Cloudflare Under Fire For Allegedly Providing DDoS Protection For Terrorist Websites 98
Cloudflare is facing accusations that it's providing cybersecurity protection for at least seven terrorist organizations. "On Friday, HuffPost reported that it has reviewed numerous websites run by terrorist organizations and confirmed with four national security and counter-extremism experts that the sites are under the protection of Cloudflare's cybersecurity services," reports Gizmodo.
"Among Cloudflare's millions of customers are several groups that are on the State Department's list of foreign terrorist organizations, including al-Shabab, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, al-Quds Brigades, the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade and Hamas -- as well as the Taliban, which, like the other groups, is sanctioned by the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)," reports HuffPost.
"In the United States, it's a crime to knowingly provide tangible or intangible 'material support -- including communications equipment -- to a designated foreign terrorist organization or to provide service to an OFAC-sanctioned entity without special permission," the report continues. "Cloudflare, which is not authorized by the OFAC to do business with such organizations, has been informed on multiple occasions, dating back to at least 2012, that it is shielding terrorist groups behind its network, and it continues to do so." Gizmodo reports: The issue that HuffPost raises is whether Cloudflare is providing "material support" to sanctioned organizations. Some attorneys told HuffPost that it may be in violation of the law. Others, like the Electronic Frontier Foundation, argue that "material support" can and has been abused to silence speech. Cloudflare's general counsel, Doug Kramer, told Gizmodo over the phone that the company works closely with the U.S. government to ensure that it meets all of its legal obligations. He said that it is "proactive to screen for sanctioned groups and reactive to respond when its made aware of a sanctioned group" to which it may be providing services. HuffPost spoke with representatives from the Counter Extremism Project, who expressed frustration that they've sent four letters to Cloudflare over the last two years identifying seven terrorist-operated sites without receiving a reply. Kramer would not address any specific customers or situations when speaking with Gizmodo. He said that's simply company policy for reasons of protecting privacy.
"Among Cloudflare's millions of customers are several groups that are on the State Department's list of foreign terrorist organizations, including al-Shabab, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, al-Quds Brigades, the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade and Hamas -- as well as the Taliban, which, like the other groups, is sanctioned by the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)," reports HuffPost.
"In the United States, it's a crime to knowingly provide tangible or intangible 'material support -- including communications equipment -- to a designated foreign terrorist organization or to provide service to an OFAC-sanctioned entity without special permission," the report continues. "Cloudflare, which is not authorized by the OFAC to do business with such organizations, has been informed on multiple occasions, dating back to at least 2012, that it is shielding terrorist groups behind its network, and it continues to do so." Gizmodo reports: The issue that HuffPost raises is whether Cloudflare is providing "material support" to sanctioned organizations. Some attorneys told HuffPost that it may be in violation of the law. Others, like the Electronic Frontier Foundation, argue that "material support" can and has been abused to silence speech. Cloudflare's general counsel, Doug Kramer, told Gizmodo over the phone that the company works closely with the U.S. government to ensure that it meets all of its legal obligations. He said that it is "proactive to screen for sanctioned groups and reactive to respond when its made aware of a sanctioned group" to which it may be providing services. HuffPost spoke with representatives from the Counter Extremism Project, who expressed frustration that they've sent four letters to Cloudflare over the last two years identifying seven terrorist-operated sites without receiving a reply. Kramer would not address any specific customers or situations when speaking with Gizmodo. He said that's simply company policy for reasons of protecting privacy.
Re: (Score:1)
They are under fire for not cooperating enough with the big brother
FTFY
Re: not exactly (Score:2)
They are under fire for annoying Huffpoo
FTFY
Re: (Score:2)
Or they've simply gone to the FBI each time and heard "just keep doing what you're doing, it's a honeypot".
Re: (Score:3)
FTFY.
Counter Extremeism Project (Score:1)
I think I would prefer steps being taken to protect me from groups like the "Counter Extremism Project" than any of the groups on that list (as awful as some of them are).
Re:Counter Extremeism Project (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, we do. Unless you're in Syria or Afghanistan or Iraq or another county suffering from the USA's war on terror, terrorists are laughably unlikely to murder you. Granted the war on terror has made them more likely to murder you than before, but it's still absurdly unlikely. You're far, far more likely to be killed by an insect.
On the other hand, anti-terrorist groups have already robbed us of much of our liberty and are constantly probing for more ways to use the terrorist bogeyman to silence us. Like in this article, trying to further abolish content-neutral services and entrench censors where they can do whatever their masters desire.
Re: Counter Extremeism Project (Score:2)
Great comment overall; too bad you had to ruin it with this horseshit:
Syria or Afghanistan or Iraq or another county suffering from the USA's war on terror
It's hilarious how regreasives have managed to convince themselves that it's not ok to blame Islam, so you blame the US instead. Just amazes me the kind of shit people can make themselves believe when it suits their ideology.
Re: Counter Extremeism Project (Score:2)
We absolutely did blame the Jews for Israeli terrorism, and the Muslims for anti-israeli terrorism. But it great that you've managed to pat yourself on the back for whatever point it is that you think you made.
Re: (Score:1)
...and I sell them falafels and hummus during lunch? Would I be prosecuted?
Guy who drove Osama bin Laden around was locked up & beaten in Guantanamo for 8 years incl a full year spent in solitary in a windowless room
Re: What if I run a food cart... (Score:1)
All he did was drive him around?
Re: (Score:1)
All he did was drive him around?
Don't have all the details but I can tell you he was finally acquitted by the USA of all charges in 2012 by a 3 judge panel.
The decision vacating his conviction was written by - I shit you not - Judge Brett Michael Kavanaugh.
Probably after having a few skis with PJ, Bernie and Squi
Re: (Score:2)
however he was released to his home country of Yemen so there's a good chance he's since been killed or died of starvation
Re: (Score:2)
The one thing America is extremely bipartisan about is terrorism. Conservatives are actually even worse about it than liberals though, constantly pushing for bigger "defense" budgets and larger scale wars and being more rabidly for the PATRIOT act and the like. Pretending it's a liberal phenomenon is absurd. Censorship advocates publish this terrorist scare in the Huff Post this week but they'll post the same thing on Breitbart next week.
OFAC are not friendly people (Score:5, Interesting)
I know something of OFAC. They are not nice, friendly, people. If they actually had a solid case they would be coming down on Cloudflare like a ton of bricks. The fact that they are whining in letters and not prosecuting means they have no case.
It's not just providing material support, just doing business with anyone on OFAC's list of Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) is a felony. The way the law is written, if anyone sells anything to a person who's on the SDN list, as much as a sandwich or a bottle of water, that's "doing business" and therefore a felony.
OFAC actually has the fantasy that all businesses in the US will check the ID of every customer and then check the SDN database against the customer's name before doing business with them. Nevermind that there are plenty of people in the world with the same names. And nevermind that it would take 15 minutes to buy a sandwich.
Re:OFAC are not friendly people (Score:4, Insightful)
They don't care if you sold a sandwich. They do care that if you become politically inconvenient later on they can get you off to prison for having sold that sandwich within the statute of limitations.
Re: (Score:2)
They may very well not have a legal case. Instead they want to use the court of public opinion. Being a government agency, they can slander all they want and get off with a "my bad".
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
How about we just express the reality.
US CIA/NSA - "Fuck you Cloudflare, you are stopping us from attacking these countries, fuck off already."
Cloudflare - "Fuck off CIA/NSA if we don't do it someone else will, do you want us to pay fucking taxes or not, you guys so full of shit."
The reason the US government does not want international treaties with regard to internet security, so it can continue to attack every single fucking country across the entire globe, is has not even signed internet no attack treat
Cloudflare doesn't seem free-speech friendly (Score:2)
Without commenting on the people of OFAC, taking Noam Chomsky's explanation of standing for freedom of speech precisely for views one doesn't like (seen in context in the movie Manufacturing Consent [archive.org] where Chomsky defends Robert Faurrison's freedom of speech while not supporting his thesis—the segment begins around 2h24m21s and Chomsky's concise response about freedom of speech to a questioner is at 2h10m52s), I'm reminded that Cloudflare is the organization that also switched from a position that was
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Or, just as likely, the government hasn't explicitly ordered them to take them down and Cloudflare's default is to not act until someone with authority tells them they have to. Neither HuffPost nor the Counter Extremism Project are US government agencies and don't get to legally tell anyone to take down anything. I'd ignore them t
Re: (Score:2)
It's HuffPo.
Yeah. My default stance is that whatever position they take, mine is 180 degrees (F or C?) off theirs. For a second there I was worried.
Re: (Score:2)
Looking at the list it does seem a bit much. conservative-headlines.com is just a bunch of links to shitty YouTube channels. Hamas.ps doesn't look particularly bad either, probably no worse than typical western political/military hero memorial sites.
Seems like the legal bar needs to be set much higher.
Re: Known terrorist organizations include (Score:1)
I wouldn't exactly call it a 'government' of Saudi Arabia, though they have had a long successful history of pulling it off. Saud is a family name. It's just a dynasty of arabs who have garnered a lot of support from rich western interests. For a long time now.
Whatever (Score:2, Insightful)
Where does this end exactly ?
Cloudflare
The ISP that gets them online
The guy who sold the computer
The one who made the website
Electricity provider to power it all
Canâ(TM)t go after the one without going after them all . . . .
Besides, the USG basically defines terrorist as anyone who they donâ(TM)t see eye to eye with. That list changes on a daily basis depending on who they are bombing on amy given day.
Re: (Score:2)
The entire situation is silly. It's exactly like "X bought water from Y, Y aided terrorism because X is a terrorist!"
DDoS protection from? (Score:2)
How many are honeypots (Score:2)
for collecting info?
Cloudflare Under Fire (Score:1)
... again.
They should just change their name to "Cloudflare Under Fire."
They didn't mention the most obvious terrorist sit (Score:2)
The People's Front of Judea.
I fixed a terrorist car (Score:2)
Am I a terrorist supporter?
I read some idiotic answers here, am i an idiot?
(Sure, I am).
Like Patreon: censor repubs protect terrorists (Score:2)
Patreon often blocks even moderate conservatives from using their service.
But Patreon proudly allows the funding for violent leftist groups.
>>
WHAT?! Antifa Groups Are Using Patreon To Fund Violent ‘Insurrection’ Against America
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/what-antifa-groups-using-patreon-to-fund-violent-insurrection-against-america/
HuffPost and Gizmodo now under investigation (Score:2)
In an update to the story both the HuffPost and Gizmodo have both found themselves under investigation by OFAC for bringing the publics attention to these terrorist organizations and their websites.
commentsubject (Score:2)
Cloudflare has been informed on multiple occasions
So if I send an email to huffpost saying their editor is a bogeyman, "they were informed" and need to take down all his/her content, regardless of the authenticity of my informing.
If "regardless" is wrong, I'd like to know what measures of regard are required before a rando's email is established as proof of intent.
Required and ignored, in huffpost's accusation.