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

571–580 of 1001 posts

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#571

Post by convery »

rhinoceraptor wrote: post #245
throwawayacc2 wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transparency in a society is extremely important. It is a fundamental right to gather and publish information bringing to the publics attention harmful, disturbing and potentially illegal behavior. What principled political speech should be protected you ask? My answer is investigative journalism. If you believe investigative journalism should exist and plays an important function in society, you should have no probl…

Harassing, doxxing, and swatting random people on social media is not investigative journalism.

Guess we should take down traditional media as well then when they dox LibsOfTiktok and other creators so that the Twitter mob can harass and SWAT them, since they can't hide behind 'journalism'. Or does it only apply to the bad guys?

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#572

Post by bakugo »

nightpool wrote: post #557
bakugo wrote: post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cloudflare is not a public service, Isn't it, though? I see people are still desperately clinging to this "websites aren't public services" narrative but as the years go by it's becoming increasingly clear that it just isn't entirely true. The whole logic behind the "it's a private space/service so they can deny service to whoever they want" argument is that, if a user is denied service, they can seek service from…

> If you are denied service by cloudflare, you can't just go to another cloudflare down the street ... Why not? Fastly, AWS, CDN77, Google, etc all still exist.

Which of those provide a similar feature set to cloudflare for the same price?

Even ignoring the fact that none of them have a free plan, they all cost significantly more than cloudflare's base paid plan and almost certainly provide less. I can't even see Fastly's prices without signing up.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#573

Post by llbeansandrice »

sieabahlpark wrote: post #484
FrecklySunbeam wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He’s talking about transgender people, not priests

That's my point, Twitter has the same content about priests. What's the big deal, no one is in a tizzy about Twitter hosting that content.

Perhaps the context where priests are part of an international organization that has paid off and silenced victims and covered for the priests for decades while the concern about transgender folks being groomers is all bullshit?

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#574

Post by bakugo »

tambourine_man wrote: post #563
bakugo wrote: post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cloudflare is not a public service, Isn't it, though? I see people are still desperately clinging to this "websites aren't public services" narrative but as the years go by it's becoming increasingly clear that it just isn't entirely true. The whole logic behind the "it's a private space/service so they can deny service to whoever they want" argument is that, if a user is denied service, they can seek service from…

> Isn't it, though? Nope. Do we elect the board? Do they charge mandatory taxes in the currency only they can emit and will they have an armed force arest you if you don't pay? > But this isn't really the case in the modern web because you often don't have alternatives. Facebook and Google really are a monopoly in the West and that's a problem with must deal with. Cloudflare, thankfully, is far from being a monopoly…

I'm not speaking in a strictly legal sense. Because this isn't a strictly legal issue.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#575

Post by ladyattis »

Cyberdog wrote: post #465
ladyattis wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's nothing like the evangelicals by any stretch of the imagination. The fact of the matter is that Kiwi Farms is a cesspit full of people who revel in obsessing over people and then harassing them not only at their jobs but even through their private communications (phone numbers, personal email addresses, etc). How you react if dozens of people just started calling you at all hours because you're trans and are vis…

It's nothing like the SJWs by any stretch of the imagination. The fact of the matter is that Reddit/ResetERA/Twitter/DailyKos is a cesspit full of people who revel in obsessing over people and then harassing them not only at their jobs but even through their private communications (phone numbers, personal email addresses, etc). How you react if dozens of people just started calling you at all hours because you're Chr…

Show me how SJWs are going around with PII like your social security number, bank account number, passwords to social media accounts, and other sensitive data? Hint, no one that's a supposed SJW has ever done this on a large scale whereas Kiwi Farms users have and do.

>Yes, I remember the "Moral Majority" era. I remember the religious right, the fundies, the evangelicals, and the grasp they had on speech.

They still do, where you been? In cryo?

>I remember how they tried to ban porn in the late '90s and the courts had to smack it down.

Again, where have you been? Max Hardcore was sentenced for 4 years in prison (I think he got out sooner but still). And that was around the early 2000s. The fact you ignore that even the current government treats even OnlyFans like content creators as the same as sex traffickers (see EFF's FOSTA articles) is amusing to me.

> And I saw how the left has taken over institutional power since then, still crying about victimhood status while holding government majorities, running education and the media, and so on.

Exactly where has this happened? The left does not exist in the United States. The CIA knocked us out during the 60s (COINTELPRO). The fact you seem to not know this means you're probably under 35, so I'm not sure I should bother discussing this with you.

>It looks like the pendulum has started swinging back in recent years.

It never swung. We've still a solidly right wing neoliberal society. Just because you might see a gay couple kiss each other's cheeks and hold hands on prime time TV don't mean we're some kind of social democracy or a socialist state.

