Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

blog.cloudflare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 1001 posts

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#161

Post by Borgz »

elefantastisch wrote: post #136
Borgz wrote: post #79

It's rather disappointing that Cloudflare's policy is to not host content that is "illegal, harmful, or violates the rights of others, including content that discloses sensitive personal information, incites or exploits violence against people or animals, or seeks to defraud the public", but they do not apply that same policy to content that they provide DDoS mitigation services for. I don't see why their policies sh…

They address this: > Giving everyone the ability to sign up for our services online also reflects our view that cyberattacks not only should not be used for silencing vulnerable groups, but are not the appropriate mechanism for addressing problematic content online. We believe cyberattacks, in any form, should be relegated to the dustbin of history.

My point is this: if there are certain types of content that they deem unacceptable to host, why do they deem it acceptable to protect?

I disagree that the paragraph you quoted is relevant to that. But if it is, then it doesn't seem good that their goal of eradicating cyberattacks is more important to them than actual human lives.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#162

Post by yanderekko »

pseudalopex wrote: post #133
yanderekko wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And? That doesn't make those sites pro-swatting unless they had no other legitimate reasons to allow this content, and as much as people hate doxxing it is clearly not only useful for swatting or other illegal activities.

> as much as people hate doxxing it is clearly not only useful for swatting or other illegal activities. What other use has come from posting home addresses on Kiwi Farms?

Home addresses can be used to find lots of other public records associated with an individual.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#163

Post by sealeck »

hecatoncheires wrote: post #144
sealeck wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not actually commendable to host content for white supremacists and transphobes. Free speech may be deserving of protection, but white supremacists using the internet to coordinate real-world activities (such as terrorist attacks) doesn't actually qualify as "free speech" deserving protection against "authoritarians and individuals wanting to rip each other down".

Quoted post unavailable.

> It actually is commendable because white people have a right to exist, and to mutually organize to advocate for themselves, same as any other racial identity.

This is clearly not what the Daily Stormer were doing - they were discussing ways to harm other ethnic groups, and deny them their "right to exist, and to mutually organize to advocate for themselves". The claim that "X group should be afforded their human rights" (effectively how your comment frames it) is completely different from "X's affordance of their human rights allows them the right to believe themselves superior to others and to act against them on that basis".

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#164

Post by causi »

yanderekko wrote: post #83
causi wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

8chan literally had sub boards dedicated to child pornography. Kiwi Farms is where people make fun of other people. They're really not comparable unless you believe "not being made fun of" is a human right.

> They're really not comparable unless you believe "not being made fun of" is a human right. This is meant to be sarcastic but a lot of people basically do believe this. Most arguments about "stochastic terrorism" would implicitly aim to devalue/censor any sort of speech that "punched down".

This is meant to be sarcastic but a lot of people basically do believe this

Indeed they do, and they're free to go on arresting their fellow citizens for teaching dogs offensive gestures. But Cloudflare is an American company, and they're under no obligation to enforce politeness on their customers.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#165

Post by sealeck »

aniforprez wrote: post #158
hecatoncheires wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

White supremacists are not fighting for the right of white people to exist or advocating for anything. They would just as easily readily throw a gay or trans white person under the bus. They are terrorist groups that fester through spreading conspiracies about other races and peoples and want nothing less than ethnic cleansing That said, it's commendable that Cloudflare hosts them while making sure to donate to an eq…

> That said, it's commendable that Cloudflare hosts them while making sure to donate to an equivalent cause to offset the grime.

I _think_ they are/were providing these services free of charge.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#167

Post by JYellensFuckboy »

driverdan wrote: post #24
mardifoufs wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

8chan had the whole mass shooter thing. Comparing the two websites is very hyperbolic.

KF actively pushes people to commit suicide. People have died because of them.

Is this in fact the case? Of course it is being claimed, but I always perceived that KF's nastiness was relatively self-contained, e.g. when someone encourages suicide, it's performative to other Farmers, rather than reaching out to a potential victim or their loved ones. All bark, no bite, and caged.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#168

Post by robert_foss »

systemvoltage wrote: post #153
yanderekko wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Free speech may be deserving of protection, but white supremacists using the internet to coordinate real-world activities (such as terrorist attacks) doesn't actually qualify as "free speech" deserving protection against "authoritarians and individuals wanting to rip each other down". Then I'm sure these activists will have no trouble moving proving their arguments in a courtroom, which is the proper space for such…

Agreed, we have a justice system based on what we agreed as a society. The rule of law. If you want to prohibit speech to white supremacists, fine, let’s pass a law and if it doesn’t hold constitutional muster, go ahead convince everyone to amend the constitution. But since our founding fathers made this process difficult on purpose, let’s take a different approach: that’s what social justice is. It is anti-democrati…

I do believe hate speech is illegal already.

Certainly online harassment leading to someone committing suicide is.

KF is a platform that facilitates these activities.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#170

Post by throwawayacc2 »

rhinoceraptor wrote: post #113
DoctorOW wrote: post #22

> Some argue that we should terminate these services to content we find reprehensible so that others can launch attacks to knock it offline. That is the equivalent argument in the physical world that the fire department shouldn't respond to fires in the homes of people who do not possess sufficient moral character. > For instance, when a site that opposed LGBTQ+ rights signed up for a paid version of DDoS mitigation…

I think one easy thing they could do, is stop hosting for forums dedicated to doxxing and harassing people, preferably before they inevitably bully their victims into suicide.

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN