|
On July 27 2009 14:01 GHOSTCLAW wrote:
4chan will end up as the victor I bet...
Just because they're probably more motivated and tech savvy than at&t is. I wouldn't put it past 4chan to just hack into at&t, and get themselves back "on the internet"
you think 4chan is more tech savy than at&t? do you know what at&t does?
anyway, i hate 4chan. it is full of fucking idiots. that said, at&t is in the wrong here if this is what it seems to be.
|
I'm not a real fan of 4chan in general, but I will say I'm glad AT&T tried to hit them first. I think 4chan is one of the few online organizations that can actually put up a big enough stink to take on a corporation. This is going to be a landmark case for net neutrality.
|
Mystlord
United States10264 Posts
This will be fun ^_^
AT&T is up for one helluva fight.
|
I think they are simply trying to end the DDOS attacks against 4chan, the attacks were aimed against /b, therefore only /b is affected. The earlier claim which is true is that AT&T has in the past threatened to ban 4chan access if they didn't clean up their content, the extent of this ban would be the WHOLE 4chan website and not just one board. If they were truly banning 4chan they would ban the entire website and not just one board.
|
On July 27 2009 14:27 Integra wrote:
I think they are simply trying to end the DDOS attacks against 4chan, the attacks were aimed against /b, therefore only /b is affected. The earlier claim which is true is that AT&T has in the past threatened to ban 4chan access if they didn't clean up their content, the extent of this ban would be the WHOLE 4chan website and not just one board. If they were truly banning 4chan they would ban the entire website and not just one board.
Why does att care that 4chan is being DDOS'd?
|
|
|
what does /b have that AT&T wants them to clean up? i visited it once or twice years ago to see what all the fuss was about but i couldn't stand the layout and the annoying posts, and nothing made any sense to me, so i never bothered to go back
all i saw were weird anime captions that i didn't recognize
|
On July 27 2009 14:27 Integra wrote:
I think they are simply trying to end the DDOS attacks against 4chan, the attacks were aimed against /b, therefore only /b is affected. The earlier claim which is true is that AT&T has in the past threatened to ban 4chan access if they didn't clean up their content, the extent of this ban would be the WHOLE 4chan website and not just one board. If they were truly banning 4chan they would ban the entire website and not just one board.
I was under the impression they did ban the whole 4chan website
at bare minimum it's more than just /b
|
Kentor
United States5784 Posts
god damn i can't go on /b/
|
On July 27 2009 14:22 choboPEon wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2009 14:01 GHOSTCLAW wrote:
4chan will end up as the victor I bet...
Just because they're probably more motivated and tech savvy than at&t is. I wouldn't put it past 4chan to just hack into at&t, and get themselves back "on the internet"
you think 4chan is more tech savy than at&t? do you know what at&t does?
Do you know what 4chan does?
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On July 27 2009 14:13 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2009 14:08 GrandInquisitor wrote:On July 27 2009 14:03 Gene wrote:
can someone explain why 4chan constantly being DDOS'd has any affect on AT&T? On July 27 2009 14:04 travis wrote:On July 27 2009 13:56 Zzoram wrote:UPDATED 6: 4chan’s current gameplan evolving over at Encyclopedia Dramatica (Great stuff!). Also, from reports gathered on Reddit, it seems this block allegedly is because of massive DDoS-attacks against img.4chan.org. The reports doesn’t say anything about why AT&T would block 15.5% of all US internet users from using a specific website without any warning, though. Over-reacting to a normal ISP response of taking down sites that are hit with massive DDoS-attacks until they are stopped? Sounds like 4chan to me. I don't think you know what you are talking about. TO EVERYONE SAYING THEY TOOK IT DOWN BECAUSE OF DDOS ATTACKScould u pls explain the rational behind this? how do the ddos attacks against 4chan effect at&t subscribers? how does it effect anyone other than the servers that host 4chan? your reasoning makes no sense. DDoS = distributed denial of service a lot of machines that are on AT&T bandwidth are attacking 4chan's servers this is bad both for 4chan and for AT&T, because it uses up a lot of bandwidth on both ends AT&T can only stop this by preventing access to the 4chan server you don't see the many flaws in this logic? 1.) if the attacks are coming from at&t users, it's at&t's responsibility to shut down those users... 2.) no one ever contacted 4chan about it 3.) the bulk of the attacks were happening quite a while ago 4.) blocking a domain to every user (millions of people), because some people were sending ddos attacks is unprecedented, ridiculous, and a blatant breach of freedoms. 4chan is hardly the only site to face ddos attacks. but really... #1 is the only one that matters. to block the site because their own users are attacking the site is ridiculous. it's like banning a kid from a public school because some bullies were picking on him.