>The left made hay from these opportunities and the right has been watching.

Again, what Left? Don't say the Democrats who literally have millionaires among their ranks like most of the currently seated party members (Pelosi has a net worth in the tens of millions) and have many of the most well known capital owning members of society on their quick dial.

It baffles me how someone like you can exist when history of the United States is well documented for the last century but all you seem to say is talking points from Mises.org or some other right wing claptrap. And you even think DailyKos is far left which amuses me. Wake me up when DailyKos and company support the abolition of intellectual property like an anarchist does (hint: I'm a mutualist anarchist).

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#576

Post by newman314 »

colechristensen wrote: post #521
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 just don't want to live in a world where society is governed and censored by big corporations. Wanting them to do so to further my worldview invites others to further the worldview of people I oppose. Leave the governing to the government, especially when it comes to systems with very broad usages (social networks, internet infrastructure, etc.)

This reeks of "both-siding" which is insanely frustrating for me. Look, I get opening a can of worms and "stay out of my business" but at the same time, we need to be able as a society be able to and be unafraid to say when things are clearly bad.

"Nazism is bad" EOM

That wasn't so hard, was it?

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#577

Post by Melatonic »

tambourine_man wrote: post #464
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…

Cloudflare is not a public service, the comparison with firefighters is not apt. I’ve been seeing this confusion more and more recently, probably because of the size and omnipresence of corporations. I don’t know if this confusion is deliberate to justify certain acts or simply ignorance, but the distinction has to be emphasized. Corporations and public services are completely different beasts, with different legisla…

I think this brings up an important topic though that we need to grapple with as a society - at what point do we recognize that we NEED public services related to the internet?

Something similar to basic Cloudflare but run as a public service by the government that is free to all might be a good thing to have. If there are majorly amoral actors that use it we should be going after them for their crimes (from a legal sense) which other parts of the government can of course aid with.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#578

Post by tedivm »

schleck8 wrote: post #566
tedivm wrote: post #556

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cloudflare has always hidden behind this stance as a way to justify doing awful things. When I worked at Malwarebytes we had regular issues with malware being hosted on Cloudflare. Now I don't mean like "hey download this file so you can learn"- that kind of thing we fully supported. I mean that these files were being explicitly used in drive by exploit attacks- if a user with a vulnerable browser went to the wrong w…

This entire 'freedom of speech' absolutism bullshit is so incoherent. They host and protect a website only dedicated to muzzling people the userbase disagrees with...

Ironically the last time I really criticized them one of their higher up security people (who no longer works there) started to digitally stalk me. This guy followed all of my accounts everywhere and went out of his way to troll me.

He was employed on their security time. I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out a ton of their staff were kiwifarm users.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#579

Post by colechristensen »

newman314 wrote: post #576
colechristensen wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don't want to live in a world where society is governed and censored by big corporations. Wanting them to do so to further my worldview invites others to further the worldview of people I oppose. Leave the governing to the government, especially when it comes to systems with very broad usages (social networks, internet infrastructure, etc.)

This reeks of "both-siding" which is insanely frustrating for me. Look, I get opening a can of worms and "stay out of my business" but at the same time, we need to be able as a society be able to and be unafraid to say when things are clearly bad. "Nazism is bad" EOM That wasn't so hard, was it?

It is not "both siding".

I do not want corporations acting as government regardless of whose side they are on.

I do not want to normalize or encourage such regulation by corporation.

If some behavior is so bad, advocate for a law against it or for the enforcement of that law.

If it is not so bad, let it exist even if you don't like it.

The whole thing about rule by the people is that having individuals or small groups that get to arbitrarily make rules and enforce them is bad. Monarchy and despotism is bad, whether or not you like what they're doing.

Despotism by corporation is just as bad and shouldn't be encouraged. It's not different because you're trying to get them to arbitrarily create rules that agree with you.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#580

Post by mojzu »

colechristensen wrote: post #552
phillipcarter wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I just don't want to live in a world where society is governed and censored by big corporations. You already do. And that's actually a good thing . It means that in free societies like the USA, these companies are free to choose to do (or not do) business with whomever they choose. They are not free from the market reacting to those decisions, though.

Which is effectively mob rule, or fear-of-mob-rule rule. I don't want dominating corporations to be run by people afraid of offending a vocal minority.

I understand your point and largely agree with the idea that corporations shouldn't become de-facto governments with regard to morality/free-speech/etc. However I think it's important to acknowledge that there's a really difficult problem to solve here with regards to spam, astroturfing and harassment/trolling (if not more areas) where allowing everything that is technically legal would make most online spaces unbearable to participate in for the vast majority of people (e.g. 4chan and its ilk). And the line between moderating those things and censorship is incredibly blurry
Post reply on HN