Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach • Hacker News Board

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#371

Post by kmlx » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 5:09 PM UTC

a2128 wrote: post #347

In my experience Cloudflare goes too far with offering their security services to everyone. There is a website that's constantly ripping and stealing artistic content from a community I used to be part of. They have an automated process for ripping and reuploading content not meant to be downloadable from small independent artists in this community without informing the artist, obtaining permission or anything. Outra…

> Over the course of a year I have sent several abuse reports about this website to Cloudflare and have never heard back.

why would you send abuse reports to cloudflare about a website that hosts copyrighted material? why not send the reports to the website itself? and if that website ignores them then there are other ways to get that content offline, no?

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#372

Post by EdiX » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 5:09 PM UTC

sealeck wrote: post #235

throwawayacc2 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

> Do you believe investigative journalism has a place in our society? Yes and KiwiFarms is not investigative journalism - they're harrassing and doxxing private individuals with clearly personal malicious intent. The key part of investigative journalism is the "investigative", which there is no evidence of on KiwiFarm's part. No attempts to hold power to account, to expose serious breaches of power - just a horrid, a…

Do you think CNN should be driven off the internet? Back in 2017 they threatened and harassed an anonymous reddit user into apologizing for making a harmless gif [1]. How is CNN better than kiwifarms?

[1] https://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/04/politics/kfile-reddit-use...

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#373

Post by NoraCodes » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 5:09 PM UTC

It's very telling that this post does not mention Cloudflare dropping switter, a social media site by and for sex workers which was, at the time, not violating any laws. They regret dropping self-described Nazis but not legal sex work? Cloudflare has an ideological agenda which they are masking behind supposed neutrality.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#374

Post by jimbob45 » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 5:09 PM UTC

SrslyJosh wrote: post #258

throwawayacc2 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

If you believed that KF was performing "investigative journalism", you wouldn't be posting this with a throwaway.

"throwawayacc2" is an account well over a year old with 400+ karma. His name does not appear to be correlated with his actual account activity.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#375

Post by ta1235414335 » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 5:09 PM UTC

FrecklySunbeam wrote: post #309

throwrqX wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Official statement from KF on Aug 26th: > What I fear more than losing my site, being sued, or dealing with police is living in a world where fat eunuchs can groom little boys into castrating themselves and nobody is allowed to say anything about it. Wow very neutral site with no agenda here

The website does have an agenda of not being shut down, yes, this is why it is so intent on following US laws and cooperates with US authorities. The person trying to shut it down was being described in the terms above, so its not surprising this is the characterization being used. The website defends free expression under US law, i suppose that also is an agenda.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#376

Post by kmlx » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 5:10 PM UTC

striking wrote: post #155

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…

Unfortunately, it's extremely hard to prove allegations of abuse by skilled actors that know how to use their tools (tools that are really easy to use). KF's lead admin states it plainly: use a VPN, because KF complies with subpoenas. If folks were committing high-end acts of terrorism against elected officials regularly, the baddies might not be safe. But if you're a trans streamer with a small following, if the fol…

> Unfortunately, it's extremely hard to prove allegations of abuse by skilled actors that know how to use their tools (tools that are really easy to use).

so the problem is actually somewhere else.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#377

Post by rndgermandude » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 5:10 PM UTC

FrecklySunbeam wrote: post #309

throwrqX wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Official statement from KF on Aug 26th: > What I fear more than losing my site, being sued, or dealing with police is living in a world where fat eunuchs can groom little boys into castrating themselves and nobody is allowed to say anything about it. Wow very neutral site with no agenda here

They do have an agenda for sure. That wasn't the question, tho. The question was whether they condone or even encourage their users to target people with the goal of driving those people into suicide?

This might be well the case. I am not one of their users nor am I educated in this matter, so I'd like to know too. When somebody makes this claim, as has been made multiple times in the threads here, with demands to therefore remove kikifarms from the internet, I think it is reasonable to ask for at least some evidence of such a claim.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#378

Post by NoraCodes » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 5:11 PM UTC

jackson1442 wrote: post #294

judge2020 wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their point for not respecting verdicts is: > Unfortunately, these cases are becoming more common where largely copyright holders are attempting to get a ruling in one jurisdiction and have it apply worldwide to terminate core Internet technology services and effectively wipe content offline. Again, we believe this is a dangerous precedent to set, placing the control of what content is allowed online in the hands of…

How can we leave something for the courts to decide while at the same time dismissing all courts other than the US? Especially when you consider neither the hosting provider of the site in question, nor the target of this wave of harassment are from the US.

Yep, I think this is a critical point. People in this thread keep saying things like, "If KiwiFarms is doing illegal things, prosecute them!" while ignoring that it's Cloudflare and other infrastructure providers that enable them to do those things across borders.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#379

Post by nradov » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 5:11 PM UTC

Pxtl wrote: post #219

fjordelectro wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like something for the courts to handle and not cloudflare. https://casetext.com/case/scott-v-moon-1

You could say that about a lot of things that are normally covered by abuse policies. For example, we expect hosts to remove content that violate copyright, why is copyright more worthy of protection at the corporate level than defamation?

The DMCA specifically requires hosts to remove content upon an allegation of copyright infringement. There is no law requiring hosts to remove defamatory content (without a specific court order). Congress has deemed copyright protection more worthy of protection at the corporate level than defamation. If you are unhappy with that situation then you should contact your members of Congress.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#380

Post by throwrqX » Wed, Aug 31, 2022, 5:11 PM UTC

DoctorOW wrote: post #334

throwrqX wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

> is Null telling people to harass people to death? I'll treat you as though you're honest, but I might point out this is a dishonest person's favorite argument. Here's the common answer in Twitter thread form: https://twitter.com/IamRageSparkle/status/128089253502461952...

An argument should be able to stand on its own regardless of which people believe in it or use it.

As for the Twitter thread I've heard plenty of similar arguments before but I'm not a particularly big believer in them. Lots of people have very awful company (take for example Hollywood actors associating with predators) but that doesn't particularly mean that they are promoting or in agreement with the actions of their company.