4 ms·

As someone stated in the other HN thread, this is a bit of a dick move. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5741905 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=57419

by kmfrk 13y ago

As someone stated in the other HN thread, this is a bit of a dick move. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5741905 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5741905

logn 13y ago
I read the flickr TOS. I don't think this violates it. How is this a dick move? Get over yourself. They're valuing the company at $1.1 Billion. If you can actually drain any significant amount of their resources then sure it's a dick move, but crazy impressive. Besides, you really think Yahoo! would be so upset that hackers are using their site for a public CDN? Sure they might make a big fuss, but they probably would think it's cool too. Afterall, flickr started as an online game. Who's to say they won't pivot again? Further, as much as anyone wants to complain about the downfall of hacker news quality, this has made me more cynical than anyone's nit or snark or trolling.
- sjs382 13y ago
  >They're valuing the company at $1.1 Billion. Flickr != Tumblr
- macspoofing 13y ago
  >I read the flickr TOS. I don't think this violates it Doesn't mean your account won't get suspended. I'm sure the TOS has a "we can do whatever we want to your account" clause somewhere in there.
- greggman 13y ago
  You can't use Flickr as a public CDN AFAIK. Their terms require if you use flickr to host an image displayed in another page that page must provide a link to the photo's page on flickr. Flickr also only allows photos, illustrations and screenshots. (and video). Nothing else. These terms are not spelled out in the ToS but in their community guidelines and faq There are plenty of examples of people having their accounts closed for not following these rules.
ricardobeat 13y ago
I must have missed that thread. It's almost the same implementation. It's just a fun POC. It's not reliable, efficient or fast enough to be something you'd use daily. I imagine it would be quite easy to filter out (and revoke API keys) if something like this started becoming popular.
shocks 13y ago
The act of abusing this script to store large files at Yahoo's expense is a dick move, but writing this script is not a dick move.
- sillysaurus 13y ago
  The act of abusing this script to store large files at Yahoo's expense is a dick move Why?
  - VikingCoder 13y ago
    ...is it mutually beneficial, if you store legitimate images? Yes. ...does it benefit Yahoo in any way, if you exploit a currently open loophole to store data that is not an image? No.
  - msellout 13y ago
    How are you defining "a dick move"?
  - shocks 13y ago
    Oh please. You know exactly why.
    - sillysaurus 13y ago
      Actually, I don't, otherwise I wouldn't have asked. Why are you so mean?
      - shocks 13y ago
        Heh, sorry. Perhaps I should have used a ':P' emoticon. I didn't intend on being mean. It's a dick move because it takes advantage of their systems to do things they clearly don't want you doing.
macspoofing 13y ago
It isn't a dick move. It doesn't hurt Yahoo, and most likely will hurt the 'abuser' since Yahoo will just suspend such accounts whenever they feel like it, and the stored data will just be gone.
- VikingCoder 13y ago
  If you say you'll store images, and I make you store things that are not images - taking up hard drive space you didn't intend to let me use - that hurts you financially. Any other reading of the situation is based on fantasy.
  - macspoofing 13y ago
    The "financial hurt" is mitigated by the fact that they can just ban your account and your access to your terabyte of stored data and possibly other yahoo services, anytime they want. >Any other reading of the situation is based on fantasy. Not necessarily. It is possible that Yahoo engineers may actually be amused and supportive of the way their service was remixed.
    - VikingCoder 13y ago
      How is that "mitigated"? You're saying there's a natural defense to this first attack, so therefore the attack doesn't hurt. Except it costs engineering time to fight back against this attack. Then, someone starts putting the file into the RGB channels. Then, it costs engineering time to fight back. Then, someone starts putting the file into the low-order bits... which happens to make the file compress terribly, compared to a normal PNG. Then, it costs engineering time to fight back.
      - macspoofing 13y ago
        Talk about cynicism. As I wrote, it is possible that Yahoo could be amused and supportive of this project, no? Corps react in various ways, and Yahoo could go either way. So unless you're representing Yahoo, why go about bitching at people for a clever remix that technically doesn't violate the TOS and doesn't exploit any vulnerabilities, when Yahoo hasn't even made an official statement. Second ... you're characterizing it as an "attack"... really? The people who'll try to use it would be people who just want some cheap cloud-storage. And as I said before, they should use at their own risk, else they may wake-up one day and find their account is banned, and the terabyte of data they uploaded (which takes a non-trivial amount of time) will be gone, along with their yahoo mail and anything else yahoo was hosting for them. Seriously, why the stick up your ass?

