ATT Blocks 4chan

[brandon]

http://status.4chan.org/

This is possibly the first time an American ISP has blocked a domestic website. Is this ushering in the era of internet censorship?

Luckily, the first website to be censored also happens to be the one that wil fight back the hardest. I'm guessing this is a war 4chan will win, ATT won't be able to justify continuing the ban after the see how much shit anonymous will bring them



“First they came for the pedophiles, and I did not speak out, because I was not a pedophile.

Then, they came for the pirates, and I did not speak out because I was not a pirate.

Then they came for anonymous, and I did not speak out because I was not anonymous.

Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me."

[almantimes2]

Im banned from /b/ until tomorrow.

Can anyone tell me if there already planning a massive raid?

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

Its like a River Tam vs. Cameron fight.

Oh fucking shit, It appears AT&T is blocking ME



Newfags cant AT&T force

AT&T

AT&T AT&T

[inibo]

I love working for a real ISP. We don't block anything but DDOS attacks against our customers.

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

I love working for a real ISP. We don't block anything but DDOS attacks against our customers.

Can you look up what individual people are looking at?

Like if I call tech support and ask why my connection is down, can the tech guy look at my records and be like, "Ill get you back up and running so you can download your filthy Ukrainian porn"

[inibo]

For our own connection from our LAN, yes; as to our customers, we could, but it would be a horrible waste of resources which a better used serving our customers. During peak times we hit 1.2 gigabits/sec or more (when Michael Jackson died we hit 2.4 gigs). That's a lot of packets to sniff. ISPs make money by enabling access, not preventing it.

Generally we speaking we log nothing but the performance state of our infrastructure. It gives me a perverse sense of pleasure when we get subpoenas asking for logs for our customers and our response is we don't have any. The best we can do is tell you which IPs are assigned to which customer and how much traffic they are passing. Since all of our customers are assigned at minimum a /29 (five usable addresses) and often a /24 (253 addresses) if you want to know what our customer was doing your going to have to ask them. The police don't like it, but there really isn't much they can do about it.

[Conza88]

“First they came for the pedophiles, and I did not speak out, because I was not a pedophile.

Then, they came for the pirates, and I did not speak out because I was not a pirate.

Then they came for anonymous, and I did not speak out because I was not anonymous.

Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me."

Haha

[angelatc]

For us non-geeks, why would ATT block that site?

[inibo]

For us non-geeks, why would ATT block that site?

Because it is totally off the hook.

[CaseyJones]

For us non-geeks, why would ATT block that site?

To Start A War
And Call For Moar Regulation

[coyote_sprit]

For us non-geeks, why would ATT block that site?

It's more generalization then anything. 4chan is pretty mild compared to the other chans but it's also the most popular so this send a message to the other chans I guess.

[Dreamofunity]

I love working for a real ISP. We don't block anything but DDOS attacks against our customers.

Do you mind revealing which ISP you work for? The type you described sounds pefect, and I generally don't know which ISPs are good or bad.

I'm fairly happy with mine, but I'm just curious if you don't mind.


And while I'd say ATT is pretty stupid to go after 4chan, 4chan will get too distracted to ever do anything unfortunately.

[He Who Pawns]

If this is true, they picked a fight with the wrong crowd.

[almantimes2]

http://encyclopediadramatica.com/AT%26T_Blocks_4chan#The_Gameplan

[Kludge]

For us non-geeks, why would ATT block that site?

Imagine an 18+ image section of RPFs where LE and Bryan don't have mod powers and everyone appears as "anonymous".

... Then imagine Raditude posting there.

[coyote_sprit]

Do you mind revealing which ISP you work for? The type you described sounds pefect, and I generally don't know which ISPs are good or bad.

I'm fairly happy with mine, but I'm just curious if you don't mind.


And while I'd say ATT is pretty stupid to go after 4chan, 4chan will get too distracted to ever do anything unfortunately.

4chan cracks down on JB and CP way more then sites like 12chan though.

[RideTheDirt]

I guess ATT is censoring 4chan. I am definitely not a huge fan, but this is unprecedented. If they start by censoring what they believe to be "right and wrong" we start down a very very bad path.

http://digg.com/tech_news/AT_T_blocks_4chan/

PS. They picked the worst website to mess with. If you do not know 4chan is notorious for taking revenge on websites. I'm waiting for AT&t to be ddos'd into the stoneage.

[silverhandorder]

ATT is free to do w/e it likes as long as it does not break the contract with their customers.

Censoring sites does not seem like a big deal to me. If I do not like it I will seek a different provider.

[silverhawks]

It's true. I'm stuck with AT&T, and I can't access that site.

Definitely feeling that the wrath of Anonymous (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_(group))is imminent.

Incidentally, I'm also getting the feeling that the response of Anon will bring Jay Rockefeller's cybersecurity bill raging back into the House.

[Reason]

UPDATED 6: 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.

[coyote_sprit]

It would seem they have lifted the block there will still be vengeance though. It also seems that as soon as it was lifted the DDoS attacks on 4chan resumed.

[Reason]

UPDATED 6: 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.

