Otoh, 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.
[dead]
Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
111–120 of 351 posts
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#112While I fully support this instance, I wonder what else Cloudflare has set to "Censored", apart for the obvious CSAM
1.1.1.2 is their malware-blocking DNS, and 1.1.1.3 is their parental-controls DNS. If you want an unfiltered DNS, use 1.1.1.1 - which resolves archive.today just fine, although archive.today itself refuses to work on Cloudlfare DNS.
I have no idea why anyone would use Cloudflare DNS, much less trust their more filtered versions.
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I would it also better to a bit redact names and details mentioned in the original article in hindsight, I hardly find real defamation. I guess you want to provide random unproven evidence if someone is target of various foreign law enforcement and commercial sites. In the article they even call for donations to archive.today . As far as I read the tone of the post is full of admiration. Funny thing is that IMH…
Defamation? No. Doxing? Yes. It's clear that the person running archive.today does not actively publicize their identity. > As far as I read the tone of the post is full of admiration Exactly like an unhinged fan stalking a celebrity.
Totally agreed. Thanks for raising awareness.
Thinking about it, I think we might need better platform rules, maybe even regulations on this. There seems to be pretty much no line of defense, which might explain the rather desperate DoS. If you take anonymity as a right, discussion like ours here on HN are dangerous as well, as they easily make otherwise difficult to find knowledge easily visible. So while a single fan page might go unnoticed, in case of doxing amplification is also a problem. Just my spontaneous thought.
Edit: one afterthought. The story about hacking together a response to the GDPR takedown request quoting press rights and freedom of speech using an LLM shows actually the deeper problem. Actually rights come with obligations (at least ethical ones). At least in Europe press standards are typically rather aware of doxing risks. While actually celebraties also successfully use legal defenses, i still think the defenses for activist are weak balancing interest here (at least if you made something of public interest)
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#114[flagged]
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 1.1.1.2 is their malware-blocking DNS, and 1.1.1.3 is their parental-controls DNS. ... TIL, thank you. Time to go tweak my pi-hole server...
I'm just curious, given all the other options that respect your privacy and don't put data collection at the center of their business model, why do you use Cloudflare on your pi-hole?
Which options respect your privacy?
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
1.1.1.2 is their malware-blocking DNS, and 1.1.1.3 is their parental-controls DNS. If you want an unfiltered DNS, use 1.1.1.1 - which resolves archive.today just fine, although archive.today itself refuses to work on Cloudlfare DNS.
I have no idea why anyone would use Cloudflare DNS, much less trust their more filtered versions.
I use cloudflare DNS because it’s faster. But should I worry, having read your comment? What is the downside to using it? What would you recommend instead?
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#117Cloudflare dns has gone back and forth on whether it wants to resolve them since 2019. It’s taken that away and restored it again (intentionally? mistake?) at least four times. The c&c/botnet designation would seem to be new though.
> Cloudflare dns has gone back and forth. Just tells me they are an unreliable resolver. Instead of being a neutral web infra, they actively participate in political agendas and censor things they "think" is wrong.
1. As noted in prior comments, Cloudflare wasn’t blocking this site previously. The site operator chose to make their site unresolvable by Cloudflare.
2. 1.1.1.2, the resolver being discussed in this post, is explicitly Cloudflare’s malware-filtered DNS host. 1.1.1.1 does not filter this site.
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
I'm not sure how illegal copyright violations really are, given that all major tech companies are doing it. DDoS attacks, on the other hand, are pretty clear-cut.
I also think "but they also do that other crime" doesn't help their case.
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#119I 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…
All your comments are painting archive.today as an innocent victim in all this, but in addition to the DDoS, they have been caught modifying archived pages as well as sending actual threats to Patokallio [1] which in my opinion seem far worse than the "doxxing".
Just the fact alone that they modified archived pages has completely ruined their credibility, and over what? A blog post about them that (a) wasn't even an attack, it is mostly praising archive.today, and (b) doesn't reveal any true identities or information that isn't already easily accessible.
From my perspective at least, archive.today seems like the unhinged one, not Patokallio.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/02/wikipedia-bans-a...
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I'm not sure whether you're making a joke or confusing the two websites.