6 ms·
[flagged]
by ghjfrdghibt 2y ago
[flagged]
- gruez 2y ago>Everyone should only be allowed to use windows and a chrome browser variant with no ad blocking. Cloudflare 100% should be allowed to arbitrarily block anyone not using this set up because they are suspicious. Seems like a slippery slope argument, but isn't reflective of reality. They still allow Tor browser to pass, of all things.
- ghjfrdghibt 2y agoIt wasn't meant to be taken seriously, I was using it to show the ridiculousness of blaming a user for the shortcomings of cloudflare. But if you like: the arbitrarily blocked user if not at fault, cloudflare is at fault.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- gruez 2y ago>I was using it to show the ridiculousness of blaming a user for the shortcomings of cloudflare. That doesn't advance the conversation, or show that cloudflare should be always as fault, as you seem to imply. Even if people are pro privacy/freedom, I think most wouldn't give the individual (as opposed to the security provider) unlimited leeway, as seen in the bank example.
- ghjfrdghibt 2y ago[flagged]
- gruez 2y ago[flagged]
- ghjfrdghibt 2y ago[flagged]
- gruez 2y ago[flagged]
- ghjfrdghibt 2y ago[flagged]
- gruez 2y ago[flagged]
- ghjfrdghibt 2y ago[flagged]
- dang 2y agoYou broke the site guidelines repeatedly and badly in this thread, crossing into swipes and personal attacks. We have to ban accounts that post like this. Fortunately I don't see other cases of this in a quick runthrough of the account's posting history, so this should be easy to fix. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.
- dang 2y agoYou also broke the site guidelines in this thread. Please don't do this, regardless of how provocative other comments are or you feel they are. It just feeds a downward spiral. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- johnklos 2y agoDoes "But if you're going out of your way to look suspicious" advance the conversation?
- gruez 2y agoIt advances the conversation because it refutes the argument that "It's not the users fault" brought up a few comments ago, by using the balaclavas in bank analogy.
- ghjfrdghibt 2y agoIt refutes nothing, it attempts to place the blame for cloudflare incompetence at the feet of a user who has done nothing wrong.
- gruez 2y agoReplied in the other comment. In short: if someone wears a balaclava to a bank, would you say that person also "has done nothing wrong"?
- ghjfrdghibt 2y agoIn short, just answering this question (which as stated in the other comment is not the issue), yes that person has t done anything wrong. There is no offence for wearing hats in banks.
- gruez 2y ago>There is no offence for wearing hats in banks. But banks aren't mandated to admit you either. Just because it's legal, doesn't mean a private establishment has to let you in. When it comes to denying entry, banks are relatively tame. Some establishments go beyond that, by denying entry unless you wear formal clothing, or presenting proof of identity.
- 2y ago
- Zak 2y agoMobile operating systems with remote attestation (that's both Android and iOS) aren't far off from that with regard to native apps. It doesn't affect the web yet, but Google did propose adding an attestation mechanism to Chrome.
- ghjfrdghibt 2y agoI vaguely remember this from this last year though I can't remember all the details. That's a scary slippery slope. Of course it'll be presented as a security feature, because users are dumb, whilst also allowing vendors to lock you into their ecosystem; similar to how passkeys are currently being push by these same companies.