do you have any idea what you're talking about from a technical perspective, or are you just mouthing off libertarian FIGHT THE POWER crap, eager to have discovered yet another figure of authority allegedly infringing on your civil liberties.
you think AT&T gives a shit whether or not a bunch of furryfags can jerk off to hentai? what they care about is that there's a lot of compromised machines dramatically taking up AT&T bandwidth, and until they can selectively block it they have to resort to drastic measures. what is "contacting" 4chan going to do? it's not like they're DDoSing themselves. and AT&T can't shut down "the DDoSers" just like that—how can they tell who's a legitimate computer and who's not? (you thought it was bad not being able to go to 4chan, imagine being one of the people whose internet got shut down entirely, mistakenly, thanks to AT&TRAVIS)
the ddos attacks through AT&T harm the internet experience for every single one of their customers by slowing legitimate internet traffic down to a crawl. temporarily blocking 4chan harms some greasy internet nerds from posting IT'S OVER 9000 for a week or so. which do you think matters more?
|
On July 27 2009 14:13 travis wrote:
you don't see the many flaws in this logic?
1.) if the attacks are coming from at&t users, it's at&t's responsibility to shut down those users...
2.) no one ever contacted 4chan about it
3.) the bulk of the attacks were happening quite a while ago
4.) blocking a domain to every user (millions of people), because some people were sending ddos attacks is unprecedented, ridiculous, and a blatant breach of freedoms. 4chan is hardly the only site to face ddos attacks.
but really... #1 is the only one that matters. to block the site because their own users are attacking the site is ridiculous. it's like banning a kid from a public school because some bullies were picking on him.
That is exactly what AT&T did, they banned all of the potential bullies. In your analogy 4chan is the kid and AT&T didn't ban 4chan from the internet, they banned AT&T users, ie the bullies who are trying to DDoS 4chan, from getting to 4chan, which is the kid. Other users not from AT&T can still visit 4chan b and r9k board.
|
On July 27 2009 14:32 GrandInquisitor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2009 14:13 travis wrote:On July 27 2009 14:08 GrandInquisitor wrote:On July 27 2009 14:03 Gene wrote:
can someone explain why 4chan constantly being DDOS'd has any affect on AT&T? On July 27 2009 14:04 travis wrote:On July 27 2009 13:56 Zzoram wrote:UPDATED 6: 4chan’s current gameplan evolving over at Encyclopedia Dramatica (Great stuff!). Also, from reports gathered on Reddit, it seems this block allegedly is because of massive DDoS-attacks against img.4chan.org. The reports doesn’t say anything about why AT&T would block 15.5% of all US internet users from using a specific website without any warning, though. Over-reacting to a normal ISP response of taking down sites that are hit with massive DDoS-attacks until they are stopped? Sounds like 4chan to me. I don't think you know what you are talking about. TO EVERYONE SAYING THEY TOOK IT DOWN BECAUSE OF DDOS ATTACKScould u pls explain the rational behind this? how do the ddos attacks against 4chan effect at&t subscribers? how does it effect anyone other than the servers that host 4chan? your reasoning makes no sense. DDoS = distributed denial of service a lot of machines that are on AT&T bandwidth are attacking 4chan's servers this is bad both for 4chan and for AT&T, because it uses up a lot of bandwidth on both ends AT&T can only stop this by preventing access to the 4chan server you don't see the many flaws in this logic? 1.) if the attacks are coming from at&t users, it's at&t's responsibility to shut down those users... 2.) no one ever contacted 4chan about it 3.) the bulk of the attacks were happening quite a while ago 4.) blocking a domain to every user (millions of people), because some people were sending ddos attacks is unprecedented, ridiculous, and a blatant breach of freedoms. 4chan is hardly the only site to face ddos attacks. but really... #1 is the only one that matters. to block the site because their own users are attacking the site is ridiculous. it's like banning a kid from a public school because some bullies were picking on him. do you have any idea what you're talking about from a technical perspective, or are you just mouthing off libertarian FIGHT THE POWER crap? you think AT&T gives a shit whether or not a bunch of furryfags can jerk off to hentai? what they care about is that there's a lot of compromised machines dramatically taking up AT&T bandwidth, and until they can selectively block it they have to resort to drastic measures the ddos attacks through AT&T harm the internet experience for every single one of their customers by slowing legitimate internet traffic down to a crawl. temporarily blocking 4chan harms some greasy internet nerds from posting IT'S OVER 9000 for a week or so. which do you think matters more?
Truer words are rarely spoken (wrote-en? ._. ).
|
On July 27 2009 14:28 SpiritWolf wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2009 14:27 Integra wrote:
I think they are simply trying to end the DDOS attacks against 4chan, the attacks were aimed against /b, therefore only /b is affected. The earlier claim which is true is that AT&T has in the past threatened to ban 4chan access if they didn't clean up their content, the extent of this ban would be the WHOLE 4chan website and not just one board. If they were truly banning 4chan they would ban the entire website and not just one board. Why does att care that 4chan is being DDOS'd?
Because 4 chan is one of the biggest websites on the internet and apparently a large number of users who performed the attack were compromised computer who had AT&T accounts. The attack uses a large amount of bandwitdh so it costs allot of money for the AT&T company.
EDIT; I wouldn't be surprised if the attacks slowed down the rest of the internet as well (as in none AT&T users)
|
United States20667 Posts
On July 27 2009 14:35 Adeny wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2009 14:32 GrandInquisitor wrote:On July 27 2009 14:13 travis wrote:On July 27 2009 14:08 GrandInquisitor wrote:On July 27 2009 14:03 Gene wrote:
can someone explain why 4chan constantly being DDOS'd has any affect on AT&T? On July 27 2009 14:04 travis wrote:On July 27 2009 13:56 Zzoram wrote:UPDATED 6: 4chan’s current gameplan evolving over at Encyclopedia Dramatica (Great stuff!). Also, from reports gathered on Reddit, it seems this block allegedly is because of massive DDoS-attacks against img.4chan.org. The reports doesn’t say anything about why AT&T would block 15.5% of all US internet users from using a specific website without any warning, though. Over-reacting to a normal ISP response of taking down sites that are hit with massive DDoS-attacks until they are stopped? Sounds like 4chan to me. I don't think you know what you are talking about. TO EVERYONE SAYING THEY TOOK IT DOWN BECAUSE OF DDOS ATTACKScould u pls explain the rational behind this? how do the ddos attacks against 4chan effect at&t subscribers? how does it effect anyone other than the servers that host 4chan? your reasoning makes no sense. DDoS = distributed denial of service a lot of machines that are on AT&T bandwidth are attacking 4chan's servers this is bad both for 4chan and for AT&T, because it uses up a lot of bandwidth on both ends AT&T can only stop this by preventing access to the 4chan server you don't see the many flaws in this logic? 1.) if the attacks are coming from at&t users, it's at&t's responsibility to shut down those users... 2.) no one ever contacted 4chan about it 3.) the bulk of the attacks were happening quite a while ago 4.) blocking a domain to every user (millions of people), because some people were sending ddos attacks is unprecedented, ridiculous, and a blatant breach of freedoms. 4chan is hardly the only site to face ddos attacks. but really... #1 is the only one that matters. to block the site because their own users are attacking the site is ridiculous. it's like banning a kid from a public school because some bullies were picking on him. do you have any idea what you're talking about from a technical perspective, or are you just mouthing off libertarian FIGHT THE POWER crap? you think AT&T gives a shit whether or not a bunch of furryfags can jerk off to hentai? what they care about is that there's a lot of compromised machines dramatically taking up AT&T bandwidth, and until they can selectively block it they have to resort to drastic measures the ddos attacks through AT&T harm the internet experience for every single one of their customers by slowing legitimate internet traffic down to a crawl. temporarily blocking 4chan harms some greasy internet nerds from posting IT'S OVER 9000 for a week or so. which do you think matters more? Truer words are rarely spoken (wrote-en? ._. ).
Written, I should think 
|
Wow, this is for real. I have dsl from AT&T and I tried going on /b/.
It just gave me a problem loading page. I don't really care as I hardly ever go to 4chan unless I'm extremely bored or looking for weird/childish funny things.
|
On July 27 2009 14:32 GrandInquisitor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2009 14:13 travis wrote:On July 27 2009 14:08 GrandInquisitor wrote:On July 27 2009 14:03 Gene wrote:
can someone explain why 4chan constantly being DDOS'd has any affect on AT&T? On July 27 2009 14:04 travis wrote:On July 27 2009 13:56 Zzoram wrote:UPDATED 6: 4chan’s current gameplan evolving over at Encyclopedia Dramatica (Great stuff!). Also, from reports gathered on Reddit, it seems this block allegedly is because of massive DDoS-attacks against img.4chan.org. The reports doesn’t say anything about why AT&T would block 15.5% of all US internet users from using a specific website without any warning, though. Over-reacting to a normal ISP response of taking down sites that are hit with massive DDoS-attacks until they are stopped? Sounds like 4chan to me. I don't think you know what you are talking about. TO EVERYONE SAYING THEY TOOK IT DOWN BECAUSE OF DDOS ATTACKScould u pls explain the rational behind this? how do the ddos attacks against 4chan effect at&t subscribers? how does it effect anyone other than the servers that host 4chan? your reasoning makes no sense. DDoS = distributed denial of service a lot of machines that are on AT&T bandwidth are attacking 4chan's servers this is bad both for 4chan and for AT&T, because it uses up a lot of bandwidth on both ends AT&T can only stop this by preventing access to the 4chan server you don't see the many flaws in this logic? 1.) if the attacks are coming from at&t users, it's at&t's responsibility to shut down those users... 2.) no one ever contacted 4chan about it 3.) the bulk of the attacks were happening quite a while ago 4.) blocking a domain to every user (millions of people), because some people were sending ddos attacks is unprecedented, ridiculous, and a blatant breach of freedoms. 4chan is hardly the only site to face ddos attacks. but really... #1 is the only one that matters. to block the site because their own users are attacking the site is ridiculous. it's like banning a kid from a public school because some bullies were picking on him. do you have any idea what you're talking about from a technical perspective, or are you just mouthing off libertarian FIGHT THE POWER crap, eager to have discovered yet another figure of authority allegedly infringing on your civil liberties. you think AT&T gives a shit whether or not a bunch of furryfags can jerk off to hentai? what they care about is that there's a lot of compromised machines dramatically taking up AT&T bandwidth, and until they can selectively block it they have to resort to drastic measures. what is "contacting" 4chan going to do? it's not like they're DDoSing themselves. and AT&T can't shut down "the DDoSers" just like that—how can they tell who's a legitimate computer and who's not? (you thought it was bad not being able to go to 4chan, imagine being one of the people whose internet got shut down entirely, mistakenly, thanks to AT&TRAVIS) the ddos attacks through AT&T harm the internet experience for every single one of their customers by slowing legitimate internet traffic down to a crawl. temporarily blocking 4chan harms some greasy internet nerds from posting IT'S OVER 9000 for a week or so. which do you think matters more?
Im not super tech savvy, but I really don't think you know what you are talking about.
you think 4chan is the only site that takes ddos attacks? why are there no precedents for this behavior?
and why "until they can selectively block it". that doesn't make any sense. why can't they selectively block it IMMEDIATELY?
and why would they not contact 4chan that they are going to block a huge percentage of their users? seems like common courtesy.
4chan isn't exactly a little site...
On July 27 2009 14:33 v[1.8]c wrote:
That is exactly what AT&T did, they banned all of the potential bullies. In your analogy 4chan is the kid and AT&T didn't ban 4chan from the internet, they banned AT&T users, ie the bullies who are trying to DDoS 4chan, from getting to 4chan, which is the kid. Other users not from AT&T can still visit 4chan b and r9k board.
ok fine maybe that analogy works... but it's shady.... in a school of 4000 students that would mean there are like 600-650 potential bullies being banned.
|
I mean seriously grinq, you act like the entire internet was going to go down for at&t users because of these ddos attacks. 4chan wasn't even going down very often, when the entirety of the attacks are targetting them.
which has more bandwidth, at&t or 4chan? it just doesn't make any sense.
|
Travis, isn't it obvious? the ban came out of nowhere, no one got warned. The users got no message about this. 4chan got no letter that warned the that they had to cease wit whatever it was or they would get banned. Selective blocking only works for limited numbers, the attack prolly has so many computer with AT&T that a total ban is the only way to stop it. it's a last desperate attempt to finally stop the attack.
|
Ok look, I am not going to argue it's possible they did it because of DDos attacks. What I am saying is that even if they did, it was an unprecedent and ridiculous move - and it's still a breach of net neutrality.
And those attacks have been going on for weeks. You mean to say they care enough to block the entire domain to all AT&T users, but can't figure out the source of attacks over a period of WEEKS? That's ridiculous! It's just information going over pipes. AT&T holds all the cards, they should be able to find the source of the attacks in no time.
As I said before, I am not super tech savvy... but I am not clueless either. I have a decent idea of how the internet works, I did used to be into "hacking" and shit when I was a kid. Don't wanna get in an argument over stupid shit, just saying I am not entirely clueless here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
