4 ms·

Hurricane Electric censors entire IPv6 /32, WA State Attorney General involved

6 points by kfnws 3y ago

kfnws 3y ago
Background post: > Hurricane Electric, one of the largest ISPs in the entire world, has blocked 1776 Hosting's IPs which very briefly (~2 days) was a way to connect to the Kiwi Farms. > Hurricane Electric admits that blocking an entire subnet of IP addresses like this is unprecedented. They refuse to elaborate as to why they've done this. > HE is an extremely old, extremely large provider which owns an enormous share of all fiber optic cable in the world. Their connectivity between smaller ISPs is unparalleled. Their bandwidth is over 100Tbps. If every nerve in your body is connected to each other, much like two computers on the Internet, then Hurricane Electric would effectively be your spine - hence why they are called the Internet Backbone. The Internet Backbone is telling a small forum of a few thousand daily users that they may not exist, they will not explain why, and they are not open to meeting halfway. > However, our relationship with HE was indirect. 1776 Hosting had a relationship with an ISP, who itself had a relationship with another ISP, who has a relationship with Hurricane Electric. HE did not terminate a relationship with me, they instead obstructed my providers from receiving traffic they specifically requested because Hurricane Electric does not allow it, without stated reason, and without appeal. > What Hurricane Electric has not considered is that this relationship took place in Washington state. Washington is one of the few states which has state-level common carrier provisions for the Internet. > This cause of action cannot be brought by individuals or companies. It must be brought by the Attorney General's Office in Washington. My providers have filed complaints with the Attorney General's Office in Washington. I am preparing to do the same via representation. > Hurricane Electric's political decision making and deliberate meddling with the Internet is the most dramatic action I have ever seen in the degradation of the Internet and the erosion of our personal liberties. The only path forward is for the Internet to be regulated as a common carrier. If we allow this behavior to continue, no website may exist without the collective assent of a dozen megacorporations joined at the hip. Latest update post: > The AGO has confirmed it has received complaints from Incognet and Crunchbits and that the complaints fall under the scope of their office. I am filing mine this week. > Residents of Washington may be needed soon. > Edit 1: Small update but when we tried to route another /48 off my subnet it was also blocked immediately before ever being pushed live as an AAAA record. In short, this means the company is actively hawking my subnets and terminating them as soon as they go up to deliberately deprive Washington residents of Internet access to websites of their choice. > Edit 2: Actually, they blocked my /32, which means Hurricane Electric is blocking 65,536 network blocks containing 65,536 subscriber blocks each with each subscriber block containing 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 possible addresses. With this number, I could assign each gram of the Earth's total mass 74 IP addresses each. They have done this specifically to accomplish keeping Washington residents off the Kiwi Farms. > https://routing.he.net/index.php?cmd=display_prefix_list&as=400304&router=core1.ska1.he.net&af=6&which=existing https://routing.he.net/index.php?cmd=display_prefix_list&as=... > https://archive.is/L7dD4 https://archive.is/L7dD4
- stephenr 3y ago
  > The Internet Backbone is telling a small forum of a few thousand daily users that they may not exist, they will not explain why, and they are not open to meeting halfway. What is the middle ground between civilised people and a bunch of shit bird drop kicks who should have been swallowed at conception?
  - kfnws 3y ago
    The middle ground is upholding the principle of net neutrality, with the large transit providers maintaining freedom of information exchange rather than doling out extrajudicial punishments for speech they may deem undesirable.
    - stephenr 3y ago
      Isn't it funny how "net neutrality" used to be about preventing companies prioritising certain traffic based on business deals. As soon as a bunch of losers who stalk people for fun get kicked offline they suddenly want to adopt the phrase "net neutrality" for their cause. People like you are exactly why every rule has exceptions. You're the embodiment of yelling "FIRE! in a crowded theatre".
      - dmatech 3y ago
        Net neutrality long assumed that backbones would merely slow down traffic, not block it entirely for opaque reasons. They're only supposed to intervene to prevent technical disruptions. I haven't spent that much time looking at KF, but they do appear to follow US law and will ban people who break it (and cooperate with US law enforcement). The site is a bit of a corner case: legal but extremely reviled. They use incredibly foul language, and they seem quite proud to be on the "wrong side of history". But I still contend that no amount of mere unpopularity should knock a site entirely off the internet.
        stephenr 3y ago
        I don't think you get to take the "well this is technically legal, let's give them the benefit of the doubt" argument when your members actions have directly caused three people to kill themselves.
superchroma 3y ago
"no website may exist without the collective assent of a dozen megacorporations joined at the hip." This is already the case. That said, if we must accept the premise that such voluntary censorship is acceptable, then I welcome any and all such action against kiwifarms. May its users be hounded off the internet entirely.
- kfnws 3y ago
  I think we should not accept that premise, and instead require the backbone transit providers to uphold net neutrality. It's the same principle as water and electricity and other utility companies not being permitted to cut off service to those whose speech they disagree with.
p1mrx 3y ago
Consider asking for help with route visibility on NANOG, provided that your discussion is "focused on operational and technical content only". Avoid speculation about why your route is not visible, and just work on debugging the problem. https://www.nanog.org/nanog-mailing-list/nanog-mailing-lists/ https://www.nanog.org/nanog-mailing-list/nanog-mailing-lists...
- thrwaway1234567 3y ago
  I don't think you can discuss hurricane electric dropping connection to kiwifarms, without discussing the possible reasons. It wasn't a software glitch; it was an intentional action.

