[deleted]
I ran the worlds largest DDoS-for-Hire empire and Cloudflare helped
101–110 of 244 posts
Re: I ran the worlds largest DDoS-for-Hire empire and Cloudflare helped
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
> a forum that is a gathering point for a mob engaging in mass harassment, stalking, and SWATing I keep hearing this allegation but it seems to be supported only by a poorly sourced twitter thread[1] and some articles that dance around the issue. How do we know this, especially the swatting? And why isn't law enforcement stepping in? The operator is an American afaict. It's not like he's some bond villain living in a…
> And why isn't law enforcement stepping in? Because 1) they have limited resources and must prioritise and 2) America law enforcement seems to have a distinct lean towards the transphobic / homophobic / white supremacist / right-wing, etc. Just because something is not being actively policed does not mean it's not an actual crime (cf motorists running red lights for an easy example.)
Traffic violations are actually policed pretty closely because it's a source of revenue. High tech is employed to identify drivers, and even some shady tricks like shortening the yellow light. So it's not a good example.
Regardless, it's a public forum(?), there should be tons of evidence if they routinely instigate swattings.
Re: I ran the worlds largest DDoS-for-Hire empire and Cloudflare helped
#103The deplatforming logic is practical but pretty shaky as a long term strategy. Kiwifarms absolutely may have been a despicable place causing real harm to people. In that case, the police should initiate a request to take them down that Cloudflare or ISPs etc. are obligated to follow. The problem is the government is completely ineffective and regularly offloads their responsibility to platforms like Facebook, Cloudfl…
Yes, the U.S. Constitution protects free expression, so the U.S. government's hands are completely tied on this issue. Even if government officials personally think a site probably facilitates behavior that violates the law, actually taking a website offline, rather than targeting individuals for criminal charges only after they've violated the law, unless that website is owned and operated, perhaps, by an individual who has been found guilty of violating the law, is most likely unconstitutional. This is one of those, "private companies are forced to step up because the state's powers are limited," situations.
Re: I ran the worlds largest DDoS-for-Hire empire and Cloudflare helped
#104Maybe a better analogy is an energy provider: You don't expect them to turn off somebody's power because they are listening to the wrong kind of music. Energy companies are publicly traded companies as well, I don't see what difference this fact makes in the analogy and the argument. Policing is the police's job, not that of infrastructure and utility companies, precicely because that would bring a lot of hairy quest…
> You don't expect them to turn off somebody's power because they are listening to the wrong kind of music.
But you would expect them to turn off somebody's power if they were, e.g., using that power for a marijuana farm or torturing kittens with electrical shocks and standing outside their house shouting "I'M USING THIS ELECTRICITY FOR CRIMINAL MEANS, YOU KNOW".
Re: I ran the worlds largest DDoS-for-Hire empire and Cloudflare helped
#105> 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
So, to continue the analogy, we are reading the post by (ex-)arsonist?
Re: I ran the worlds largest DDoS-for-Hire empire and Cloudflare helped
#106So he ran a DDoS network that wasn't behind Cloudflare, but used Cloudflare to stop his website being DDoSed by competitors, and this means Cloudflare was helping him DDoS others? No, it means Cloudflare was helping keep his website up, in a neutral manner. In other words, exactly what Cloudflare have stated their policy is. Now if Cloudflare allowed him to run DDoS code on its Workers, then yes, that's Cloudflare he…
These defenses of Cloudflare's behavior are getting very silly. Is there anything that Cloudflare could protect that you wouldn't be OK with? Because a DDoS-for-hire service is illegal, unethical, and contradictory of Cloudflare's stance that "cyberattacks, in any form, should be relegated to the dustbin of history."[1] Most importantly, it should be obvious to anyone that a company that has a purported goal of prote…
I don't really give two hoots about Cloudflare, I just don't like false statements, like when "Cloudflare helped me run a DDoS network" actually means "Cloudflare kept my website from being DDoSed", with the addendum "and I'm bad, therefore, not protecting KiwiFarms is hypocritical."
It's just dumb.
Re: I ran the worlds largest DDoS-for-Hire empire and Cloudflare helped
#107The deplatforming logic is practical but pretty shaky as a long term strategy. Kiwifarms absolutely may have been a despicable place causing real harm to people. In that case, the police should initiate a request to take them down that Cloudflare or ISPs etc. are obligated to follow. The problem is the government is completely ineffective and regularly offloads their responsibility to platforms like Facebook, Cloudfl…
Yes, the U.S. Constitution protects free expression, so the U.S. government's hands are completely tied on this issue. Even if government officials personally think a site probably facilitates behavior that violates the law, actually taking a website offline, rather than targeting individuals for criminal charges only after they've violated the law , unless that website is owned and operated, perhaps, by an individua…
If it's not illegal then it probably isn't causing any serious harm, so Cloudflare doesn't need to block it. If it is, say a direct death threat or telling others to harm someone, then it's already illegal and your explanation isn't needed.
Re: I ran the worlds largest DDoS-for-Hire empire and Cloudflare helped
#108This article seems to have been posted to make a false equivalence with the current Kiwifarms situation. There’s a pretty clear difference in urgency between taking down DDOSers and deplatforming a forum that is a gathering point for a mob engaging in mass harassment, stalking, and SWATing. One is a nonviolent crime. The other is a crime targeting an individual that had already escalated to the point of a high risk o…
> a forum that is a gathering point for a mob engaging in mass harassment, stalking, and SWATing I keep hearing this allegation but it seems to be supported only by a poorly sourced twitter thread[1] and some articles that dance around the issue. How do we know this, especially the swatting? And why isn't law enforcement stepping in? The operator is an American afaict. It's not like he's some bond villain living in a…
You can go look at the forum yourself at https://kiwifarms.ru/ (WARNING: DO NOT DO THIS IF YOU MIGHT BE ONE OF THEIR TARGETS! This would be EXTREMELY bad for your mental health!)
You'll struggle to find swatting, organized harrassment and non-internet stalking, but you'll see plenty of extremely unpleasant comments. If you were a kiwifarm target... well... see my comment above.
Re: I ran the worlds largest DDoS-for-Hire empire and Cloudflare helped
#109The linked post by Prince is pretty frustrating.
“This is not our stance, but we do it anyway for all the reasons we just said are bullshit.”
I have a ton of respect for Prince but this spineless double standards stuff is BS.
PS: I have no idea what the deal is with Kiwifarms and frankly I don’t care. If it’s really that bad then we need to have a judge order an injunction.
Re: I ran the worlds largest DDoS-for-Hire empire and Cloudflare helped
#110So he ran a DDoS network that wasn't behind Cloudflare, but used Cloudflare to stop his website being DDoSed by competitors, and this means Cloudflare was helping him DDoS others? No, it means Cloudflare was helping keep his website up, in a neutral manner. In other words, exactly what Cloudflare have stated their policy is. Now if Cloudflare allowed him to run DDoS code on its Workers, then yes, that's Cloudflare he…
> No, it means Cloudflare was helping keep his website up, in a neutral manner. I think it's more subtle than that. It was keeping his website up to make a profit. It benefits Cloudflare to have powerful, well run bot networks out there ready take out any site which do not have Cloudflare's protection. Yeah, it's a neutral manner on one level, but at a higher level it's bit more nuanced.
I feel like that's assuming a lot about Cloudflare - what evidence is there of such Machiavellian maneuovres on their behalf?
Would it be impossible to run DDoS as a service for profit without Cloudflare? People were doing fine at just that before Cloudflare ever existed.