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

Cloudflare took down our website

robindev.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 483 posts

Re: Cloudflare took down our website

#441

Post by nolverostae »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #255
nolverostae wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BYOIP is reasonable, though I doubt anyone actually does legislation blocks by IP. Since like half of companies on the internet use Cloudflare or other multi-tenant infrastructure everyone is aware that you can't block an IP address and hit one target. The only thing I've seen is DNS blocks (both DNS protocol directly and based on TLS SNI). FYI, we also fully block users from the US (due to regulations). My problem h…

You would be surprised how big of a hammer ISPs will use when they are told to hit something. They live in a very different world than many modern web software companies - they are the plumbers for lots of things you take for granted, and look at the world the way a plumber does. Thanks to TLS, the plumbers can't see the HTTP headers to figure out what's actually flowing, so they sort of end up whacking all of it. Ge…

It will be interesting to see. Just for completeness, Fastly is not requiring us to BYOIP or anything unless it causes them actual problems, which so far it hasn't. I'm sure they also have other similar businesses to ours so they should have some experience.

I guess I'll see in a while if this was also just a sales tactic from Cloudflare or not.

Re: Cloudflare took down our website

#442

Post by seanw444 »

pornel wrote: post #428
redman25 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's one of the main reasons I'm leary about them. Such a big f-up is difficult to forget. It shows that they have a move fast and break things culture which for a company that is responsible for critical infrastructure feels wrong.

In response to this incident Cloudflare has made big engineering changes, including huge work to move away from C as much as possible. The offending parsers were rewritten in Rust ( https://github.com/cloudflare/lol-html ), as well as WAF, image optimization, and a few others. Nginx is being replaced with a custom cache server. New implementations are using either the Workers platform, or are written in Rust or Golan…

Memory safety doesn't fix fundamental design flaws.

Re: Cloudflare took down our website

#443

Post by jrochkind1 »

archon810 wrote: post #281
jrochkind1 wrote: post #77

I have been hearing stories from developers/entrepeneurs about Cloudflare being very weird to deal with: "We'd like to talk to you about an enterprise plan." "No thanks, I'm fine with the free plan." "Based on your traffic, we'd like to talk to you about an enteprrise plan." "Is there a traffic limit on the free plan?" "No, there is no limit. But based on your traffic, we require you to get an enteprirse plan." [Give…

Our experience has been quite the opposite once we were forced to migrate from a free plan (a long time ago after what felt like abusing the free plan due to the amount of bandwidth we were using). The bandwidth caps and all included features were clearly spelled out in the entetprise contract and when we went over, they didn't push for a contract renegotiation unless the overage lasted like 3+ months. And we frequen…

It's good to have an alternate experience shared, thanks!

Perhaps the stories I have heard are from people with particularly bad/aggressive sales reps, or who are particularly bad negotiators on their side.

I will say, though, that the free plan is marketted as without traffic/bandwidth limits, and has no traffic limits in it's terms of service, no? If it is possible to abuse it with an amount of bandwidth, rather than this being a "feeling", wouldn't it be more clear and transparent and respectful to just make it clear in the terms?

Re: Cloudflare took down our website

#444

Post by pornel »

seanw444 wrote: post #442
pornel wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In response to this incident Cloudflare has made big engineering changes, including huge work to move away from C as much as possible. The offending parsers were rewritten in Rust ( https://github.com/cloudflare/lol-html ), as well as WAF, image optimization, and a few others. Nginx is being replaced with a custom cache server. New implementations are using either the Workers platform, or are written in Rust or Golan…

Memory safety doesn't fix fundamental design flaws.

This is an empty tautology. You have no insight into the actual design, so I presume your fundamental design flaw is the CDN existing.

Re: Cloudflare took down our website

#445

Post by Dylan16807 »

dangus wrote: post #431
Dylan16807 wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You said "I’m going to guess that you need to have an Enterprise contract to be a business of certain categories". If that was the problem, this issue wouldn't be relevant to most people. When you switch to "they can terminate anyone", and they act this rashly and unexpectedly, that means anyone needs to live in fear.

But that’s the norm for SaaS products, especially when you don’t have an enterprise contract where termination procedures are more robust. So nobody is going to live in fear when cloudflare has the exact same TOS policy as everyone else.

The "and" is very important. The TOS is standard. Cutting paying customers out of your infrastructure so quickly when they haven't done something egregious is not standard.

Re: Cloudflare took down our website

#446

Post by archon810 »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #443
archon810 wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our experience has been quite the opposite once we were forced to migrate from a free plan (a long time ago after what felt like abusing the free plan due to the amount of bandwidth we were using). The bandwidth caps and all included features were clearly spelled out in the entetprise contract and when we went over, they didn't push for a contract renegotiation unless the overage lasted like 3+ months. And we frequen…

It's good to have an alternate experience shared, thanks! Perhaps the stories I have heard are from people with particularly bad/aggressive sales reps, or who are particularly bad negotiators on their side. I will say, though, that the free plan is marketted as without traffic/bandwidth limits, and has no traffic limits in it's terms of service, no? If it is possible to abuse it with an amount of bandwidth, rather th…

. I've always found it weird that they are so elusive and ambiguous about quota and allowances. It's a deliberate technique for targeted upsells, but it's not the best way to do business IMO.

Re: Cloudflare took down our website

#447

Post by hmottestad »

udev4096 wrote: post #402
trane_project wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I interviewed there once and they asked me what I would do if a service broke after a deployment. I said the first step was to revert to the last known good version and then investigate. Color me surprised when that was not the answer they expected.

That's strange. What was the "correct" answer?

If I ever interview at Cloudflare and get this question I might answer with "call the sales team and have them fix it by selling someone an enterprise subscription paid upfront by the decade" just to see if the interviewers read Hacker News :P

Re: Cloudflare took down our website

#450

Post by bedatadriven »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #200

As far as I can tell, the issue with this is: OP runs a casino/gambling site. Gambling is a regulatory mess (I have spent far too long dealing with this as an RNG supplier), and so it's very hard to comply with every jurisdiction, and each one needs you to prove compliance to operate in that jurisdiction.* Gaming companies spend a lot on compliance and tracking, but since the internet is the internet, it's pretty har…

Ok, I have to ask: are you a Random Number Generator (RNG) supplier, or a Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) supplier, or some other kind of supplier??
Post reply on HN