by kmfrk 13y ago

As someone stated in the other HN thread, this is a bit of a dick move. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5741905 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5741905

logn 13y ago

I read the flickr TOS. I don't think this violates it. How is this a dick move? Get over yourself. They're valuing the company at $1.1 Billion. If you can actually drain any significant amount of their resources then sure it's a dick move, but crazy impressive. Besides, you really think Yahoo! would be so upset that hackers are using their site for a public CDN? Sure they might make a big fuss, but they probably would think it's cool too. Afterall, flickr started as an online game. Who's to say they won't pivot again? Further, as much as anyone wants to complain about the downfall of hacker news quality, this has made me more cynical than anyone's nit or snark or trolling.

sjs382 13y ago
>They're valuing the company at $1.1 Billion. Flickr != Tumblr
macspoofing 13y ago
>I read the flickr TOS. I don't think this violates it Doesn't mean your account won't get suspended. I'm sure the TOS has a "we can do whatever we want to your account" clause somewhere in there.
greggman 13y ago
You can't use Flickr as a public CDN AFAIK. Their terms require if you use flickr to host an image displayed in another page that page must provide a link to the photo's page on flickr. Flickr also only allows photos, illustrations and screenshots. (and video). Nothing else. These terms are not spelled out in the ToS but in their community guidelines and faq There are plenty of examples of people having their accounts closed for not following these rules.

ricardobeat 13y ago

I must have missed that thread. It's almost the same implementation. It's just a fun POC. It's not reliable, efficient or fast enough to be something you'd use daily. I imagine it would be quite easy to filter out (and revoke API keys) if something like this started becoming popular.

shocks 13y ago

The act of abusing this script to store large files at Yahoo's expense is a dick move, but writing this script is not a dick move.

sillysaurus 13y ago
The act of abusing this script to store large files at Yahoo's expense is a dick move Why?
- VikingCoder 13y ago
  ...is it mutually beneficial, if you store legitimate images? Yes. ...does it benefit Yahoo in any way, if you exploit a currently open loophole to store data that is not an image? No.
- msellout 13y ago
  How are you defining "a dick move"?
- shocks 13y ago
  Oh please. You know exactly why.
  - sillysaurus 13y ago
    Actually, I don't, otherwise I wouldn't have asked. Why are you so mean?
    - shocks 13y ago
      Heh, sorry. Perhaps I should have used a ':P' emoticon. I didn't intend on being mean. It's a dick move because it takes advantage of their systems to do things they clearly don't want you doing.

macspoofing 13y ago

It isn't a dick move. It doesn't hurt Yahoo, and most likely will hurt the 'abuser' since Yahoo will just suspend such accounts whenever they feel like it, and the stored data will just be gone.

VikingCoder 13y ago
If you say you'll store images, and I make you store things that are not images - taking up hard drive space you didn't intend to let me use - that hurts you financially. Any other reading of the situation is based on fantasy.
- macspoofing 13y ago
  The "financial hurt" is mitigated by the fact that they can just ban your account and your access to your terabyte of stored data and possibly other yahoo services, anytime they want. >Any other reading of the situation is based on fantasy. Not necessarily. It is possible that Yahoo engineers may actually be amused and supportive of the way their service was remixed.
  - VikingCoder 13y ago
    How is that "mitigated"? You're saying there's a natural defense to this first attack, so therefore the attack doesn't hurt. Except it costs engineering time to fight back against this attack. Then, someone starts putting the file into the RGB channels. Then, it costs engineering time to fight back. Then, someone starts putting the file into the low-order bits... which happens to make the file compress terribly, compared to a normal PNG. Then, it costs engineering time to fight back.
    - macspoofing 13y ago
      Talk about cynicism. As I wrote, it is possible that Yahoo could be amused and supportive of this project, no? Corps react in various ways, and Yahoo could go either way. So unless you're representing Yahoo, why go about bitching at people for a clever remix that technically doesn't violate the TOS and doesn't exploit any vulnerabilities, when Yahoo hasn't even made an official statement. Second ... you're characterizing it as an "attack"... really? The people who'll try to use it would be people who just want some cheap cloud-storage. And as I said before, they should use at their own risk, else they may wake-up one day and find their account is banned, and the terabyte of data they uploaded (which takes a non-trivial amount of time) will be gone, along with their yahoo mail and anything else yahoo was hosting for them. Seriously, why the stick up your ass?