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

Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

cloud.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 230 posts

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#151

Post by JasonADrury »

calgoo wrote: post #145
VladVladikoff wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are both bad. You are showing your own bias.

No, he is referencing Google going after the Chinese company, not the Israel based one. That does not mean there is bias with the commenter at all, just that the companies operate differently and are treated differently. The country of origin is important as Israel based companies are more integrated into the western business world, and tend to at least try to show an effort in keeping spam and other things off their…

FWIW a couple of years ago I was involved in a court case where there was a subpoena sent to Luminati to figure out whether or not a specific request had originated from their network, lawyers Luminati replied that they do not keep any logs whatsoever as they aren't required to do so under Israeli law.

Hard to imagine any serious anti-abuse efforts by Luminati if they don't monitor what their users are doing, but this is probably a deliberate effort to avoid potential liability arising from knowing what their users are doing.

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#152

Post by JasonADrury »

wmf wrote: post #122
vlovich123 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some users may knowingly install this software on their devices, lured by the promise of “monetizing” their spare bandwidth. Sounds like they’re targeting networks even if the users are ok participating in, precisely what you’re saying is ok. As for malware enrolling people into the network, it depends if the operator is doing it or if the malware is 3rd parties trying to get a portion of the cash flow. In the latt…

Users are OK with acting as proxies because they don't understand all the shady stuff their proxy is being used for. Also consumer ISPs generally ban this.

Why would the users care either way?

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#153

Post by JasonADrury »

chii wrote: post #132
Ronsenshi wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing about Google is that many anti-scraping services explicitly allow access to Google and maybe couple of other search engines. Everybody else gets to enjoy CloudFlare captcha, even when doing crawling at reasonable speeds. Rules For Thee but Not for Me

> many anti-scraping services explicitly allow access to Google and maybe couple of other search engines. because google (and the couple of other search engines) provide enough value that offset the crawler's resource consumption.

That's cool, but it's impossible for anyone to ever build a competitor that'd replace google without bypassing such services.

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#154

Post by jraph »

JasonADrury wrote: post #152
wmf wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Users are OK with acting as proxies because they don't understand all the shady stuff their proxy is being used for. Also consumer ISPs generally ban this.

Why would the users care either way?

Some people care about ethics, and try to avoid doing bad stuff, or helping the bad stuff.

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#156

Post by dewey »

walletdrainer wrote: post #113
7thpower wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have a robust KYC that appears to serve, at least in large part, as a way to stay off the shit list of companies with the resources to pursue recourse. Source: went through that process, ended up going a different route. The rep was refreshingly transparent about where they get the data, why the have the kyc process (aside from regulatory compliance). Ended up going with a different provider who has been cheaper…

I’ve certainly never been asked to do KYC with Luminati after using them for hundreds of terabytes over the years. It’s not like I’m using some bigco email address or given them any other reason to skip KYC either.

They probably would if they would see your username here!

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#157

Post by dewey »

kotaKat wrote: post #5

I'm actually a little shocked seeing that there was a WebOS variant of the residential proxying SDK endpoint. Does that mean there might be a bit more unchecked malware lurking behind the scenes in the LG ecosystem? Personally I'm surprised they didn't have a Samsung option.

Why would webOS App Store be any different than the iOS or Android App Store which also have monetization frameworks for bandwidth sharing.

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#158

Post by riedel »

progbits wrote: post #43

I'm surprised by the negative takes... Yes, proxies are good. Ones which you pay for and which are running legitimately, with the knowledge (and compensation) of those who run them. Malware in random apps running on your device without your knowledge is bad.

I learn: proxy networks run by large corps are good. True internet is bad. While I understand that often we are talking about Malware/Worms etc that enable this. However, i find it often disturbing to here often a lot of libertarian speech from the tech scene, while on the other hand are feeling themselves very comfortable to take over state power like policing efforts to save the world.

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#159

Post by bomewish »

Craighead wrote: post #148
bigiain wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I the only one cynically thinking that "Russia, Iran, DPRK, PRC, etc" is the "But think of the chiiildren!!!" excuse for doing this? And when Google say "IPIDEA’s proxy infrastructure is a little-known component of the digital ecosystem leveraged by a wide array of bad actors." What they really mean is " ... leveraged by actors indiscriminately scraping the web and ignoring copyright - that are not us." I can't he…

No, what they're saying is what they said, what you're implying reveals a strange bias. Web scraping through residential proxies? Please think through your thoughts more. There's much more effective and efficient ways to do so. Multiple bad actors, like ransomware affiliates, have been caught using residential proxy networks. But by all means, don't let facts and cyber threat intelligence get in the way.

What are the much more effective and efficient ways — since you said it ?

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#160

Post by walletdrainer »

dewey wrote: post #156
walletdrainer wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve certainly never been asked to do KYC with Luminati after using them for hundreds of terabytes over the years. It’s not like I’m using some bigco email address or given them any other reason to skip KYC either.

They probably would if they would see your username here!

I think they should have requested KYC when I was complaining about being unable to log into gmail, but I’m not going to complain as long as the service works.

I don’t use Luminati for anything illegal though, so it’s possible they just have some super amazing abuse detection algorithms that know this.

Post reply on HN