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

Cloudflare loses 22% of its domains in Freenom .tk shutdown

netcraft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 236 posts

Re: Cloudflare loses 22% of its domains in Freenom .tk shutdown

#191

Post by mindslight »

fragmede wrote: post #168
umbra07 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know right! I feel so young. there are people on this site that were born in the previous millennium! :O

oof. We didn't even have the Internet, nevermind Google. Kids these days will never even know what it was like pre ChatGPT. programming and even just computers alone was hard back in the day.

Hard?! You'd generally have one or two medium size books that documented the whole environment including corner cases, very few or no third party libraries, no frameworks, no autoupdates, just programmers living their best lives. If anything ChatGPT is filling the hole created by poorly documented "open source" churn.

Re: Cloudflare loses 22% of its domains in Freenom .tk shutdown

#193

Post by moralestapia »

refulgentis wrote: post #186
creatonez wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If .tk was such a clear signal for abuse, isn't it a bad thing that signal no longer exists? I'd rather ICANN finally introduce .free, give a few years to alert everyone, and those developing spam filters can treat it how they want.

> If .tk was such a clear signal for abuse, isn't it a bad thing that signal no longer exists? No, this is (obviously) contrarianism for contrarianisms sake. It's good when entities facilitating crime stop facilitating it. No debate necessary. Additionally, it's completely unclear what you mean by your proposal.

A TLD per se is not a facilitator for crime.

Re: Cloudflare loses 22% of its domains in Freenom .tk shutdown

#194

Post by LinuxBender »

eszed wrote: post #7
chomp wrote: post #4

Thank god, .tk caused so many headaches for us, truly a cesspit of a tld. The rate of fraud and abuse on our platform was staggeringly high from it, it was close 99%.

It would follow that Cloudflare is tacitly admitting they have been / are hosting a large number of domains used for fraud and abuse. That surprises me, given the time and effort they spend mitigating fraud and abuse. Anyone care to explain what I'm missing?

I believe their primary focus is protecting the customers / proxied web servers, not the clients of said site. I suspect if one day the free accounts on CF went away there again we would lose a lot of scam sites assuming they don't accept Monero or similar and like .tk we would also lose some cool sites.

Re: Cloudflare loses 22% of its domains in Freenom .tk shutdown

#195

Post by mastazi »

Is it safe to assume that these were overwhelmingly on Cloudflare's free tier? I don't expect that someone who gets a domain for free is going to pay for hosting; if that's the case I don't see this as a big loss for Cloudflare, or am I missing something?

Re: Cloudflare loses 22% of its domains in Freenom .tk shutdown

#197

Post by Zpalmtree »

KomoD wrote: post #29
gadders wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've definitely refused to help far right sites and sites like Kiwi Farms.

Yeah, because of the pressure after it all blew up. They even said in their own blog post that it was an "extraordinary" decision and did not believe terminating them was appropriate. Kiwi Farms used their services for at least 6 years before anything happened.

it wasn't.

Re: Cloudflare loses 22% of its domains in Freenom .tk shutdown

#198

Post by internetter »

diggan wrote: post #142
internetter wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if this is about not-illegal-but-objectionable content, I'm actually glad that as an infrastructure company, they're choosing to not get into the business of content moderation. Agreed. There's one other subset you didn't mention: "Clearly illegal but not yet handled in the court of law". Cloudflare again has a pretty hardline stance that "the courts need to come to us and force us to take it down"

> Clearly illegal but not yet handled in the court of law Isn't that somewhat of an oxymoron? What are some examples of something that is against the law but not handled by the courts of law?

I mean not handled yet. Like say I'm hosting pirated content. Yes it's illegal, but it's not Cloudflare's place to say that.

Re: Cloudflare loses 22% of its domains in Freenom .tk shutdown

#199

Post by mardifoufs »

overstay8930 wrote: post #18

The people complaining that Cloudflare hosts these criminals would be the first ones complaining that Cloudflare has too much power when taking down websites it doesn’t like. You can’t win with these people, I personally think this is the best outcome and shows our systems work (albeit slowly). Sure it took a while, but now there doesn’t have to be a precedent of Cloudflare acting as the internet police more than it…

Well CloudFlare already does exactly that. It already set the precedent you are referring to. That's why it feels odd that they don't shut down literal criminals too. They have no issues with shutting down stuff, but they are famously very lax when it comes to actual criminal stuff. I'm not trying to say that they were wrong or right for engaging in content policing, what I'm saying is that the precedent isn't new.

Re: Cloudflare loses 22% of its domains in Freenom .tk shutdown

#200

Post by philsnow »

lolinder wrote: post #26
overstay8930 wrote: post #18

The people complaining that Cloudflare hosts these criminals would be the first ones complaining that Cloudflare has too much power when taking down websites it doesn’t like. You can’t win with these people, I personally think this is the best outcome and shows our systems work (albeit slowly). Sure it took a while, but now there doesn’t have to be a precedent of Cloudflare acting as the internet police more than it…

> You can’t win with these people This is the classic fallacy of assuming that because you see comments of type A and comments of type B on the same forum that means they're the same people. They're usually not. A more accurate way to phrase this is "you can't win with ... people". Whatever you do will end up ticking off some subset of the population.

There’s a similar problem I encounter from time to time: when I self-identify as “conservative” and express opinion C, many people assume I also hold opinions D, E, and F, because “that’s how all conservatives are”.

There are multitudes in every group.

Post reply on HN