3 ms·

And all that while the company refuses to acknowledge that it is full backing. Cloudflare loves to call back on the law when defending Kiwifarms, but then equa

And all that while the company refuses to acknowledge that it is full backing. Cloudflare loves to call back on the law when defending Kiwifarms, but then equate themselves to a public utility. If the law intended for it, DDoS protection would be a public utility or at least a protected class of service that can't refuse customers. And if you say that it should be and the law is just lagging behind (and I'd tend to agree with you), I can say the same thing about the technical legality of a website that enabled and (indirectly) incentives doxing, harassment or even swatting (except on Kiwifarms, people might technically have a case for defamation, but good luck getting that prosecuted).

cowtools 4y ago
The law describes DDoS attacks as a felony. The technology makes it such that it's infeasable to prevent DDoS attacks without a centralized entity like cloudflare.
- sascha_sl 4y ago
  But that still doesn't make Cloudflare the fire brigade. It is still their policy decision to value the freedom of speech of Kiwifarms more than the safety of those KF target, no matter how much they try to pretend they have an obligation to protect everyone that asks for it and are thus not at all partially responsible for enabling harassment - to the point of suicide in at least 3 cases. They don't have to protect them. That responsibility would be with lawmakers and the executive branch. Just as it would be their responsibility to enable feasible prosecution of defamation on the site. They don't do either.
  - nervlord 4y ago
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    > But that still doesn't make Cloudflare the fire brigade. Why not? That particular service seems a lot like a volunteer fire brigade.
    - sascha_sl 4y ago
      Are the Proud Boys like a volunteer fire brigade because they provide "security services" too?
      - Dylan16807 4y ago
        The fact that you have to use scare quotes makes it clear that the answer is no. So I'm not sure what your point is.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

cowtools 4y ago

The law describes DDoS attacks as a felony. The technology makes it such that it's infeasable to prevent DDoS attacks without a centralized entity like cloudflare.

sascha_sl 4y ago
But that still doesn't make Cloudflare the fire brigade. It is still their policy decision to value the freedom of speech of Kiwifarms more than the safety of those KF target, no matter how much they try to pretend they have an obligation to protect everyone that asks for it and are thus not at all partially responsible for enabling harassment - to the point of suicide in at least 3 cases. They don't have to protect them. That responsibility would be with lawmakers and the executive branch. Just as it would be their responsibility to enable feasible prosecution of defamation on the site. They don't do either.
- nervlord 4y ago
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  > But that still doesn't make Cloudflare the fire brigade. Why not? That particular service seems a lot like a volunteer fire brigade.
  - sascha_sl 4y ago
    Are the Proud Boys like a volunteer fire brigade because they provide "security services" too?
    - Dylan16807 4y ago
      The fact that you have to use scare quotes makes it clear that the answer is no. So I'm not sure what your point is.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]