Live data from Hacker News

Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2

radar.cloudflare.com

211–220 of 351 posts

Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2

#211
post #184
post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The browsers of their site visitors.

If you need to be on the site it’s not a botnet and there is no C&C server coordinating the attack. It‘s just the JS on the site that makes the attack.

Does this mean that the Great Cannon of China is not a botnet because it stops working when you close your browser?

Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2

#212
Some time ago, probably at least a year, likely more, I read a blog post by someone working for Google in Europe who loved using Archive.today and out of curiosity tried to determine who was running it. In the end he gave up, offered to buy the operator a beer or something like that, but if I recall correctly he went to even greater lengths in his research than the blogger discussed in this thread

I wish I could find it

Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2

#214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure whether you're making a joke or confusing the two websites.

You’re just not at all familiar with the subject. Archive.org is awful . It allows site owners and random third parties to edit old archived pages. Archive.today does not.

Folks keep saying this

Do you actually mean edit or do you just mean delete

Both are problematic, but falsifying a historic record is orders of magnitude worse than deleting one, and conflating them would be extremely dishonest

Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2

#215
It amazes me that people still use and recommend Cloudflare's DNS servers for resolution. Cloudflare DNS does not support EDNS Client Subnet. As a result, DNS queries resolved by their service are likely to return IP addresses for many CDNs that are physically farther away from you, leading to a slower internet browsing and viewing experience.

Sacrificing performance for a faster lookup time makes no sense in 2026. This is the one area where I continue to use Google DNS as it just works. Use anything but Cloudflare in this case, please.

Parent pro-tip: Next time the iPad is having Bluey episode playback issues, check to see if you're actually using Cloudflare DNS.

Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2

#216

I 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…

>It's weird to see people getting fixated on the DDoS, which is obviously far less nasty than actually attempting to dox someone.

I would say the opposite... The DDoS is pretty obviously ridiculous, completely unacceptable, and entirely indefensible, while the blog post seems like whatever.

I honestly cannot fathom defending using your popular website as a tool to DDoS someone you have personal beef with, without the consent of the DDoSing participants.

Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2

#217
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/02/wikipedia-bans-a...

That doesn't say anything about them tapering with archive content

Yes it does. The last section of the article.

https://megalodon.jp/2026-0219-1634-10/https://archive.ph:44...

This is an archive of an Archive.is archive of a blog post. The first sentence of the post says “ Jani Patokallio was a woman of exceptional intellect…” This was changed, it originally had someone else’s name (see second paragraph). So, who knows what other archived pages were changed?

Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2

#218

Cloudflare 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.

As far as I am aware, all previous issues with archive.today and Cloudflare were on account of archive.today taking measures to stop Cloudflare's DNS from correctly resolving their domains, not the other way around. The current situation is due to Cloudflare flagging archive.today's domains for malicious activity, Cloudflare actually still resolves the domains on their normal 1.1.1.1 DNS, but 1.1.1.2 ("No Malware") n…

For context, archive.today is angry that Cloudflare won't pass through EDNS - which includes things like your IP address, which archive.today explicitly wants for DNS-based geographical routing. The obvious problem with this is that it would deanonymize all 1.1.1.1 users, at least down to their ISP and probably down to the individual subscriber.

Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2

#219
post #70

A bit context if you are confused why Public DNS server blocking websites. 1.1.1.2 is Malware blocking DNS server similar to AdBlock DNS server. It is not 1.1.1.1 and 1.0.0.1 Here is the DDoS context https://gyrovague.com

For some reason I thought 1.1.1.1/1.0.0.1 already wouldn’t resolve archive.[today|is|ph] anyway

Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2

#220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One side publishes words, the other DDoSes. One side could just ignore the other and go about their business, the other cannot. One is using force, which naturally leads to resistance and additional attention, the other is not. Both sides look like they have been bullied in the past and not found their way out of reproducing the pattern yet.

[flagged]

Words can have influence and can come from a place of authority, which does carry responsibility. Words of a president are very different from words published on a random blog by some random person, and different yet again from words published by a newspaper. Some presidents words are opinion, the same words in different context are commands and not acting on them comes at a price.

Context matters. Which is why also different rules apply, and laws exist to guard these rules. DDoS is not an acceptable response in any jurisdiction, no matter what triggered them. We’re not in the Middle Ages, even if some behave like we are. Violence does not justify violence. Unjust action does not justify unjust responses.

Post reply on HN