is now hitting the archive.org wayback machine with the same as users, thus censoring history too.

@resist1984 One reason more to use Cloudflare.The wayback machine keeps data from all websites forever.Maybe it's interesting history for some public information but they also save social media,forums,everyone you ever wrote with no way to delete it.That's pure evil.

@nipos
Whether your dislike of the Wayback machine is justified or not -- putting them behind access restrictions like this only limits access by people who care about privacy, and disabled people -- hardly "just dessert"
@resist1984

@Mr_Teatime @resist1984 Nope because I explicitly whitelisted Tor in my Cloudflare settings resulting in Tor users being able to access the site without seeing a shitty Google captcha 😉

@nipos @Mr_Teatime w/ whitelisted is even worse, b/c then Tor users don't know they are interacting w/a CF MitM. Tor users then unwittingly support a Tor adversary.

@Mr_Teatime @nipos archive.org does users a service b/c it helps bypass the (if needed) & ensures the target site is not rewarded w/traffic or interaction.

@nipos @Mr_Teatime there is a very useful browser plugin that detects & automatically redirects to the archive of the page.

@Mr_Teatime @nipos the Firefox plugin that redirects CF sites is called "Block Cloudflare MITM Attack" and is posted here: addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firef. Description is in cyrillic but don't let that scare you off. This plugin will outright block CF sites: gitlab.com/gkrishnaks/cloud-fi

@resist1984 I was recently talking about Cloudflare with non-techie colleagues, and was trying to summarise what's wrong with Cloudflare. How would you put it?

The main issue is that it sees so much of all of the traffic, and that it serves as an obstacle to anonymous/TOR browsing. Anything else that should really be added and would likely make sense to them?

The starting point was that they saw it as something that helps people fend off DDoS attacks

@g at a high level, is very similar to . In both cases you have a vigilante extremist org so fixated on attacking their enemy that they have no regard for collateral damage to harmless users. Ppl cannot protect their own by running their own mail server b/c of SpamHaus, & ppl cannot protect their own identity b/c CF DoS's *all* users.

Follow

@g also harms non-Tor users by MitMing the connection. CF sees every username & unhashed password even when a TLS padlock is present.

@g a side-effect of CF DoSing users is to push ppl off Tor (to escape the ). That's disabling ppl of their protection.

@g w.r.t finding off DDoS attacks, note 1st that any CDN will offer that.. no reason to use . Also, once you have a DDoS attack, CF is no longer gratis. CF will force you to upgrade to premium b/c the attack counts toward your bandwidth allowance.

@g also realize that a DDoS attack is impractical from , b/c the exit nodes are too few & bandwidth is insufficent for that.

@g so it's crude & reckless to DoS in an anti-DoS effort. They want ppl to believe Tor is a DoS threat, but they're actually on an anti-bot agenda. Yet not all bots are malicious.

@g I could write a book on this. I'll also mention that uses 's , & that's a abuse in itself. Google links your logged in cookie w/the CF site the CAPTCHA is on.

@resist1984 yes, good point, so it's completely unnecessary... which makes clear this is intentional
@resist1984 Right. But other CDN will likely have similarly problematic behaviour. Let's say I'm a news organisation. Now google has a programme whereby it gives DDoS protection gratis to news organisations. If you do have DDoS problems, then this seems like a deal. But of course, google being google, it comes with all sorts of its own issues.

Full disclosure: my employer currently benefits of DDoS protection for free from https://equalit.ie/ (at first sight, it looks good, but I never really looked into that, will see). Targted DDoS had been a major issue in a few occasions

@g some problems like having visibility on all traffic are shared across all CDNs, so it's best to avoid CDNs entirely if possible. But if you must use a CDN, is the worst of the worst.. it shelters criminals and harms

@resist1984 well understood, that's a separate Cloudlfare controversy, but I'm aware of it
@resist1984 that's a great point, as indeed it impacts so much the browsing experience
@resist1984 I didn't think of it. And to be honest, I don't really understand how... admittedly, because I have a limited understanding of how CDN work. Don't they just pass things over using the host certificate? I'm obviously misunderstanding how this works

@g the TLS tunnel terminates at , so CF sees all traffic. It must work that way. If CF were to simply proxy all encrypted traffic to the origin, then it would fail to relieve the originating server of workload.

@g np. And note there may or may not be a 2nd tunnel between the originating server & CF, but in either case the end user sees a padlock

@resist1984 right, in principle, you have no way to know what happens on the other side of the tunnel, good point
@resist1984 thanks a lot for making these points much clearer to me, much appreciated!

@resist1984

So if I have a SSL certificate from Let's Encrypt setup, but still sit behind Cloudflare, is my data still compromised?

@resist1984 oh, right, so TLS tunnel terminates there, and if it looks good, it's then passed over in a new tunnel... got it
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon 🔐 privacytools.io

Fast, secure and up-to-date instance. PrivacyTools provides knowledge and tools to protect your privacy against global mass surveillance.

Website: privacytools.io
Matrix Chat: chat.privacytools.io
Support us on OpenCollective, many contributions are tax deductible!