3 ms·

There is an easier way, send a DMCA request, Cloudflare been bleeding ips of their customers in that manner for years

by gggggg11111 10y ago

eli 10y ago
Assuming you don't mind committing perjury, I guess.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- gggggg11111 10y ago
  Yes because hackers who go around DDOSing entities care about perjury
  - ZoFreX 10y ago
    To be fair they were talking about pentesters, for whom port scanning is usually on the table, and breaking the law is not.
    - gggggg11111 10y ago
      Under Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. 1030) it is a federal crime to "intentionally access a computer without authorization or exceed authorized access" ... An eager prosecutor could take that and run a mile
- Sir_Substance 10y ago
  Is there actually a recorded instance of someone getting charged for perjury relating to a DMCA request?
  - DanBC 10y ago
    I don't know what happened with this case: https://torrentfreak.com/warner-bros-our-false-dmca-takedowns-are-not-a-crime-131115/ https://torrentfreak.com/warner-bros-our-false-dmca-takedown... The law is pretty clearly broken. I kind of hope Google is collecting all the false take down requests they get. Submitting a false report, under penalty of perjury, and saying "whoops algorithms lol" shouldn't be something they get away with. There's this too: https://www.eff.org/press/archives/2004/10/15 https://www.eff.org/press/archives/2004/10/15
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  Only one part of a DMCA takedown is under penalty of perjury, and it's quite possible to file a knowingly false takedown request without that part being falsified.
  - eli 10y ago
    But isn't it the part where you assert in good faith you own the copyright? How do you get around that scenario of a malicious takedown request against a random site?
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      It's the part where you asset that you are the owner of the copyright you alleged is being violated. As long as you own copyright on something that's not a problem. The part where you actually allege that particular content uses your work without permission or privilege is not under penalty of perjury.

There is an easier way, send a DMCA request, Cloudflare been bleeding ips of their customers in that manner for years

eli 10y ago

Assuming you don't mind committing perjury, I guess.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
gggggg11111 10y ago
Yes because hackers who go around DDOSing entities care about perjury
- ZoFreX 10y ago
  To be fair they were talking about pentesters, for whom port scanning is usually on the table, and breaking the law is not.
  - gggggg11111 10y ago
    Under Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. 1030) it is a federal crime to "intentionally access a computer without authorization or exceed authorized access" ... An eager prosecutor could take that and run a mile
Sir_Substance 10y ago
Is there actually a recorded instance of someone getting charged for perjury relating to a DMCA request?
- DanBC 10y ago
  I don't know what happened with this case: https://torrentfreak.com/warner-bros-our-false-dmca-takedowns-are-not-a-crime-131115/ https://torrentfreak.com/warner-bros-our-false-dmca-takedown... The law is pretty clearly broken. I kind of hope Google is collecting all the false take down requests they get. Submitting a false report, under penalty of perjury, and saying "whoops algorithms lol" shouldn't be something they get away with. There's this too: https://www.eff.org/press/archives/2004/10/15 https://www.eff.org/press/archives/2004/10/15
dragonwriter 10y ago
Only one part of a DMCA takedown is under penalty of perjury, and it's quite possible to file a knowingly false takedown request without that part being falsified.
- eli 10y ago
  But isn't it the part where you assert in good faith you own the copyright? How do you get around that scenario of a malicious takedown request against a random site?
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    It's the part where you asset that you are the owner of the copyright you alleged is being violated. As long as you own copyright on something that's not a problem. The part where you actually allege that particular content uses your work without permission or privilege is not under penalty of perjury.