4 ms·
> This applies to all CDNs, and is part of what a CDN is. Not really. The problem with CloudFlare is that it's not just your static assets going through it, bu
by joepie91_ 10y ago
> This applies to all CDNs, and is part of what a CDN is.
Not really. The problem with CloudFlare is that it's not just your static assets going through it, but everything.
> (if you think it only applies to proxying ones, then think about what I can do if I own your copy of jQuery)
There are quite a few (in-progress and already-available) mechanisms to limit what third-party scripts can do on your page. All of that is bypassed when somebody injects code directly into your page.
> Don't get me started on the DDoS misapprehensions. "Just run your own" mitigation appliance to take XXX Gbps DDoS? This is a gross misrepresentation of what DDoS and DDoS mitigation is.
That specifically refers to when you have your own infrastructure, and conveniently ignores all the suggestions for the other cases.
- manigandham 10y ago> Not really. The problem with CloudFlare is that it's not just your static assets going through it, but everything. Yes it applies to all CDNs. You can proxy whatever you want through them, including your main domain or just a subdomain for assets. There is nothing different here about CloudFlare.
- detaro 10y agoSome CDNs can only serve static files and are not suitable to send the full page through them. But yes, nothing is stopping you from using a CDN like CF that could do so and use it just for static files.
- manigandham 10y agoThose are just legacy old CDN's then. Every major CDN today is a reverse proxy service. This post about CF being some kind of MITM risk isn't applicable when they all do this to function, even for static assets too.
- detaro 10y agoI'm not the person that first responded to you, I'm agreeing with you ;)