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

From what I understand, the political aspect of the issue aside, the problem is that if a site is served via CloudFlare, there's no easy way to identify and communicate with the actual hosting company.

Off the top of my head, this could be solved by adding the origin IP in CloudFlare's HTTP response headers. Am I wrong? Or this makes no sense (or it's there already) and I just don't know what I'm talking about?

EDIT: Ha! Got downvoted, probably because someone thought I want to help Russia censor the web. :)

Thing is, CloudFlare shouldn't be responsible for taking down sites, whatever the basis of the takedown might be; this should be addressed at the host level, not this or any other proxy.



>the problem is that if a site is served via CloudFlare, there's no easy way to identify and communicate with the actual hosting company

Isn't that the the entire point, though?


I don't follow. I use CloudFlare to make my sites respond faster and be protected from DOS attacks. Hiding the place where my files are stored is not why CloudFlare exists -- at least I thought so.

Of course one might argue that revealing the origin IP exposes it to DOS attacks, but this is a different issue.


That's basically what I was arguing - giving access to the origin IP undermines its value as a service.




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

Search: