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

Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

cloud.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 230 posts

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#51

Post by crtasm »

londons_explore wrote: post #9

We need more residential proxies, not less. I've had enough of companies saying "you're connecting from an AWS IP address, therefore you aren't allowed in, or must buy enterprise licensing". Reddit is an example which totally blocks all data to non-residential IP's. I want exactly the same content visible no matter who you are or where you are connecting from, and a robust network of residential proxies is a stepping…

I'm reading reddit.com from a Tor node, they also have a .onion domain you could use.

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#52

Post by ndiddy »

dataviz1000 wrote: post #42
ndiddy wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look at the article, the network they disrupted pays software vendors per-download to sneakily turn their users into residential proxy endpoints. I'm sure that at least some of the time the user is technically agreeing to some wording buried in the ToS saying they consent to this, but it's certainly unethical. I wouldn't want to proxy traffic from random people through my home network, that's how you get legal…

They provide an SDK for mobile developers. Here is a video of how it works. [0] They don't even hide it. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1a9HLrwvUO4&t=15s

Of course they're pitching it like everything's above board, but from the article:

> While many residential proxy providers state that they source their IP addresses ethically, our analysis shows these claims are often incorrect or overstated. Many of the malicious applications we analyzed in our investigation did not disclose that they enrolled devices into the IPIDEA proxy network. Researchers have previously found uncertified and off-brand Android Open Source Project devices, such as television set top boxes, with hidden residential proxy payloads.

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#53

Post by JDye »

Aurornis wrote: post #49
JDye wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in the UK and can't view a large portion of the internet without having to submit my ID to _every_ site serving anything deemed "not safe the for the children". I had a question about a new piercing and couldn't get info on it from Reddit because of that. I try using a VPN and they're blocked too. Luckily, I work at a copmany selling proxies so I've got free proxies whenever I want, but I shouldn't _need_ to u…

> that they have to objectively ruin the site for everyone using it. See the API changes and killing off of third party apps. Third party app users were a very small but vocal minority. The API changes didn't drop their traffic at all. In fact, it's only gone up since then. The datacenter IP address blocks aren't just for scrapers, it's an anti-bot measure across the board. I don't spend much time on Reddit but even…

I agree that write-actions should be protected, especially now when every other person online is a bot. As for read-actions, I'll continue to profit off those being protected too but I wouldn't be too bothered if something suddenly changed and all content across the internet was a lot easier to access programmatically. I think only harm can come from that data being restricted to the huge (nefarious) companies that can pay for that data or negotiate backroom deals.

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#54

Post by bdcravens »

progbits wrote: post #43

I'm surprised by the negative takes... Yes, proxies are good. Ones which you pay for and which are running legitimately, with the knowledge (and compensation) of those who run them. Malware in random apps running on your device without your knowledge is bad.

Many are "compensated" (in the way of software they didn't pay for), so the real question is that of disclosure (in which case many software vendors check the box in the most minimal way possible by including it as fine print during the install)

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#55

Post by [deleted] »

londons_explore wrote: post #20
ndiddy wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look at the article, the network they disrupted pays software vendors per-download to sneakily turn their users into residential proxy endpoints. I'm sure that at least some of the time the user is technically agreeing to some wording buried in the ToS saying they consent to this, but it's certainly unethical. I wouldn't want to proxy traffic from random people through my home network, that's how you get legal…

> that's how you get legal threats from media companies or the police called to your house. Or residential proxies get so widespread that almost every house has a proxy in, and it becomes the new way the internet works - "for privacy, your data has been routed through someone else's connection at random".

[deleted]

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#56

Post by rolph »

Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #33
londons_explore wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that's how you get legal threats from media companies or the police called to your house. Or residential proxies get so widespread that almost every house has a proxy in, and it becomes the new way the internet works - "for privacy, your data has been routed through someone else's connection at random".

> Or residential proxies get so widespread that almost every house has a proxy in, and it becomes the new way the internet works - "for privacy, your data has been routed through someone else's connection at random". Is this a re-invention of tor, maybe I2P?

IP8 address tumbler? to wit, playing the shell game, to obstruct direct attribution.

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#57

Post by Jblx2 »

crtasm wrote: post #51
londons_explore wrote: post #9

We need more residential proxies, not less. I've had enough of companies saying "you're connecting from an AWS IP address, therefore you aren't allowed in, or must buy enterprise licensing". Reddit is an example which totally blocks all data to non-residential IP's. I want exactly the same content visible no matter who you are or where you are connecting from, and a robust network of residential proxies is a stepping…

I'm reading reddit.com from a Tor node, they also have a .onion domain you could use.

Anyone know how to create a usable reddit account from the .onion domain?

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#58

Post by direwolf20 »

dist-epoch wrote: post #38
direwolf20 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can run one, something like ByteLixir, Traffmonetizer, Honeygain, Pawns, there are lots more, just google "share my internet for money" What will you be proxying? Nobody knows! I haven't had the police at my house yet. Seems a great way to say "fuck you" to companies that block IP addresses. You may see a few more CAPTCHAs. If you have a dynamic IP address, not many.

How much can you make if you run all of them at the same time? Doesn't the ISP detect them?

like $3 a month

and why would they

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#59

Post by phyzome »

Jblx2 wrote: post #57
crtasm wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm reading reddit.com from a Tor node, they also have a .onion domain you could use.

Anyone know how to create a usable reddit account from the .onion domain?

I've tried it, and my account was shadowbanned a few hours after I created it. It's very obnoxious.

Re: Disrupting the largest residential proxy network

#60

Post by direwolf20 »

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #4

> These efforts to help keep the broader digital ecosystem safe supplement the protections we have to safeguard Android users on certified devices. We ensured Google Play Protect, Android’s built-in security protection, automatically warns users and removes applications known to incorporate IPIDEA SDKs, and blocks any future install attempts. Nice to see Google Play Protect actually serving a purpose for once.

Does it also block unwanted traffic from Google apps or does it have a particular hatred for companies that interfere with Google's business model?
Post reply on HN