I still don't understand why would Google or Amazon care about this, and why it's against their ToS. Do they think that some of those states may block all kind of access to their IP blocks just because of some people using Signal?
Amazon threatens to suspend Signal's AWS account over censorship circumvention
11–20 of 519 posts
Re: Amazon threatens to suspend Signal's AWS account over censorship circumvention
#12Misleading headline? > Signal plans to make its traffic look like traffic from another site, (popularly known as “domain fronting”) by using a domain owned by Amazon -- Souq.com
I reckon with Amazon IPs being thrown indiscriminately in the bucket with Telegram they aren't keen to seeing a repeat of the same situation.
Re: Amazon threatens to suspend Signal's AWS account over censorship circumvention
#13What was it that convinced Google and Amazon to no longer allow this particular censorship evasion?
Re: Amazon threatens to suspend Signal's AWS account over censorship circumvention
#14Once all speech has moved to privately owned platforms, having the right to free speech will be effectively useless.
You have the right to read the linked article, why don't you exercise it?
Re: Amazon threatens to suspend Signal's AWS account over censorship circumvention
#15I still don't understand why would Google or Amazon care about this, and why it's against their ToS. Do they think that some of those states may block all kind of access to their IP blocks just because of some people using Signal?
> Do they think that some of those states may block all kind of access to their IP blocks just because of some people using Signal?
I think this is exactly the problem, yes.
Re: Amazon threatens to suspend Signal's AWS account over censorship circumvention
#16Misleading headline? > Signal plans to make its traffic look like traffic from another site, (popularly known as “domain fronting”) by using a domain owned by Amazon -- Souq.com
The part you're missing is:
... to third parties.
Re: Amazon threatens to suspend Signal's AWS account over censorship circumvention
#17I still don't understand why would Google or Amazon care about this, and why it's against their ToS. Do they think that some of those states may block all kind of access to their IP blocks just because of some people using Signal?
That's exactly what happened, so yes.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/04/in-ef...
Re: Amazon threatens to suspend Signal's AWS account over censorship circumvention
#18They're spoofing identity of non-consenting parties. The cause is noble, but it isn't what the headline would imply. Amazon isn't saying "You can't host encrypted services on our platform", they are saying "You can't use TLS and load balancing hacks to pretend to be us in oppresive countries".
And
>The idea behind domain fronting was that to block a single site, you’d have to block the rest of the internet as well. In the end, the rest of the internet didn’t like that plan.
That they interpret AWS and Google as "the rest of the Internet" is pretty sad, too.
Re: Amazon threatens to suspend Signal's AWS account over censorship circumvention
#19You should be using your own servers. Guess the lesson is learned now?
How would using their own servers solve any of the problems listed in the article? In fact, it would make what they want to do impossible.
Re: Amazon threatens to suspend Signal's AWS account over censorship circumvention
#20The HN post that alerted Amazon: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16868564