[Reason]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=201574

[Vessol]

As much as fagchan is the literal asshole of the internet, it should never be censored.

[coyote_sprit]

The block was lifted and shortly after 4chan was DDoSed again.

[Tabby]

Glad the block is lifted.

[almantimes2]

http://status.4chan.org/





Cogent Communications has joined the club—they're now blocking all of 4chan. I can't even access the site at this point.


Edit: Moot apparently has retracted his statement that Cogent Communications has blacklisted 4chan

[Kludge]

http://status.4chan.org/ (http://status.4chan.org/)

That's very interesting... So what's the speculation on why 4chan has been under DDoS attack for over a week?

I imagine the ban is temporary since their customers are wasting an absurd amount of bandwidth (intentionally or otherwise).

[coyote_sprit]

That's very interesting... So what's the speculation on why 4chan has been under DDoS attack for over a week?

I imagine the ban is temporary since their customers are wasting an absurd amount of bandwidth (intentionally or otherwise).

It's believed the DDoS originated from anontalk.

[RideTheDirt]

The block was lifted and shortly after 4chan was DDoSed again.
I don't care much for the site anyway, but if 4chan retaliates heavily it could bring these "cyberbills" to the floor.

[Kludge]

It's believed the DDoS originated from anontalk.

Dear Lord.... I never knew of that's existence before now. That's..... huh.... I guess it's the text equivalent of 4chan.

The first thread I see: A sweet little loli frolicked with me in the lovely sea today… (http://www.anontalk.com/topic/31256)

[almantimes2]

It's believed the DDoS originated from anontalk.

Yea and they got romped http://insurgen.info/wiki/Operation:_Internet_Boss

[Kludge]

lmao.... The Internet's so fucking retarded.

[coyote_sprit]

Daily Kos calling for net neutrality, who would have guessed.
http://www.dailykos .com/story/2009/7/26/758177/-Why-we-need-net-neutrality:-ATT-began-censoring-the-internet-tonight-%28update-2x%29

[inibo]

Do you mind revealing which ISP you work for? The type you described sounds pefect, and I generally don't know which ISPs are good or bad.

I'm fairly happy with mine, but I'm just curious if you don't mind.


And while I'd say ATT is pretty stupid to go after 4chan, 4chan will get too distracted to ever do anything unfortunately.

I'd rather not say. We are small, so unless you live in the Washington, DC area it really doesn't matter. That and we don't do residential. All of our customers are businesses, law firms, government agencies or other large institutional customers.

[Mini-Me]

ATT is free to do w/e it likes as long as it does not break the contract with their customers.

Censoring sites does not seem like a big deal to me. If I do not like it I will seek a different provider.

I don't really think the "private company" argument applies 100% to telecom companies these days: To the best of my knowledge, they typically get their business through exclusive [local] government-granted monopoly contracts, not through the free market...so seeking out another provider becomes easier said than done. When certain companies get in bed with the government, and the government coercively blocks competition, calling them a "private company" is a bit of a misnomer, since they have powerful privileges that real private companies don't possess. Just like we fault the person who hires a hitman for a murder (as well as the hitman himself), I don't think it's going too far to say that we should fault anyone who directs or contracts with the government to initiate aggression against others. Aside from companies with exclusive monopoly contracts, that includes individuals like the globalist elites, etc. It's the same reason why guys like David Rockefeller shouldn't automatically be considered "exonerated of all wrongdoing" just because they don't personally hold any official government positions.

[Kludge]

calling them a "private company" is a bit of a misnomer, since they have powerful privileges that real private companies don't possess.

More than any other subsidized business/corporation? Where's the cut-off line between calling it public and private? The government interferes with business on such an absurd scale that all corporations might as well be called public, especially when considering that corporations couldn't exist (with limited liability) without the government's endorsement.

[Mini-Me]

More than any other subsidized business/corporation? Where's the cut-off line between calling it public and private? The government interferes with business on such an absurd scale that all corporations might as well be called public, especially when considering that corporations couldn't exist (with limited liability) without the government's endorsement.

I agree that the government interferes to such an absurd extent that the public/private thing is unfortunately more of a shade of gray in our economy, particularly considering the corporate personhood thing you just mentioned. However, shade of gray or not, exclusive monopoly contracts guaranteeing a no-competition environment are still around the extreme end of the "special privileges" scale. I don't know where I'd draw a strict line between fair play and shenanigans in our economy, but if I absolutely had to draw one, I'd definitely put monopoly contracts on the "shenanigans" side of things, if nothing else. There's also something markedly different in degree (or even in principle) about some small company being affected by regulations (or even industry-level subsidies) outside of its control and another company deliberately wining and dining government officials for exclusive monopoly contracts.

You're right that the lines aren't black and white, but that doesn't really matter in this context, because we're not exactly sitting here determining how to construct laws based on this conundrum: If you and I were deciding laws, these regulations, subsidies, corporate personhood, monopoly contracts, etc. wouldn't exist in the first place, and it would be a moot point, right? ;) As it stands today, we're stuck making personal value judgments about just how "evil" or "not evil" XYZ Company's actions are in the context of today's economic and political climate...and whether or not we should personally defend them or condemn them for their actions (or withhold judgment). As for myself, unless there are mitigating factors that I'm not aware of, I'm currently leaning strongly towards "condemn."

