[hnnh44]

To be fair to cloudflare, this is what the website being protected pays them to do. They can't effectively block malicious actors that are 100x more sophisticated than me, without being able to analyze that data.

I understand the risk of "evil" they could pull off with such a huge portion if internet traffic flowing through them, but the "you pay us for this service" model means they don't _need_ to monetize in evil ways. Whether they end up doing that or not remains to be seen.

I'm 100% against AMP though. As noted elsewhere, Google has repeatedly demonstrated they're not to be trusted.

[jgrahamc]

Correct, we do not need to monetize user traffic in evil ways. Our customer is the owner of a website, or someone exposing an API backend for an app, etc. They pay us for the service. They pay us more than it costs us to run the service. If we started monetizing our customers' traffic we'd be out of business in a flash.

[LoSboccacc]

well of course we all love cloudflare, it's great, we pay for it at work and I use it on almost all my projects at home.

but while that database might not be monetized by cloudflare, the mere existence of it makes it a high value target for everyone else.

we got all high confidence on cf's engineering, but we're one inch away from having everyone skeleton in the closet running out at large.

I mean usa just had an election whose result was allegedly influenced one way or another by state sponsored hacking. it doesn't get more higher stakes than that.

[samstave]

Exactly. I am not concerned that CF will "monetize" - I am concerned they will share data with government/other parties whom users have no knowledge of, or recourse against, said sharing.

Select * from population where political-affiliation is far-left AND age >30 AND reddit-user-name contains etc...

etc...