News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records. Parent comment

Re:AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records by ranger_danger on Sunday July 14, 2024 @05:52PM (#40963468)
cloudflare is blocked here... do you have a better archive?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records by jjcm on Sunday July 14, 2024 @06:28PM (#40963664)
> cloudflare is blocked here

Not affiliated with cloudflare at all, just curious - where is "here" and why is a major edge cloud provider blocked?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records by Arnavion on Sunday July 14, 2024 @06:51PM (#40963800)
archive.today doesn't use CloudFlare in the first place. I think ranger_danger meant to say that they use Cloudflare's DNS resolver (1.1.1.1) which doesn't work with archive.today. (archive.today wants location information that the client normally sends in its DNS request to be able to route the client to an appropriate server, but CloudFlare's resolver sends its own location with less granularity which breaks that.)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records by ranger_danger on Sunday July 14, 2024 @09:08PM (#40964512)
> One more step

> Please complete the security check to access archive.ph

It's not a DNS issue (and I don't use theirs), the site itself uses CF and I get endless captcha loops. Sometimes the site will just say "you are blocked" instead too, or even "Your browser is out of date" when it's not.

https://community.cloudflare.com/t/one-more-step-please-comp...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records by reaperman on Monday July 15, 2024 @12:32AM (#40965291)
For your sanity, I had this same issue for awhile on some of my devices but not others and couldn't understand exactly what was causing it.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records by Arnavion on Monday July 15, 2024 @06:57PM (#40972206)
archive.today (and its sister sites like .ph) don't use CloudFlare, but given the problems they have with it, they might do something like resolve to a CloudFlare-backed sinkhole if they think you're coming from CloudFlare's resolver. Would be funny if true.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records by ranger_danger on Monday July 15, 2024 @10:51PM (#40973327)
The message I'm getting though ("Please complete the security check to access archive.ph") is from CF, and I do not use their DNS or anyone who does.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records by Arnavion on Tuesday July 16, 2024 @12:18PM (#40977909)
Read the comment carefully.

>The message I'm getting though ("Please complete the security check to access archive.ph") is from CF

That is what I said.

>and I do not use their DNS or anyone who does.

That is not what I said.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records by ranger_danger on Tuesday July 16, 2024 @12:25PM (#40977965)
> is from CF

> That is what I said

No, you said:

> archive.today (and its sister sites like .ph) don't use CloudFlare,

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records by Arnavion on Tuesday July 16, 2024 @01:09PM (#40978329)
Well done on reading that far. Now do me the favor of reading past that.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records by ranger_danger on Tuesday July 16, 2024 @01:27PM (#40978481)
I think one could argue that your supposed sinkhole is still "using CF". I still don't agree with your response "that's what I said", and I think you don't really know what they're using anyways so this is a pointless argument IMO.

Either way that's no excuse for the attitude. Please try to think about how your words come across to others and whether you would want to be treated the same way, especially when it is something trivial like a disagreement on terminology.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records by Arnavion on Tuesday July 16, 2024 @01:39PM (#40978582)
That's fine. I know how to read so I don't have to worry. When I do have reading failures I have the fortitude to accept my mistake.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records by leftbehind on Sunday July 28, 2024 @02:04AM (#41091501)
The site does not use CF. It is not CF ! Its intentional blocking users with an fake captcha by presenting page that looks like CF branding
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records by reaperman on Sunday July 14, 2024 @06:06PM (#40963544)
Maybe consider using https://quad9.net for DNS? It's nice having archive.today work. Otherwise you can always copy/paste the link to TFA into https://archive.org
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AT&T Paid a Hacker $370k to Delete Stolen Phone Records by ranger_danger on Sunday July 14, 2024 @09:06PM (#40964499)
The DNS is not the problem... the site itself gives me a "you are blocked" page directly from CF. I don't get a different result from using different DNS either way.
[ Parent | on HN ]