Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Reading this post just concerns me more than anything.

DDoS protection is pretty much vital infrastructure for any web site, and Cloudflare is one of the first and largest organisations that provides this service. Infrastructure of this scale and this importance should be impartial, but this is more evidence that CloudFlare isn't.

For example, Cloudflare at the whim of Mathew Prince pulled service for white supremacist site "Daily Stormer" [1] - because they made claims of support and their content "made him angry".

The message is clear, if your content makes a CEO angry your site may be DDoS'd off the internet (eg. Daily Stormer), if your content getting DDoS'd off the internet makes a CEO "sick", then you'll get special treatment (eg. Ukranian Newspaper).

Would this blog post be as warming to people, if Cloudflare didn't help the newspaper because it supported Russian claims over Crimea?

Regardless of your content, if your content is legal, the political whims of tech CEOs shouldn't be what ensures you have consumer rights.

[1] https://blog.cloudflare.com/why-we-terminated-daily-stormer/



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: