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

281–290 of 1001 posts

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#281

Post by sophacles »

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…

DDoS attacks don't just hurt the target of the attack. If any link on the path to the target is overwhelmed by the attack traffic, all users of that link are affected. Large attacks are hundreds of Gbps - a datacenter with 100Gbps of internet connectivity would be effectively offline. A datacenter with that much connectivity will likely host more than one site.

I know you aren't advocating that other sites be taken down, but that is the effect of allowing DDoS against a site. Perhaps you don't mind collateral damage but it should be acknowledged as a consequence of your suggestion.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#282

Post by throwrqX »

sealeck wrote: post #190
weberer wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And let's be real. DDoS attacks are acts of digital terrorism. They're attacking infrastructure due to political motives. These people who want to revoke DDoS protection for groups they don't like are essentially promoting terrorism. Why else would they fight so hard to remove DDoS protection, if not because they simply want those attacks to succeed?

> They're attacking infrastructure due to political motives. They're attacking KiwiFarms for their agenda of trying to drive people to commit suicide.

Some users of KiwiFarms may have the agenda of wanting to drive people to commit suicide, you seem to be accusing the website as a whole of a) having an agenda and b) that agenda being to drive people to kill themselves

What evidence is there for this? I haven't kept up with the website recently, is Null telling people to harass people to death?

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#283

Post by creeble »

Borgz wrote: post #266
creeble wrote: post #214

>We believe cyberattacks, in any form, should be relegated to the dustbin of history. Unless, of course, you are an _enabler_ of such attacks. This is where CF's hypocrisy shines through. instant-stresser.com str3ssed.co freestresser.co metastresser.com (dozens more) These are all sites hosted with CF DNS, who provide services that are literally the opposite of free speech -- they are in the business of _suppressing…

This is very interesting, thanks for posting. According to completedns.com, instant-stresser.com has been using Cloudflare on and off for almost 8 years, and continuously for the last 3 years. It's also the 2nd result on Google for searching "free stresser". It seems impossible that this site hasn't been reported to Cloudflare by now, indicating that they have made the decision to continue protecting it. Very bad. I…

Well, maybe this site will help:

ddosforhire.net

They're a lovely recommendation/review site that lists a few dozen DDoS-for-hire sites. Take a random look at who hosts the individual sites' DNS.

Their business is fundamentally a shake-down racket, disguised as a free-speech defender.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#284

Post by rvz »

3sGPqEu59EGDFUn wrote: post #234
chc wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The group they're trying to target here is a terrorist group. Not even in a metaphorical sense. It's people who try to harass random transgender people to the point of suicide or murder.

If they are a terrorist group (or otherwise doing something "wrong"), then the appropriate means to deal with that is courts and law enforcement, not a CDN.

They're right you know, report them to the authorities. Not to an entity like Cloudflare.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#285

Post by tlonny »

chc wrote: post #263
mmmpop wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

That was not my definition. Kiwi Farms will post their target's private info, the private info of everyone their target knows, send death threats to their target and their family, report false crimes to try and get SWAT teams to kill their target, etc. Ben Shapiro doesn't seem like a good person and I suspect he is probably sympathetic to many terrorists, but he is not himself a terrorist as far as I know.

What's your source on the SWAT-ing + death threats originating from Kiwi Farms?

My understanding of that website is that it is moderated based on the philosophy of "look, don't touch". Your statement runs contrary to this...

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#286

Post by causi »

throwayyy479087 wrote: post #35

Never thought I'd see the Left trying to weaponize corporations to suppress speech they dislike. Reminds me a LOT of Evangelicals in the 2000s - I know that comparison has been made frequently but that's the last group that made a serious censorship push. I wonder how all of this will end? I support CloudFlare here - they should act as a utility, not as an arbiter of content. This ends poorly and one day will bite th…

Never thought I'd see the Left trying to weaponize corporations to suppress speech they dislike.

It is a terrible fact of human psychology that being abused in a particular manner make you much more likely to abuse others in the same manner, not less.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#287

Post by fsociety »

jackson1442 wrote: post #32

They talk a lot about "human rights" in this post. At what point does someone's right to personal safety and privacy trump another person's right to host whatever they want on the internet?

Only when it makes them more money than claiming to be a “bastion of free speech”.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#288

Post by computerfriend »

This is a cycle. Some day, fascists will attack Cloudflare for protecting a site that hosts e.g. the home addresses of supreme court judges that ruled in favour of reducing civil liberties. Everyone criticising Cloudflare now had better remember it when the time comes and they realise that they don't actually care about frameworks and values, only about winning.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#289

Post by ancarda »

cowtools wrote: post #141
weberer wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And let's be real. DDoS attacks are acts of digital terrorism. They're attacking infrastructure due to political motives. These people who want to revoke DDoS protection for groups they don't like are essentially promoting terrorism. Why else would they fight so hard to remove DDoS protection, if not because they simply want those attacks to succeed?

DDoS is a product of an inherent weakness of the internet infrastructure, namely BGP. Cloudflare "solves" this by acting as a middleman, and charging for their service. I don't know if I would describe a DDoS attack as "digital terrorism", but it is annoying and hard to stop on an individual level because of the design of the internet.

Isn't the issue more with how we implemented IP than BGP? AFAIK, DDoS attacks would be far less effective if every ISP implemented BCP 38.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#290

Post by 3fcc8rQD8qPJhcd »

Really disappointed to learn that Cloudflare contributes disproportionately to hate speech and misinformation

https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/ICWSM/article/view/19292/1906...

Seems like KF is not an isolated incident but a trend which has been established for some years now

Post reply on HN