Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by SpicyLemonZest 634 days ago
It's hard to see why Cloudflare would put themselves in this position if they're planning to back down when the order inevitably comes in. (Perhaps Twitter somehow did this without Cloudflare's cooperation - I wouldn't put that past them trying but I'd be surprised if it were possible.)
2 comments
kingofthehill98 634 days ago
Don't see why they would join this fight agains't Brazil.

The money X Corp is paying them cannot be THAT great to justify losing all brazilian costumers and Cloudflare doesn't seem like a very ideology-driven company.

link
beeflet 634 days ago
I think it would be about the matter of principle and demonstrating that they will defend their customer's interests.
link
tmottabr 634 days ago
They will defend their customer interests by staying able to do business in Brazil..

Lets remember that Twitter is not their only customer..

So if twitter has problem with some country justice it is their problem to solve, not a problem to be shared with every other Cloudflare customer..

Also, i doubt that they are making more money from Twitter then every other customer in Brazil added together..

link
beeflet 634 days ago
by complying with the block it sets a precedent that is bad for their other customers in the long term, not the short term.
link
tmottabr 634 days ago
They already do content blocking all over the world..

The precedent is already set, this is nothing new..

link
fivre 634 days ago
are there technical details on exactly what x.com did?

cloudflare offers a lot of self-service tools, which can and do allow customers that cloudflare doesn't want to service to use it until someone finds out (my favorite example is that, briefly, the foreign ministry of Iran briefly managed to register and activate properties on the service)

registering while only directing brazilian clients to cloudflare would be difficult using the standard method (setting your domain's nameservers to the cloudflare servers), but cloudflare's CNAME setup option only requires a TXT record. it's possible x.com did that by just paying for a business plan and never interacting with cloudflare staff

doing so for the _root_ record is a bit dicier, but as x.com operates its own nameservers they're probably able to handle the not-quite compliant fuckery necessary to CNAME the root: https://developers.cloudflare.com/dns/zone-setups/partial-se...

link