6 points by kfnws 3y ago

Background post: > Hurricane Electric, one of the largest ISPs in the entire world, has blocked 1776 Hosting's IPs which very briefly (~2 days) was a way to connect to the Kiwi Farms. > Hurricane Electric admits that blocking an entire subnet of IP addresses like this is unprecedented. They refuse to elaborate as to why they've done this. > HE is an extremely old, extremely large provider which owns an enormous share of all fiber optic cable in the world. Their connectivity between smaller ISPs is unparalleled. Their bandwidth is over 100Tbps. If every nerve in your body is connected to each other, much like two computers on the Internet, then Hurricane Electric would effectively be your spine - hence why they are called the Internet Backbone. The Internet Backbone is telling a small forum of a few thousand daily users that they may not exist, they will not explain why, and they are not open to meeting halfway. > However, our relationship with HE was indirect. 1776 Hosting had a relationship with an ISP, who itself had a relationship with another ISP, who has a relationship with Hurricane Electric. HE did not terminate a relationship with me, they instead obstructed my providers from receiving traffic they specifically requested because Hurricane Electric does not allow it, without stated reason, and without appeal. > What Hurricane Electric has not considered is that this relationship took place in Washington state. Washington is one of the few states which has state-level common carrier provisions for the Internet. > This cause of action cannot be brought by individuals or companies. It must be brought by the Attorney General's Office in Washington. My providers have filed complaints with the Attorney General's Office in Washington. I am preparing to do the same via representation. > Hurricane Electric's political decision making and deliberate meddling with the Internet is the most dramatic action I have ever seen in the degradation of the Internet and the erosion of our personal liberties. The only path forward is for the Internet to be regulated as a common carrier. If we allow this behavior to continue, no website may exist without the collective assent of a dozen megacorporations joined at the hip. Latest update post: > The AGO has confirmed it has received complaints from Incognet and Crunchbits and that the complaints fall under the scope of their office. I am filing mine this week. > Residents of Washington may be needed soon. > Edit 1: Small update but when we tried to route another /48 off my subnet it was also blocked immediately before ever being pushed live as an AAAA record. In short, this means the company is actively hawking my subnets and terminating them as soon as they go up to deliberately deprive Washington residents of Internet access to websites of their choice. > Edit 2: Actually, they blocked my /32, which means Hurricane Electric is blocking 65,536 network blocks containing 65,536 subscriber blocks each with each subscriber block containing 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 possible addresses. With this number, I could assign each gram of the Earth's total mass 74 IP addresses each. They have done this specifically to accomplish keeping Washington residents off the Kiwi Farms. > https://routing.he.net/index.php?cmd=display_prefix_list&as=400304&router=core1.ska1.he.net&af=6&which=existing https://routing.he.net/index.php?cmd=display_prefix_list&as=... > https://archive.is/L7dD4 https://archive.is/L7dD4

stephenr 3y ago
> The Internet Backbone is telling a small forum of a few thousand daily users that they may not exist, they will not explain why, and they are not open to meeting halfway. What is the middle ground between civilised people and a bunch of shit bird drop kicks who should have been swallowed at conception?
- kfnws 3y ago
  The middle ground is upholding the principle of net neutrality, with the large transit providers maintaining freedom of information exchange rather than doling out extrajudicial punishments for speech they may deem undesirable.
  - stephenr 3y ago
    Isn't it funny how "net neutrality" used to be about preventing companies prioritising certain traffic based on business deals. As soon as a bunch of losers who stalk people for fun get kicked offline they suddenly want to adopt the phrase "net neutrality" for their cause. People like you are exactly why every rule has exceptions. You're the embodiment of yelling "FIRE! in a crowded theatre".
    - dmatech 3y ago
      Net neutrality long assumed that backbones would merely slow down traffic, not block it entirely for opaque reasons. They're only supposed to intervene to prevent technical disruptions. I haven't spent that much time looking at KF, but they do appear to follow US law and will ban people who break it (and cooperate with US law enforcement). The site is a bit of a corner case: legal but extremely reviled. They use incredibly foul language, and they seem quite proud to be on the "wrong side of history". But I still contend that no amount of mere unpopularity should knock a site entirely off the internet.
      - stephenr 3y ago
        I don't think you get to take the "well this is technically legal, let's give them the benefit of the doubt" argument when your members actions have directly caused three people to kill themselves.

superchroma 3y ago

"no website may exist without the collective assent of a dozen megacorporations joined at the hip." This is already the case. That said, if we must accept the premise that such voluntary censorship is acceptable, then I welcome any and all such action against kiwifarms. May its users be hounded off the internet entirely.

kfnws 3y ago
I think we should not accept that premise, and instead require the backbone transit providers to uphold net neutrality. It's the same principle as water and electricity and other utility companies not being permitted to cut off service to those whose speech they disagree with.

p1mrx 3y ago

Consider asking for help with route visibility on NANOG, provided that your discussion is "focused on operational and technical content only". Avoid speculation about why your route is not visible, and just work on debugging the problem. https://www.nanog.org/nanog-mailing-list/nanog-mailing-lists/ https://www.nanog.org/nanog-mailing-list/nanog-mailing-lists...

thrwaway1234567 3y ago
I don't think you can discuss hurricane electric dropping connection to kiwifarms, without discussing the possible reasons. It wasn't a software glitch; it was an intentional action.