171–180 of 231 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless France starts blocking DNS port 53/udp and 53/tcp and start whitelisting DNS servers ... :-/
This would be the point where DNS over HTTPS would save the day if it had more widespread adoption..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Will read the article now thank you
This kind of comment is best left on reddit to keep the signal-to-noise ratio on HN as high as possible. Just hit that upvote button instead. :)
Hilarious how the article mentions the domain names at the end. It's like Google showing links of DMCA-striken lists, so you can easily find out the actual places to pirate.
> It's like Google showing links of DMCA-striken lists Used to be like that. Now they have renamed “Chilling Effects” to “Lumen Database” and require submitting an email address to view each individual complaint.
If you need to poison the DNS by court order. Can you also just poison the requestees DNS entries? E.g. Canal+ own websites?
[flagged]
Rampant? Read the article before commenting, they are talking about 800 people in the whole of France. It's clearly not about severity, but about control. They would try the overreach even if there is no damage to be found (like using ridiculous "this is the money we lost" calculations).
800 is the figure given by google's attorney for people that would be affected by the block enforced by public DNS servers, not the total amount of "rampant piracy" that's going on.
Over a decade ago, a ton of tech companies (including Google) coordinated a “blackout the Internet” day of protest against U.S. legislation that would have required them to alter DNS to fight piracy. Interesting that now that France actually does it, they say they will comply. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PI...
[flagged]
Logical extensions of this principle: * Domestic abuse is the victim's fault because they shouldn't have made their partner angry. * The Chinese GFW is the fault of the people who criticized the government. They shouldn't criticize the government. * Israel indiscriminately bombing Gaza is the fault of the Gazans who fought back the last time Israel did that. * The Holocaust is the Jews' fault for not fleeing the coun…
Except in all those cases, you can vaguely make the case that the "victims" were in the right (eg. the right to be not physically assaulted). It's far more questionable to claim that people have the right to free live sports streaming.
This looks like such a non issue to be honest. Government branches should have technical and legal capabilities to block domestic and foreign hosts. Legitimate foreign service providers, should either comply with local government, cease operations in that country, or be prepared for war.
Wouldn't China's GFW be considered a good thing by that argument?
But yes, countries should have control over their borders, both physical and digital.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, the country (france) is ordering the "poisoning", these american companies just comply with local regulations. Heavily biased article. Remember that dns/ip systems are decentralized at the national precisely so that countries have sovereignity. The editorial line would have us believe that france is committing a free speech crime or overturning internet infrastructure, while in actuality they are exherting thei…
This is literally just a framing issue. Note first that people generally believe in universal human rights, e.g. states shouldn't be allowed to do horrible things (e.g. genocide) just because they would be asserting their national rights. Further the action of a single state often influences other states, as is especially true when it comes to the internet which is global by nature.