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

Internet Archive breached again through stolen access tokens

bleepingcomputer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 376 posts

Re: Internet Archive breached again through stolen access tokens

#221

Post by gruez »

tourmalinetaco wrote: post #178
TechSquidTV wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has really shown that the be true. I am stuck in a situation right now where I have some lost media I want to upload but they have been down for over a week. I plan to create a torrent in the meantime but that means relying on my personal network connection for the vast majority of downloads up front. I looked into CloudFlare R2, not terrible but not free either. I was looking into using R2 as a web seed for the…

Why not subscribe to a seedbox? They’re about $5/2TB/mo. It protects your IP, you can buy for only the month, and since seedboxes are hosted in DMCA-resistant data centers you can download riskier torrents lightning fast, meaning you’re not just spending money for others, you can get something out of it too.

2TB of bandwidth or storage?

Re: Internet Archive breached again through stolen access tokens

#222

Post by mbirth »

jonhohle wrote: post #197
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To make the web distributed-archive-friendly I think we need to start referencing things by hash and not by a path which some server has implied it will serve consistently but which actually shows you different data at different times for a million different reasons. If different data always gets a different reference, it's easy to know if you have enough backups of it. If the same name gets you a pile of snapshots t…

There was a startup called Space Monkey that sold NAS drives where you got a portion of the space and the rest was used for copies of other people’s content (encrypted). The idea was you could lose your device, plug in a new one and restore from the cloud. They ended up folding before any of their resilience claims could be tested (at least by me). Would be people be willing to buy an IA box that hosted a shard of ra…

Does anyone remember wua.la? It worked similar in that you offered local disk space in exchange for cloud storage. It was later bought by LaCie and killed off shortly after.

Re: Internet Archive breached again through stolen access tokens

#223

Post by null0pointer »

db48x wrote: post #29
thaumasiotes wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a terrible solution. The Wayback Machine takes down their snapshots at the request of whoever controls the domain. That's not archival. If the state of a webpage in the past matters to you, you need a record that won't cease to exist when your opposition asks it to. This is the concept behind perma.cc.

No, they don’t delete the archived content. When the domain’s robots.txt file bans spidering, then the Wayback Machine _hides_ the content archived at that domain. It is still stored and maintained, but it isn’t distributed via the website. The content will be unhidden if the robots.txt file stops banning spiders, or if an appropriate request is made.

What’s the reasoning behind hiding content upon request? Doesn’t that defeat the purpose of archival?

My intuition would say there are 3 cases when content ceases to become available at the original site:

- The host becomes unable to host the content for some reason (bankruptcy, death, etc.) in which case I assume the archive persists.

- The host is externally required to remove the content (copyright, etc.) in which case I assume IA would face the same external pressure? But I’m not sure on that.

- The host/owner has a change of heart about publishing the content. This borders more on IA acting as reputation management on the part of the original host/owner. Personally I think this is hardest to defend but also probably the least common case. In this case I’d think it’s most often to hide something the original host doesn’t want the public finding out later, but that also seems to make it more valuable to be publicly available in the archive. Plus, from a historian/journalist perspective, it’s valuable to be able to track how things change over time, and hiding this from the public prevents that. Though to be honest I’m kind of in two minds here because on the other hand I’m generally of the opinion that people can grow and change, and we shouldn’t hold people to account for opinions they published a decade ago, for example. I’m also generally in favor of the right to be forgotten.

Would appreciate your thoughts here.

Re: Internet Archive breached again through stolen access tokens

#224

Post by gruez »

userbinator wrote: post #215
boplicity wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI: "Money" is imaginary property. Not sure you want to call people supporting "imaginary property" dogmatic. It's what our society is built on.

Money is not imaginary. You can touch and interact with it.

That's like saying movies aren't imaginary either because there's blu-rays. Even if we take that point at face value though, the vast majority of money is imaginary, only existing on ledgers. When the fed "prints money", it's just adjusting an entry on a database somewhere.

Re: Internet Archive breached again through stolen access tokens

#226

Post by TZubiri »

ranger_danger wrote: post #211
mikae1 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I was not aware there were even any illegal ones. Depends on the jurisdiction. Remember what happened in the The Pirate Bay trial?

My understanding is that that court case did not show that operating a torrent tracker is illegal, but specifically operating a (any) service with the explicit intent of violating copyright... huge difference IMO. To me that's not even related to it being a torrent tracker, just that they were "aiding and abetting" copyright infringement.

Ok. But what is the case law in hosting illegal content? Sure you may operate a torrent, but if your client is distributing child porn, in my view, you bear responsibility.

Re: Internet Archive breached again through stolen access tokens

#227

Post by ogurechny »

gweinberg wrote: post #52

Does anyone know who is targeting the Internet Archive, and why? I get the impression the attacks are too sophisticated for it to just be vandal punks.

I get the impression it's just pissing into the salt shaker. Internet Archive is obviously held together by duct tape (okay, okay, strong and durable duct tape) and personal willpower. Moreover, its main mission is spreading data, not hiding it from others to generate revenue.

Those who don't get the salt shaker bit, here's the original of the ancient wisdom:

https://web.archive.org/web/20060619131835/http://xelios.liv...

Choose any translation:

https://malaya-zemlya.livejournal.com/697779.html

https://personal-view.com/talks/discussion/25915/humor-hacke...

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/hacker-restaurant-alexander-s...

Re: Internet Archive breached again through stolen access tokens

#228

Post by TZubiri »

jonhohle wrote: post #193
John_Cena wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of talk is simply modern politik-speak. I can't stand it and the people who fall for their deception. Stretch the truth to disarm the constituents

In what way? Torrents are used all over for content delivery. Battle.net uses a proprietary version of BitTorrent. It’s now owned by Microsoft. There’s many more legitimate uses as commented by many others. Criminals using tools does not make the tools criminal.

It's a matter of numbers, if tens of thousands of criminals use tech X, and it has few genuine uses, it's going to be restricted.

This has precedent in illegal drug categorization, it's not just about the damage, but its ratio of noxious to helpful use.

Re: Internet Archive breached again through stolen access tokens

#229

Post by shiroiushi »

MathMonkeyMan wrote: post #200
dokyun wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The group that claimed to be responsible for the first hack was said to be Russian-based, anti-U.S., pro-Palestine, and their reasoning for the attack was because of IA's violation of copyright.... I think you should draw your own more informed conclusions, but it smells a lot like feds to me.

What do Palestine, Russia, and the U.S. have to do with the Internet Archive? The Internet Archive is a supremely boring target politically.

He's pointing out that it doesn't make any sense: why would someone pro-Russian and anti-US care about violating western IP? In reality, it's the opposite: Russia is happy to help with that because they think it helps weaken the west.
Post reply on HN