October 19, 2020

A phone call to an Internet provider in Oregon on Sunday evening was all it took to briefly sideline multiple websites related to 8chan/8kun — a controversial online image board linked to several mass shootings — and QAnon, the far-right conspiracy theory which holds that a cabal of Satanic pedophiles is running a global child sex-trafficking ring and plotting against President Donald Trump. Following a brief disruption, the sites have come back online with the help of an Internet company based in St. Petersburg, Russia.

The IP address range in the upper-right portion of this map of QAnon and 8kun-related sites — — is assigned to VanwaTech and briefly went offline this evening. Source: twitter.com/Redrum_of_Crows.

A large number of 8kun and QAnon-related sites (see map above) are connected to the Web via a single Internet provider in Vancouver, Wash. called VanwaTech (a.k.a. “OrcaTech“). Previous appeals to VanwaTech to disconnect these sites have fallen on deaf ears, as the company’s owner Nick Lim reportedly has been working with 8kun’s administrators to keep the sites online in the name of protecting free speech.

But VanwaTech also had a single point of failure on its end: The swath of Internet addresses serving the various 8kun/QAnon sites were being protected from otherwise crippling and incessant distributed-denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks by Hillsboro, Ore. based CNServers LLC.

On Sunday evening, security researcher Ron Guilmette placed a phone call to CNServers’ owner, who professed to be shocked by revelations that his company was helping QAnon and 8kun keep the lights on.

Within minutes of that call, CNServers told its customer — Spartan Host Ltd., which is registered in Belfast, Northern Ireland — that it would no longer be providing DDoS protection for the set of 254 Internet addresses that Spartan Host was routing on behalf of VanwaTech.

Contacted by KrebsOnSecurity, the person who answered the phone at CNServers asked not to be named in this story for fear of possible reprisals from the 8kun/QAnon crowd. But they confirmed that CNServers had indeed terminated its service with Spartan Host. That person added they weren’t a fan of either 8kun or QAnon, and said they would not self-describe as a Trump supporter.

CNServers said that shortly after it withdrew its DDoS protection services, Spartan Host changed its settings so that VanwaTech’s Internet addresses were protected from attacks by ddos-guard[.]net, a company based in St. Petersburg, Russia.

Spartan Host’s founder, 25-year-old Ryan McCully, confirmed CNServers’ report. McCully declined to say for how long VanwaTech had been a customer, or whether Spartan Host had experienced any attacks as a result of CNServers’ action.

McCully said while he personally doesn’t subscribe to the beliefs espoused by QAnon or 8kun, he intends to keep VanwaTech as a customer going forward.

“We follow the ‘law of the land’ when deciding what we allow to be hosted with us, with some exceptions to things that may cause resource issues etc.,” McCully said in a conversation over instant message. “Just because we host something, it doesn’t say anything about we do and don’t support, our opinions don’t come into hosted content decisions.”

But according to Guilmette, Spartan Host’s relationship with VanwaTech wasn’t widely known previously because Spartan Host had set up what’s known as a “private peering” agreement with VanwaTech. That is to say, the two companies had a confidential business arrangement by which their mutual connections were not explicitly stated or obvious to other Internet providers on the global Internet.

Guilmette said private peering relationships often play a significant role in a good deal of behind-the-scenes-mischief when the parties involved do not want anyone else to know about their relationship.

“These arrangements are business agreements that are confidential between two parties, and no one knows about them, unless you start asking questions,” Guilmette said. “It certainly appears that a private peering arrangement was used in this instance in order to hide the direct involvement of Spartan Host in providing connectivity to VanwaTech and thus to 8kun. Perhaps Mr. McCully was not eager to have his involvement known.”

8chan, which rebranded last year as 8kun, has been linked to white supremacism, neo-Nazism, antisemitism, multiple mass shootings, and is known for hosting child pornography. After three mass shootings in 2019 revealed the perpetrators had spread their manifestos on 8chan and even streamed their killings live there, 8chan was ostracized by one Internet provider after another.

The FBI last year identified QAnon as a potential domestic terror threat, noting that some of its followers have been linked to violent incidents motivated by fringe beliefs.

Further reading:

What Is QAnon?

QAnon: A Timeline of Violent Linked to the Conspiracy Theory

167 thoughts on “QAnon/8Chan Sites Briefly Knocked Offline

  1. KrebsFascist

    Sounds like a bunch of Nazis and Fascist pigs reveling in the suppression of speech. Brian Krebs is an enemy of the people.

