's Cloudflares problem.
nope -- as stated, up to the website owner. They can whitelist Tor if they'd like to. Entirely the website owner's decision to make.
The concerning thing about this is that internet is increasingly dependent on Cloudflare, making it a single point of failure and exploitation. Somehow, people are not talking much about it, but a significant amount of sites have opted in for Cloudflare proxying, allowing it to see the traffic in plain text, while the visitors are made to believe that the connection is secure. Similarly, users will now use their fast…
Cloudflare gets a lot of press and is doing great things; I’m not concerned about them being a single point of failure on the internet.
The number of sites on Cloudflare is a pretty small fraction of the internet as a whole.