Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
You think DDoS (which is illegal btw) is okay as long as you don't like the target?
[flagged]
Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
71–80 of 351 posts
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#72Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#73Otoh, without archive.today a substantial % of HN posts would be unreadable for nearly all of the audience.
I doubt it.
You may have mixed it up with archive.org.
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Why? Because once the problematic content is removed it should no longer be blocked. >It's accurate It is neither a C&C server for a botnet, nor any other server related to a botnet. I would not call it accurate. >Nobody should ever use that site It has a good reputation for archiving sites, has stead the test of time, and doesn't censor pages like archive.org does allowing you to actually see the history of news ar…
It's not just problematic content, it's criminal behavior. And the site has a bad reputation for archival, given that the owner altered the content of archived articles.
>It's not just problematic content, it's criminal behavior.
How is that supposed to be a big deal when the one of core services archive.today provides is obviously illegal anyway?
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Okay, there's one filler post I missed. I'm sure it took a lot of time to write the 16739382nd post explaining what the various things on a boarding pass mean.
They have posted twice in four years. Once doing some digging into who runs archive today, and a second time to respond to a ddos attack. Writing about being ddos'd seems eminently reasonable. So if you elide that, you are talking about a single article in four years. It's genuinely nothing.
The purpose of a thing is what it does.
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Why? Because once the problematic content is removed it should no longer be blocked. >It's accurate It is neither a C&C server for a botnet, nor any other server related to a botnet. I would not call it accurate. >Nobody should ever use that site It has a good reputation for archiving sites, has stead the test of time, and doesn't censor pages like archive.org does allowing you to actually see the history of news ar…
The site started doctoring archived versions as part of the petty feud. That is, what was supposed to be a historical record, suddenly had content manipulated so as to feed into this fight[0]. There is no redemption. You want to be an archive, you keep it sacrosanct. Put an obvious hosting-site banner overlay if you must, but manipulating the archive is a red-line that was crossed. ...On 20 February 2026, English Wik…
While I disagree with that action I still trust the site as a reliable source. Redemption is possible. Maybe not for Wikipedia, but I don't care about that site and consider it rotten.
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Why? Because once the problematic content is removed it should no longer be blocked. >It's accurate It is neither a C&C server for a botnet, nor any other server related to a botnet. I would not call it accurate. >Nobody should ever use that site It has a good reputation for archiving sites, has stead the test of time, and doesn't censor pages like archive.org does allowing you to actually see the history of news ar…
It's not just problematic content, it's criminal behavior. And the site has a bad reputation for archival, given that the owner altered the content of archived articles.
The site commits copyright infringement by showing you content it doesn't have the rights for. This is not the kind of site to go on about morals for.
>the site has a bad reputation
Not compared to archive.org. archive.is has a much better track record.
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#78I think there are two angles to look at this. Yes, there’s the attack on the weblog. But there’s also pressure on archive.today, e.g. an FBI investigation [1] and some entity using fictitious CSAM allegations [2]. [1]: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/11/fbi-subpoena-tri... [2]: https://adguard-dns.io/en/blog/archive-today-adguard-dns-blo...
Jani Patokallio who runs gyrovague.com published a blog post attempting to dox the owner of archive.today.
Jani justifies his doxing as follows "I found it curious that we know so little about this widely-used service, so I dug into it" [1]
Archive.today on the other hand is a charitable archival project offered to the public for free. The operator of Archive.today risks significant legal liability, but still offers this service for free.
[1]: https://gyrovague.com/2026/02/01/archive-today-is-directing-...
It's weird to see people getting fixated on the DDoS, which is obviously far less nasty than actually attempting to dox someone. The only credible reason for Jani to publish something like this is if he desires to cause physical harm to the operator of archive.today
Or are we just looking at an unhinged fan stalking their favorite online celebrity?
People were critical of the Banksy piece, but this is much nastier. At least Banksy is a huge business, archive.today does not even make money.
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#79Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Should providing a public service absolve all sins?
So far, the only sin archive.today has been accused of is retaliating against a guy attempting to dox them.
That's a pretty small sin in my book. To be written off as wildly unsuccessful but entirely justified self defense.
DDoSing gyrovague.com is silly, not evil.
The content on gyrovague.com which targets archive.today is evil, plain and simple.