5 ms·

You cannot just put Cloudflare in front of your Google hosted bucket, that's against CF's terms of service. In order to do that you would have to also host the

You cannot just put Cloudflare in front of your Google hosted bucket, that's against CF's terms of service. In order to do that you would have to also host the content itself on Cloudflare R2/Images etc. There used to be also html only restriction but that's no longer the case. > Next, we got rid of the antiquated HTML vs. non-HTML construct, which was far too broad. Finally, we made it clear that customers can serve video and other large files using the CDN so long as that content is hosted by a Cloudflare service like Stream, Images, or R2. https://blog.cloudflare.com/updated-tos/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/updated-tos/

KomoD 2y ago
You totally can, just not a "disproportionate percentage"
- frankjr 2y ago
  That's when you're caching a whole page which contains images. The OP is talking about putting the CDN in front of a bucket which doesn't serve anything but images (= 100%).
  - kijin 2y ago
    You can easily work around that problem by putting the CDN in front of everything, including web pages and API calls, not only your bucket of images. OP might want to do that anyway, since the attacker will now be hammering their Rails app instead of just the bucket.
JohnMakin 2y ago
This is absolutely nuts to me and would immediately rule out ever hosting anything on google storage for me
- krzys 2y ago
  It’s Cloudflare’s, which prohibits usage not directly related to hosting web content.
- JohnMakin 2y ago
  i cant delete this but i misread original comment.
ghayes 2y ago
Where is this against the GCP or CloudFlare's TOS?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
voxic11 2y ago
Lots of people do this, so you definitely can do this even if its against CF's terms of service, which is something I can't find evidence of.
- frankjr 2y ago
  > Cloudflare reserves the right to disable or limit your access to or use of the CDN, or to limit your End Users’ access to certain of your resources through the CDN, if you use or are suspected of using the CDN without such Paid Services to serve video or a disproportionate percentage of pictures, audio files, or other large files. If you're putting the CDN in front of a bucket with nothing but images, you're automatically in breach. https://www.cloudflare.com/service-specific-terms-application-services/#content-delivery-network-terms https://www.cloudflare.com/service-specific-terms-applicatio...
  - theginger 2y ago
    The issue would be if you just did it for the bucket but didn't load any web pages through cloudlfare, as long as your website uses cloudlfare, this is a very normal and supported use case. You might potentially run into problems if you used it just for the bucket, the pages (or what ever else) the images in the bucket are normally called from aren't using cloudlfare so cloudlfare just sees your bucket and nothing else, I've never come across people having issues with this but I've only ever seen it for people who have at least some of their normal traffic also going through cloudlfare.
- hinkley 2y ago
  Is this your private opinion, or your professional one? Because that sentence doesn’t cut the mustard in a professional setting. That’s a FAFO sentiment.
  - chrisweekly 2y ago
    FAFO: F*ck Around and Find Out
  - kijin 2y ago

KomoD 2y ago

You totally can, just not a "disproportionate percentage"

frankjr 2y ago
That's when you're caching a whole page which contains images. The OP is talking about putting the CDN in front of a bucket which doesn't serve anything but images (= 100%).
- kijin 2y ago
  You can easily work around that problem by putting the CDN in front of everything, including web pages and API calls, not only your bucket of images. OP might want to do that anyway, since the attacker will now be hammering their Rails app instead of just the bucket.

JohnMakin 2y ago

This is absolutely nuts to me and would immediately rule out ever hosting anything on google storage for me

krzys 2y ago
It’s Cloudflare’s, which prohibits usage not directly related to hosting web content.
JohnMakin 2y ago
i cant delete this but i misread original comment.

ghayes 2y ago

Where is this against the GCP or CloudFlare's TOS?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

voxic11 2y ago

Lots of people do this, so you definitely can do this even if its against CF's terms of service, which is something I can't find evidence of.

frankjr 2y ago
> Cloudflare reserves the right to disable or limit your access to or use of the CDN, or to limit your End Users’ access to certain of your resources through the CDN, if you use or are suspected of using the CDN without such Paid Services to serve video or a disproportionate percentage of pictures, audio files, or other large files. If you're putting the CDN in front of a bucket with nothing but images, you're automatically in breach. https://www.cloudflare.com/service-specific-terms-application-services/#content-delivery-network-terms https://www.cloudflare.com/service-specific-terms-applicatio...
- theginger 2y ago
  The issue would be if you just did it for the bucket but didn't load any web pages through cloudlfare, as long as your website uses cloudlfare, this is a very normal and supported use case. You might potentially run into problems if you used it just for the bucket, the pages (or what ever else) the images in the bucket are normally called from aren't using cloudlfare so cloudlfare just sees your bucket and nothing else, I've never come across people having issues with this but I've only ever seen it for people who have at least some of their normal traffic also going through cloudlfare.
hinkley 2y ago
Is this your private opinion, or your professional one? Because that sentence doesn’t cut the mustard in a professional setting. That’s a FAFO sentiment.
- chrisweekly 2y ago
  FAFO: F*ck Around and Find Out
- kijin 2y ago