4 ms·
The moment CF stops hosting DDoS websites is the moment the censorship will burst wide open. Besides CP (which is too hot to try to defend), as soon as they sta
by MichaelGG 9y ago
The moment CF stops hosting DDoS websites is the moment the censorship will burst wide open. Besides CP (which is too hot to try to defend), as soon as they start judging which businesses are allowed to host then they'll be forced to restrict their offerings all around.
What if a booter site advertises itself and says "you must confirm you have legal authority to run an attack test against this site"? What if it's legal in <some jurisdiction>?
CF should only take down sites after getting a direct court order to stop services (even then jurisdiction is an issue).
- j_s 9y agoI mentioned it as a conflict of interest to be aware of. I personally use CloudFlare for DNS for most of my personal sites. Your comment seems to fairly accurately reflect CloudFlare's position: Thoughts on Abuse | https://blog.cloudflare.com/thoughts-on-abuse/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/thoughts-on-abuse/ (2012) Here is a semi-recent take from one of their more vocal opponents: Spreading the DDoS Disease and Selling the Cure | https://krebsonsecurity.com/2016/10/spreading-the-ddos-disease-and-selling-the-cure/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2016/10/spreading-the-ddos-disea... (2016) Here is how it works out in practice for a few fellow HN-er's: The New Normal: 200-400 Gbps DDoS Attacks | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7242377 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7242377 (2014)
- foobarbazetc 9y agoThe problem with this flawed line of argument is that CloudFlare applies their own Pro-Platforming views that might fly in the US globally. So this jurisdiction issue actually goes both ways.