91–100 of 124 posts
I feel amazon cloudfront is a much better option for an image proxy. Takes less than a minute to setup, offers automatic ssl and dozens of caching endpoints. Also super easy to automate with AWS cli. Even optimizes for streaming videos. I have never had any issues with them. You can check the AWS calculator to figure out the pricing based on your average bandwidth. Depending on your use case you may be paying less th…
Break the terms of service, get mad and write a blog post. It's not even hidden in some legalese; they tell you not to serve majority image/video content _everywhere_ in the UI. All my tunnels are still running great, for free. I could not be happier.
Isn’t the payload of most marketing websites majority image content size-wise?
The only thing I keep using from cloudflare is their DNS service. I know this is not related to the post, but I tried to use workers for a few times, specifically the Cron workers. However it never worked as it should. My Cron was never triggered. And then, when I contacted their support throught the community, theirs mods seemed to basically don't care that Cron workers don't work. I tried and did everything the sup…
Their support is really trash. There's a lot of "go to the forums", and you go there and get ignored. We had issues with ZeroTrust and could get literally ZeroHelp. We were told the ZeroTrust team doesn't monitor the forums (which were where we were told by support to go for help, lol).
To me, it seems that Cloudflare is just another additional abstraction layer / proxy -- between web sites / web apps / SAAS providers -- and the Internet.
There might be benefits from such an arrangement -- such as Cloudflare's ability to block DDoS attacks...
But there also might be drawbacks from such an arrangement -- such as what do if Cloudflare for whatever reason -- blocks/bans/or otherwise limits you?
Opinion: A good website / web app / SAAS -- would be as distributed as possible -- that is, it would use the Internet natively AND it would Cloudflare AND it would use N Cloudflare competitors/proxy services -- ideally all of them -- at the same time!
In other words -- let the user choose their own route to a provider!
Do you want to use Cloudflare?
Great, we have that!
Do you want to use the Internet natively?
Great, we have that!
Do you want to use a competitor to Cloudflare?
Great -- we have that too!
If it is technically impossible to do that with one domain -- then mirror your site/service/SAAS -- to multiple domains.
Let the user decide what they want...
Incidentally, towards that end, I found the following excellent list on GitHub:
https://github.com/anderspitman/awesome-tunneling
(https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30443747 -- for related discussion)
It's non-canonical -- but it's probably a step in the right direction...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"mitm" strongly implies Cloudflare is somehow unauthorized, like they're slipping in and hijacking the connection. I know why Cloudflare detractors use this type of intentionally misleading language, but can we maybe say something like "worlds largest _proxy_" that is more accurate?
Maybe not even the largest proxy by volume. Akamai and Google Cloud load balancers serve bigger customers with comparable, if not more overall bandwidth. Cloudflare only puts out stats for "percentage of websites"[0], which includes all of the random blogs that get less than 1k views a day. 0: https://community.cloudflare.com/t/statistically-speaking-wh...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Genuinely curious. Why does Cloudflare prevent that?
Images and Videos tend, in comaprison to text, consume a lot of data even if compressed. This additional data leads to a stark increase in bandwidth usage when accessing a video compared to, e.g., a (text) blog. Because cloudflare is the one handling most of the bandwidth usage and routing this amounts to a significant cost for them (more servers, bigger pipes, ...).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I agree, I think they should set some more objective limits.
Setting a specific limit is going to result in people pushing up as close to the line as possible, instead of holding to the spirit of the policy.
I think limits should be clearly defined. Especially for paying customers.
I feel amazon cloudfront is a much better option for an image proxy. Takes less than a minute to setup, offers automatic ssl and dozens of caching endpoints. Also super easy to automate with AWS cli. Even optimizes for streaming videos. I have never had any issues with them. You can check the AWS calculator to figure out the pricing based on your average bandwidth. Depending on your use case you may be paying less th…
They should just be upfront... "If your service uses a disproportionately large amount of any of our resources for the amount of revenue it generates, we will ask you to either pay extra or leave. We'll try to give you a notice period to leave, but in extreme cases the period will be very short or none at all". Then the TOS should give examples of common things that trigger use of this policy, for example running an…
They are extremely upfront about this: > 2.8 Limitation on Serving Non-HTML Content > The Services are offered primarily as a platform to cache and serve web pages and websites. Unless explicitly included as part of a Paid Service purchased by you, you agree to use the Services solely for the purpose of (i) serving web pages as viewed through a web browser or other functionally equivalent applications, including rend…
1. It doesn’t help that the “percentage” is ambiguous
2. A couple of days warning or suggestion to move to a higher paying plan would be nice instead of just shutting them down.
I’m this case Cloudflare reminds me a quote from Big Lebowski: “You're not wrong Walter, you're just an asshole.”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah? People use MITM because it has large benefits.
This line of reasoning is poor. Taken to horrible extremes: Slavery has large benefits. Even if not taken to extremes, we're talking about the same argument that erodes privacy; "We need to take away your freedom so that the terrorists can't groom your children and bomb your daycare centers!". I can't even begin to steelman an argument like this, it's just poorly reasoned out.