Matthew Prince lied.

It's been over 12 hours since the IMMINENT AND EMERGENCY THREAT TO HUMAN LIFE, a threat so immediate that law enforcement couldn't act in time to stop it, and only seizing the .net domain would stop it.

The site didn't go down, so presumably any nefarious plots coordinated here would have continued and been executed by now. Either that, or Cloudflare is full of shit and there was never any threat.

So where are the bodies, Matthew? Where's the violence? Where's all that that dangerous imminent terrorism that depends on the very site I've been successfully using since the minute you freaked out and lied?
 
Archive of the article:
Title.png

I ran the worlds largest DDoS-for-Hire empire and CloudFlare helped​

09/03/2022


Today CloudFlare is in the spotlight for their decision to revoke access to a website behind their network, the timing comes just 3 days after they published a blog post discussing their abuse policies and making the following statement:
"Some argue that we should terminate these services to content we find reprehensible so that others can launch attacks to knock it offline. That is the equivalent argument in the physical world that the fire department shouldn't respond to fires in the homes of people who do not possess sufficient moral character"
I agree with CloudFlare's analogy, the fire department should respond to a fire at any home regardless of who lives in it. However this real world example is not an accurate representation of the situation CloudFlare is presenting. As the operator of the largest DDoS-for-Hire empire in the history of the internet, I have a unique perspective on the situation CloudFlare finds themselves in.

"Avoiding" an abuse of power​

As the infrastructure provider for over 20% of all www traffic traversing the internet today, CloudFlare is in a position to enforce it's beliefs on a global scale. Most of the time this isn't a problem, lots of nefarious websites try to take advantage of the services CloudFlare offers and are rightfully kicked off. The problems arise in a small category of websites that blur the line. Is it okay to revoke access to a website promoting hate speech and violence? Who interprets what qualifies as hate speech? Should a single forum post in a sea of thousands disqualify an entire website? Who makes the decision on how these criteria are defined?

CloudFlare's answers to these questions has historically been: nothing. They have repeated again and again that because they are an internet utility they remain neutral on these topics and leave it up to the hosting providers to answer these questions. However CloudFlare is not a neutral utility, they are a publicly traded company and have shareholders to report to, can any fire department in the world say the same?

As a young cyber miscreant I operated dozens of booter ("DDoS-for-Hire") services throughout my teenage years, and every single one of them used CloudFlare to protect my websites from rival DDoS attacks. Without CloudFlare's "neutral" security service offerings I couldn't have facilitated millions of DDoS attacks. It's hard to stress just how instrumental CloudFlare is in the success of a booter services operation, booters that didn't have protection from CloudFlare would not remain online very long.

It looks like not much has changed throughout the years, just like I took advantage of CloudFlare's services many years ago, the first result on google for the search term "booter" is doing the same thing today. As long as CloudFlare doesn't intervene in the operation of these websites, they are "avoiding" an abuse of power, isn't that convenient?

Downstream Responsibility​

article.png
As someone who has previously justified their actions by saying "I am not directly causing harm, the responsibility flows downstream to my end users" I can tell you it is a shaky defense at best. The situation would be different if CloudFlare was unaware of the booter websites they are offering protection to, but that is not the case. CloudFlare knows who they are protecting and chooses to continue doing so, being fully cognizant of the end result their actions will have. Let's talk about that end result because the hypocrisy of it all stings like a slap in the face as I type this.

CloudFlare is responsible for keeping booter websites online and operating, the very same websites who's sole purpose is to fuel CloudFlare's very own business model, selling DDoS protection. Dear reader please take a moment to reflect upon the last sentence.

CloudFlare is a fire department that prides itself on putting out fires at any house regardless of the individual that lives there, what they forget to mention is they are actively lighting these fires and making money by putting them out!​

I'm reminded of a similar story published by my favorite journalist many years ago: Spreading the Disease and Selling the Cure

CloudFlare's own responsibility chart tells us they feel they have no obligation to take action against booter services flourishing under their network, even though the end result of their inaction means they will get more customers purchasing their security services and the internet as a whole will be infested with more DDoS traffic than it otherwise would be. If your business is putting out fires, ensuring a steady stream continue to be lit might just be in your best interests.

In either my case or CloudFlare's, we are both a few rungs detached on the ladder that ultimately ends with a DDoS attack and we are both financially motivated to not break this ladder. It's one thing to be on this ladder as a teenager with misguided aspirations and another to be a company with a 20 billion dollar market cap hiding behind a ruse of not wanting to censor free speech.

Regardless of the laws interpretation on where the responsibility falls for the facilitation of these attacks, there is no argument against the fact that should CloudFlare intervene and boot booter services off their platform (hah), the need for their paid protection services would diminish

Closing Thoughts​

Despite my critiques of CloudFlare in this blog, they offer an amazing public service to the world. I have been a CloudFlare user since I was I was 14 and continue to endorse their services. I've used CloudFlare in many ways throughout the years and todays article was written completely objectively. As a company who's mission is to help build a better Internet they are not aligned with that goal while these websites are allowed to flourish on their network.

