Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)

[Dovid Bender <dovid () telecurve com>]

As was mentioned in the BlackHat video the DDOS providers don't like
competition and they try to take each other out which is they they nee to
be on clouadfare. If they were all kicked off of Cloudfare then they would
all take each other out leaving no need for clouydfare's DDOS sevices. So
by hosting these companies they are ensuring that they will have business.

(I have no evidence to this. Just a theory..............)



On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Steve Mikulasik <Steve.Mikulasik () civeo com
> wrote:

> I am sure a lawyer would see it very differently, I could see someone
> looking at this like racketeering. They get paid to provide a service to
> defend against DDoS, well knowingly hosting people who conduct DDoS
> attacks. Cloudflare profits from both the victims and the criminals. If
> Cloudflare isn't acting in good faith to shut down these sites when they
> receive evidence they are bad actors, they could find themselves in a bit
> of trouble.
>
> At this point Cloudflare would know that these bad actors are hosted on
> their service since we know many Cloudflare employees subscribe to the
> NANOG list, and the list of bad actors would now show up in their email
> server, ready for legal discovery.
>
> Disclaimer: I have a ton of respect for Clouldflare and what they do on
> the internet.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces () nanog org] On Behalf Of Randy Bush
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 8:56 AM
> To: Paras Jha <paras () protrafsolutions com>
> Cc: NANOG list <nanog () nanog org>
> Subject: Re: EVERYTHING about Booters (and CloudFlare)
>
> > I suppose it's inevitable, given that both are known for having
> > non-existent abuse departments.
>
> as the OP made pretty clear, it's not a matter of an abuse contact.
> it is the service not acting as a law enforcement agency and asking for a
> court order.  most large service providers operate in that way.
>
> randy