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

Popular dark-web hosting provider hacked, 6,500 sites down

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 160 posts

Re: Popular dark-web hosting provider hacked, 6,500 sites down

#31

Post by cronix »

john37386 wrote: post #10

"Backups? Forget it. This is the Dark Web. Winzen told ZDNet that there ain’t no such thing as backups on Daniel’s Hosting, by design:" I'm wondering why encrypted backup is not an option for them?

For the same reason why the NSA siphons up all data from the net, encrypted or not, and stores it. They know one day they'll be able to crack todays crypt. Being able to decrypt a backup 5 or 10 years from now will still provide a lot of useful data, whether it came from the darknet or someones icloud backup while it was in transit to Apples servers. Encryption really only protects you from "today", not what will happen to it in the future. It's one reason I kind of chuckle to myself when people put such high regard into companies that proclaim to be more self conscious about protecting user data and what they do with it. It doesn't really matter if the data is still being collected and stored for later decryption. It's basically just a "delay" of when it can be read. The only thing stopping them, currently, is not having enough qbits in a quantum computer. Things are going to get, strange. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNV_3PkA9WM

Re: Popular dark-web hosting provider hacked, 6,500 sites down

#32

Post by arthurjj »

sp332 wrote: post #30
bambataa wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it not fairly trivial to link that to you? How can you make it anonymous?

In normal Tor usage, the client sends a request through three chosen hops, each of which only knows the previous and next hops, so the entry node doesn't know the destination and the exit node doesn't know where the request originated. But this only hides the client, because the client needs to know the server's address to direct the exit node where to send the request. So to hide the server, there is a symmetrical s…

^ is the most informative comment in the whole thread.

So by 'hosting' they mean being the rendezvous address?

Re: Popular dark-web hosting provider hacked, 6,500 sites down

#33

Post by cyberpunk0 »

dewey wrote: post #11
superkuh wrote: post #4

Man, why do people insist on using others to host their tor hidden services? It seems like the last thing you'd want or need to do. It's super simple to set up a hidden service from your home computer and host. I've been putting all my clear web sites on tor as well for years. Lots of bot traffic but never any problems and plenty of real traffic too.

The same reason people host their emails, websites, photos somewhere else or host their infrastructure in the cloud instead of colocating. It’s not hard but just another thing you have to care for when your real focus should be on what you provide not how you provide it.

Disagree. If you make an app and half of your infrastructure is rented out through third parties, that is a cost that you will ultimately pass on to the customer through increased price, trust placed in the third party services which implicitly gets inherited by the customer, or other means such as your internal codebase or your infrastructure becoming bloated in order to manage the interconnect with the third parties.

Re: Popular dark-web hosting provider hacked, 6,500 sites down

#34

Post by [deleted] »

superkuh wrote: post #4

Man, why do people insist on using others to host their tor hidden services? It seems like the last thing you'd want or need to do. It's super simple to set up a hidden service from your home computer and host. I've been putting all my clear web sites on tor as well for years. Lots of bot traffic but never any problems and plenty of real traffic too.

[deleted]

Re: Popular dark-web hosting provider hacked, 6,500 sites down

#36

Post by rsync »

greyfox wrote: post #26
httpsterio wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a server just as any server, instead of serving content through apache or nginx, you are more likely to serve it through thttpd or savant.

Why do you say that? Genuinely curious. Though I'm not familiar with thttpd or savant, after briefly looking them over they appear to be http servers just like apache or nginx. What would make them more appealing for a dark web host? They dont seem to be particular "dark-web-centric" with what i could read at face value. though most times dark web stuff has tons of other info thats not found 'at face value'...

"Though I'm not familiar with thttpd or savant, after briefly looking them over they appear to be http servers just like apache or nginx."

Not your parent, but it wouldn't surprise me to learn that "dark web sites" are using thttpd ... it's a very simple, lightweight, dependable web server. The major downside - the lack of SSL - is perhaps not an issue as you are running over an encrypted channel anyway.

If I just needed to throw something up - perhaps on a remote or throwaway host - thttpd would certainly be my first choice.

Re: Popular dark-web hosting provider hacked, 6,500 sites down

#37

Post by jamieweb »

I guess that all of the private keys for the onion services will be gone too. Even if they aren't, they can't be used anymore anyway as they should be assumed to be compromised.

I hashed for a month to get a vanity one, others have done longer. Did this hosting service allow custom private key uploads?

Re: Popular dark-web hosting provider hacked, 6,500 sites down

#38

Post by sp332 »

arthurjj wrote: post #32
sp332 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In normal Tor usage, the client sends a request through three chosen hops, each of which only knows the previous and next hops, so the entry node doesn't know the destination and the exit node doesn't know where the request originated. But this only hides the client, because the client needs to know the server's address to direct the exit node where to send the request. So to hide the server, there is a symmetrical s…

^ is the most informative comment in the whole thread. So by 'hosting' they mean being the rendezvous address?

If I'm reading this right, it actually hosted the websites but its IP address was hidden. I don't know if each site maybe got its own IP on the host, because after all I'd think it would be trivial for a customer to upload some code to unmask the host's actual IP. https://web.archive.org/web/20170830191551/https://hosting.d...

Re: Popular dark-web hosting provider hacked, 6,500 sites down

#39

Post by siliconunit »

cronix wrote: post #31
john37386 wrote: post #10

"Backups? Forget it. This is the Dark Web. Winzen told ZDNet that there ain’t no such thing as backups on Daniel’s Hosting, by design:" I'm wondering why encrypted backup is not an option for them?

For the same reason why the NSA siphons up all data from the net, encrypted or not, and stores it. They know one day they'll be able to crack todays crypt. Being able to decrypt a backup 5 or 10 years from now will still provide a lot of useful data, whether it came from the darknet or someones icloud backup while it was in transit to Apples servers. Encryption really only protects you from "today", not what will hap…

Just xor bit by bit against real random noise,embed it in a massive stream of other pure random, remember the offset, if it's really that important..
Post reply on HN