5 ms·

First the ciu-online.net people sent DMCA notices to myself and Cloudflare, since I used Cloudflare as a caching proxy. Eventually Cloudflare gave them the IP a

First the ciu-online.net people sent DMCA notices to myself and Cloudflare, since I used Cloudflare as a caching proxy. Eventually Cloudflare gave them the IP address of my server and the ciu-online.net people were able to determine that IP address was owned by Hetzner. Now they send DMCA notices to myself, Cloudflare, and Hetzner. I think the goal is to annoy as many people as possible. Even after I shut off my IPFS gateway they continued sending notices. Anyway, if you're hosting anything that might generate a DMCA notice, don't use Hetzner. They will kick you off even if you're complying with the DMCA process. Also, they make you submit a statement on abuse.hetzner.com for every single DMCA notice that gets sent to them. If you don't submit the statement in 24 hours they threaten to block your IP address. It is extremely tedious and annoying.

nanidin 3y ago
> Even after I shut off my IPFS gateway they continued sending notices. It seems like those notices were made in bad faith. It would be nice if they faced some punishment.
- 6510 3y ago
  Would it be unethical to send additional nonsensical take down requests to Hetzner? I mean, if you are going to be like a child and pretend every email is both true and in good faith the thing you really need is more outlandish nonsense so that one might mature? (make it less fun to host and more like hard work) Then again, Germany is just about the worse place to host "infringing" content. Perhaps one should send regular take down requests to ones own host complaining about ones own website and point at example.com/<php echo $website[0]; ?> as the proof. Then change hosts if they chose to act weird on it. I read "good" things about Hosted Network Pty. Ltd who in 2018 had a complaint response time near 20 days. "Worse" in the industry.
qingcharles 3y ago
Thank you for the advice. I will shop around. The trouble is that Hetzner are almost an order of magnitude cheaper than the next best. You get what you pay for. Any recommendations?
- _a9 3y ago
  I would take a look around for eastern european hosters that dont really care for western bs and pick up a vps from there to use as a reverse proxy. You can continue enjoying hetzner and still be insulated by putting it behind a different server that will get (and toss) any abusive takedown requests. The lowendtalk forums are a good place to find any number of hosters that will fill your need.
grayhatter 3y ago
>Eventually Cloudflare gave them the IP address of my server and the ciu-online.net people were able to determine that IP address was owned by Hetzner. Wait... isn't the point of paying cloudflare to prevent DoS attacks?
- rodgerd 3y ago
  Cloudflare will fight tooth and nail to keep Stormfront online, not IPFS.
  - mminer237 3y ago
    Didn't they voluntarily ban The Daily Stormer? And while horrible, I don't recall there being anything illegal about that, whereas IPFS likely requires them to take manual action repeatedly to avoid legal penalty.
    - viraptor 3y ago
      CloudFlare will sometimes go to the court to actively protect their abusive customer from being exposed to legal liability. But apparently they don't do that unless you're really nasty and exposing you would mean they are actually able to provide information about their customers - that's a line they won't cross even for attempted murders.
    - solardev 3y ago
      It wasn't exactly "voluntarily" -- more like "banned it after sustained public pressure", I think. They were reluctant at first but eventually caved after pressure continued to mount. The CEO wasn't happy about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloudflare#The_Daily_Stormer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloudflare#The_Daily_Stormer (Not trying to take sides here -- it's a messy, complex topic -- just trying to recount the history as I remember it, hopefully somewhat correctly)
    - rodgerd 3y ago
      > Didn't they voluntarily ban The Daily Stormer? They defended them for a long time, and then banned them shortly after one of the Stormer admins started bragging that they had Cloudflare in their pocket.

nanidin 3y ago

> Even after I shut off my IPFS gateway they continued sending notices. It seems like those notices were made in bad faith. It would be nice if they faced some punishment.

6510 3y ago
Would it be unethical to send additional nonsensical take down requests to Hetzner? I mean, if you are going to be like a child and pretend every email is both true and in good faith the thing you really need is more outlandish nonsense so that one might mature? (make it less fun to host and more like hard work) Then again, Germany is just about the worse place to host "infringing" content. Perhaps one should send regular take down requests to ones own host complaining about ones own website and point at example.com/<php echo $website[0]; ?> as the proof. Then change hosts if they chose to act weird on it. I read "good" things about Hosted Network Pty. Ltd who in 2018 had a complaint response time near 20 days. "Worse" in the industry.

qingcharles 3y ago

Thank you for the advice. I will shop around. The trouble is that Hetzner are almost an order of magnitude cheaper than the next best. You get what you pay for. Any recommendations?

_a9 3y ago
I would take a look around for eastern european hosters that dont really care for western bs and pick up a vps from there to use as a reverse proxy. You can continue enjoying hetzner and still be insulated by putting it behind a different server that will get (and toss) any abusive takedown requests. The lowendtalk forums are a good place to find any number of hosters that will fill your need.

grayhatter 3y ago

>Eventually Cloudflare gave them the IP address of my server and the ciu-online.net people were able to determine that IP address was owned by Hetzner. Wait... isn't the point of paying cloudflare to prevent DoS attacks?

rodgerd 3y ago
Cloudflare will fight tooth and nail to keep Stormfront online, not IPFS.
- mminer237 3y ago
  Didn't they voluntarily ban The Daily Stormer? And while horrible, I don't recall there being anything illegal about that, whereas IPFS likely requires them to take manual action repeatedly to avoid legal penalty.
  - viraptor 3y ago
    CloudFlare will sometimes go to the court to actively protect their abusive customer from being exposed to legal liability. But apparently they don't do that unless you're really nasty and exposing you would mean they are actually able to provide information about their customers - that's a line they won't cross even for attempted murders.
  - solardev 3y ago
    It wasn't exactly "voluntarily" -- more like "banned it after sustained public pressure", I think. They were reluctant at first but eventually caved after pressure continued to mount. The CEO wasn't happy about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloudflare#The_Daily_Stormer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloudflare#The_Daily_Stormer (Not trying to take sides here -- it's a messy, complex topic -- just trying to recount the history as I remember it, hopefully somewhat correctly)
  - rodgerd 3y ago
    > Didn't they voluntarily ban The Daily Stormer? They defended them for a long time, and then banned them shortly after one of the Stormer admins started bragging that they had Cloudflare in their pocket.