[go_carolina_528]

Att is messing with the wrong group of people. I wonder how long till 4chan retaliates........

[brandon]

Att is messing with the wrong group of people. I wonder how long till 4chan retaliates........

They are planning to go dig up ATT's Fiber Cables in remote areas, cut them, and then bury them again. They already have satellite maps of where all the cables are. lol

I doubt they will follow through with it now that it's come to light the ban was simply due to a DDoS attack on 4chan clogging ATTs servers

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

Daily Kos calling for net neutrality, who would have guessed.

Boy, Kos must think he's safe in his Ivory Tower from 4chan. If there was ever a sight I wouldn't shed a tear that got DNS raped by 4chan, its the Kostards.

[inibo]

I don't really think the "private company" argument applies 100% to telecom companies these days: To the best of my knowledge, they typically get their business through exclusive [local] government-granted monopoly contracts, not through the free market...so seeking out another provider becomes easier said than done. When certain companies get in bed with the government, and the government coercively blocks competition, calling them a "private company" is a bit of a misnomer, since they have powerful privileges that real private companies don't possess. Just like we fault the person who hires a hitman for a murder (as well as the hitman himself), I don't think it's going too far to say that we should fault anyone who directs or contracts with the government to initiate aggression against others. Aside from companies with exclusive monopoly contracts, that includes individuals like the globalist elites, etc. It's the same reason why guys like David Rockefeller shouldn't automatically be considered "exonerated of all wrongdoing" just because they don't personally hold any official government positions.


More than any other subsidized business/corporation? Where's the cut-off line between calling it public and private? The government interferes with business on such an absurd scale that all corporations might as well be called public, especially when considering that corporations couldn't exist (with limited liability) without the government's endorsement.

You guys are touching on some interesting points here.

The company work for has been very successful. They've been around a biit over 10 years, I think. I've been there a bit over three. In that time they've gone from a small mom and pop shop (brother and sister, actually) with a couple used Copper Mountain DSLAMs to a company employing 25 people, with over 800 corporate customers. I have little to do with the money side (which I like because if I never touch the money nobody can ever blame money issues on me), but knowing what we get for monthly charges on some customer and extrapolating from that I'm guess we are within spitting distance of ten million a year revenue.

All that sounds great, but we are also LSDB certified which gives us an edge with some customers who are required by law or contract to use an LSDB and we are an eRate provider, which means we get to provide our service at full price to schools and libraries who only pay a fraction of that cost with the Federal government picking up the difference. In short, we are at least partially subsidized. Granted most of our business is simply based on negotiated contracts that have nothing to do with being an LSDB or eRate, but sometimes I wonder if we or any similar company could survive, especially in the DC market, if we chose to do without the those two advantages.

To what extent is adapting yourself to the market as it currently exists simply good business practice and to what extent is it selling out or licking the boot that's mashing down you face?

And on a side note, having been in IT in some form or fashion for over 25 years I've had access to various customer contact databases that if I'd chosen to I could have "borrowed" to built up a clientèle base for independent consulting. I have been tempted from time-to-time to quit, but only after I've helped myself to several thousand contacts, many of who already know I know what I'm doing because they've already dealt with me. I've never done it, but I wonder is it ethics or stupidity that holds me back.

[Golding]

ATT has always done this sort of thing. I remember I lived in an area where ATT was the only internet provider, and they blocked particular Deja News groups. Typical of them, that they'd block 4chan.

[hotbrownsauce]

Try using a proxy server to get around blocked websites.

[t0rnado]

Okay, here's how modern DDoS attacks work in a nutshell: A "hacker" sends commands to a botnet, which is a group of backdoored computers, that direct it to send SYN packets to a certain IP address or website. A SYN packet flood is just one type of DDoS attack in which a TCP Handshake occurs(A SYN packet gets sent, an ACK packet is received, and another SYN packet is sent). More likely than not, some of the computers in the botnet that was used to DDoS 4chan had AT&T as their ISP.

TL;DR: AT&T helped stop the DDoS against 4chan and 4chan spread rumors about the CEO of AT&T dieing to lower the price of their stock.

But seriously, even if AT&T just blocked off traffic to 4chan just for the hell of it, they really had nothing to be worried about. 4chan is just a bunch of autistic losers who use memes to feel like a part of group.

[Optatron]

For us non-geeks, why would ATT block that site?

go look and find out.

[Optatron]

Imagine an 18+ image section of RPFs where LE and Bryan don't have mod powers and everyone appears as "anonymous".

... Then imagine Raditude posting there.

a better answer : BECAUSE THEY CAN, anybody who's blocked, feel free to find an alternative ISP where you are.

In the US, there's less than 10 companies, of which there are less than 5 backbones.

Just think about how many cable companies you can switch from if one channel is dropped, your options are VERY VERY limited. If it becomes a law or commonplace for corporations to make those choices for you, GOOD LUCK.