The CEO of CloudFlare, Matthew Prince, has shown he is willing to intervene when he deems it necessary. If Matthew were to read this I would ask him, don't you think you would set a positive precedent by reversing course on your booter policy? There are no free speech or human rights considerations here, there is only the right choice and the wrong one.

Disclaimer: I am not proud of my past actions and understand I don't have the best record of building a better internet. I am working on fixing that with each passing day and hope you don't judge an entire persons character soley on the actions of their youth.

Written by Rasbora
09/03/2022



Ps: I redirected the links to archive
|| Archive 1 || Archive 2 || Archvive 3 ||
 
I know Null was planning on moving to a variety of services to prevent single points of failure like Cloudflare. I hope they get enacted soon, since Keffals and Co seem to be incredibly persistent and annoying - more so than the other cows the Farms had to deal with.
Our dear leader is pretty much the sole source of developing secure web architecture right now. Just because he wants a shitposting site.
If Cloudflare is a vulnarbility (aka. they bow to screeching troons), then this should be mitigated.

Maybe someone in here has influence on acquisition decisions (you might be quite surprised) and remember that Cloudflare is not a reliable service. You wouldn't want that for your own web services.

And so the wheels are turning again.
 
Hope this doesnt come across as fedposting, but it’s impossible to ignore that this sort of deplatforming is exactly what radicalizes people. Yes, KiwiFarms is a gossip forum for and about retards, but it’s also one of the last bastions for free speech online. After a while, when more and more sites go down for less justifiable grounds, the everyday person will be confronted with a very uncomfortable realization: these people are tyrants, my liberties are being actively infringed upon.

The next question is simple but loaded: “how much do I have to lose”? I realized this point this morning, as it relates to the other obvious question “why do troons have this much social influence?”. I think a big part that explains “why troons?” is that most people who get involved with trans communities / actively transition have very little in their life to lose. By their own admission, they are poor, mentally unwell, told to hate themselves every day, etc. People with little to lose are the easiest to manipulate and radicalize. Now, what if you could astroturf social acceptance for this group, and make it so they are exempt from the social threat of physical violence that “all men” have to face? You now have a lovely political hound to sick on wrong-thinkers without any risk of practical retaliation.

The real question is just how long can that facade hold up? Eventually, people feel forced to take a stand out of pride and principal alone. It becomes even harder to ignore when the people behind deplatforming campaign are as obviously reprehensible as Keffals just by example. I think those people really do feel bulletproof—the Teflon Troons if you will—and can you blame them? Unfortunately for them, however, they’re also too short sighted and high off the smell of their own amholes to realize that they’re nothing more than the useful idiots of the commies and Jews. If shit really hit the fan, there isn’t a demographic that’s less mentally and physically adjusted to handle such a scenario. Just to reiterate, this is NOT a call to action / violence, I’m just spitballing here.
 
The unacceptable views and behaviors are what free speech battles alwys hinge upon - it’s easy to support freedom of speech when it’s polite and agrees with you.

10 years ago, people defended the rights of Westboro and the KKK even if they thought they were assholes. We‘re far less noxious and far less aggressive than either of those groups, and yet people can’t bear to allow ua to exist.
The ACLU gets massive shit constantly from these people for defending the Nazis' rights in Skokie in 1978. I feel like any day now the ACLU will apologize and say they wished they had never done that. They've all but come out saying there probably should be a hate speech exception to the First Amendment. I'm sure that bookburner Chase Strangio faggot has been pushing them to declare anything troons don't like as not protect by the First Amendment so people can be thrown in prison or killed for transphobia.
 
How many fedposts are posted on /pol/ every minute?
Probably hundreds, yet you don't see such a massive push from the troon brigade to deplatform 4chan from Cloudflare(admittedly they could go there next if this site goes down for good), stating the obvious here but they really hate having their open criminal activity exposed and catalogued by the forum.

Every totalitarian regime has an elite group of janissaries, the tranny brigade is probably its most disgusting iteration yet, they are unironically ontologically evil and I take some glee knowing that their existence is pure physical suffering, to the point they will inevitably take their own life sooner rather than later.
 
Immediate threat to human life incoming:

You know that Matthew Prince! I'm coming to kill you! In San Francisco, at your house! (in minecraft)

Lucas "Keffals" Roberts told me to do this

I know it's a Sam Hyde quote. Others don't and may take it seriously. This is exact the kind of posts that started the trouble. Well done.
 
Null should just point the .net DNS record to one of the archived twitter permabannable fedposts or chomo tweets. Then watch journos write stories where they don't mention what they see at the .net domain lol.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: urr13 account
Pretending to be retarded makes other people think you're retarded. You can say "in minecraft" or add "/sneed" to your posts but it will be shared as though you were serious all the same.

Aye I suppose. I mean this eniter affair proves that lmfao.
 
Back