Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
No, pschastain has malware on their computer. I just hit a ratelimit on another account I was using, and decided it'd be funny if I replied from their own account.
[deleted]
Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
321–330 of 351 posts
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#322Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#323Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> The crucial context here is that archive.today provides a useful public service for free. So public services should DDoS is your argument? > Jani Patokallio runs gyrovague.net in order to harass people who provide useful public services. I scrolled pretty far through the blog and didn't find anything of that sort. Just a bunch of travel stuff. Now I'm curious what sort of "harassment" you hallucinated in the sites…
[flagged]
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#324Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are Hacker News users part of a botnet since they link to sites that when people click they go down due to all of the traffic? Am I part of a botnet if I have HN open as it means HN can execute javascript? I think it's stretching the definition.
If you don't think this is a DDoS with archive.today visitors acting as an unwitting/unwilling botnet, how do you think this normally works? It's not any more sophisticated. There is not much functional difference between someone telling my smart fridge to ping https://gyrovague.com and a website telling my browser to do it.
I don't think it's a botnet. To me that implies that the software that runs on your computer is a service that talks to a C&C server or to other bots P2P, forming the net(work) part of a botnet. In this case it is not a bot downloading a payload from a C&C, but a user intentionally visiting a website which downloads and runs the payload. It does not really work as a botnet since the web browser is not a service that will continually talk with a network of other servers to get a new payload.
Try ignoring what the payload is as it does not really matter in defining what is or isn't a botnet (though botnets typically imply malicious or sketchy payloads).
In regards to it being a DDoS it leans more in the yes direction due to the intent of it, but it also sites sending traffic to other sites is part of the web. You can embed things from other sites like images and then those others sites will fulfill those requests. The web didn't restrict pages to only send requests and load content from the same domain.
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#325Earlier quoted context omitted.
[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…
>DDoS is not an acceptable response in any jurisdiction
Who the fuck cares about what the law says? Seriously. The service archive.today offers is illegal in any case.
This is just a fundamentally bizarre context to be bringing up the law in.
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#326Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
> Or are we just looking at an unhinged fan stalking their favorite online celebrity? In this case, question is recursive. I have no idea who Jani Patokallio or gyrovague.com are, and the way Jason Drury shifts from “tried to dox” to “doxx’d” makes me wonder if this is astroturfing by Jani or Jason or a 3rd party. Who knows!
>the way Jason Drury shifts from “tried to dox” to “doxx’d”
I double-checked all my comments, that never happened.
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#327Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's weird to see people getting fixated on the DDoS, The weird part to me is that some people are seemingly trying to downplay a popular website abusing visitors to DDoS someone. How does your information (two angles) change anything at all about that fact? Normally if any website was caught abusing visitors to DDoS another website there would be no debate about why this is a bad thing. What about your other angle…
>The weird part to me is that some people are seemingly trying to downplay a popular website abusing visitors to DDoS someone. What's the true, practical impact being downplayed here?
You cannot seriously argue that performing a DDOS on a website, and causing other people to participate in it unwittingly, is a-ok.
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#328Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've thoroughly discredited yourself and your other comments with this. If anything, this comment reads exactly like the messages from the archive.today operator. No sensible person could read the original blog post and read this comment as anything other than an attempt to spread lies and pressure Jani.
[flagged]
What about DDoSing and its consequences? For that matter, it looks like a very bad move. Not exactly a very "grown-up" or responsible approach.
Re: Cloudflare flags archive.today as "C&C/Botnet"; no longer resolves via 1.1.1.2
#329Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you want me to address? I'm just pointing out that there are no great archival services, and the only real alternative to archive.today is worse. >Pay attention to this type of behavior, folks. It's revealing What does it reveal?
Lmao, did you just start bickering with yourself? Or, wow, you just revealed your second account.
Yea, reading through the page, these two accounts have been sounding exactly the same. I suppose it is in line with the childish behavior of AT.