    We are Anonymous. We are Legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us.

    1. JamminJ

      That’s the problem with these groups that anyone can claim to be a member. Any kid can say he’s anon. Doesn’t make it so.

      This comment is more likely from the same FSB GRU account as the rest, and nothing to do with Anonymous.

        1. Bob

          I visited your site, I want to suggest a similar one here.

    2. Enjoy prison Trumpies!

      You are silly, you are loud, and you are entirely ignorable idiots pushing a Kremlin propaganda experiment of which you are merely the end joke-butts.

      Go shoot up a pizza place, make yourselves useful as you ever were.


    3. Q-Alol 8-Bran

      “I’m angry, uninformed and exposing myself on the internet.”

      “Welcome to Q-Anon, would you like to be our leader?”

    4. Anonymous

      Rioting, looting, and burning buildings (antifa) = good

      Freedom of expression (8kun) = bad

      1. SeymourB

        Actually, around 90% of the burning of buildings in Seattle were done by white people, most of whom were outside agitators who came in solely to cause damage that they thought would be blamed on minorities. We know because they were all stupid enough to get arrested.

        White supremacy doesn’t really skim off the top of the public, it’s more of a dredging operation, down near the bottom of the IQ pool. This is why you guys can’t come up with an original thought unless the Russian handlers in charge of the operation come up with it first.

        1. TestPilot

          “Actually, around 90% of the burning of buildings in Seattle were done by white people”. And how did you arrive at that number? Kinda sounds like you pulled it out of your ass. Maybe it’s just a coincidence you don’t cite a reliable source for this claim either.

        2. telescreen

          I’m a little late to this post, but I must say this is an excellent comment on the shallow gene pool that we find ourselves wading through on daily basis.

      2. Deep Thoughts Jack Handey

        “Freedom of expression” – Is a concept, not a right, and when you’re talking about the 1st A. in the US, it applies to government censors.
        Not societal repercussions. There are no absolute rights in a society.

        *(If you step far enough out of society, you will leave it.)

        And if you drop your keys in a volcano, forget them because, man,
        they’re gone.

        1. JFT

          Actually, Jack… freedom of speech and religion is an inalienable right, and anyone infringing upon those rights can petition the government (also in the 1A) when they are denied the public square by people who aren’t government, but who are infringing on rights.

          the key concept here is infringing upon others’ rights. No one, even the government, can infringe on your rights (that’s why we have courts.) We do not label speech (other than “free”), and any thoughts of the illegality of “hate speech” can be right out the window because there is no such thing. If you’re not willing to defend speech you hate, you don’t deserve free speech yourself.

          The public square is the key here. Antifa/BLM is moving into the public square and preventing other voices to be heard (see: Seattle, Portland, Kenosha, etc.) THAT is a violation by proxy of the 1st Amendment.

          IANAL, but this is elementary level stuff. Just like you can’t come onto my property and take my guns (neither can the government), you can’t bar me from the public square because you don’t like what I say. Even the ACLU got that right back when they actually defended civil liberties.

          Twitter can ban you from their servers for capricious reasons (and nebulous TOS word-salads) but it cannot go to YOUR website and censor your content. Nor can Facebook follow you to your own space on the web and get you deplatformed because it doesn’t like what you say.

          The same holds true for those try to deplatform 8Chan and the like. They are free speech platforms full of content I personally find loathsome and vile. But if I’m not willing to defend their right to say it (provided they didn’t run afoul of their hosting provider, which it is apparent they did not), who am I to claim I am for free speech?

          If anyone says “I’m all for Free Speech, but….” they are not for free speech. there is no but. There is no except. There is only free speech. (and a court system to gain relief when you’re slandered/libeled/etc.) Note there is no prohibition on PUTTING OUT libelous and slanderous things… just consequences for the speech.

          We don’t restrict free speech for that very reason. To keep it free.

          1. Tina Mouse

            Deplatforming is a private economic act. Refusing to engage with an organization because of its politics is literally freedom of association. You are literally arguing against 1st Amendment rights of freedom of association, which underlies the right to privacy (see NAACP vs Alabama). Your understanding of the 1st Amendment is so facile, shallow, and backwards you are arguing against it in pontificating about your knowledge.

            And because white male stupid on the Internet is predictable, before you go there, no refusing to engage with people because of specific protected categories is not, for reasons of actual freedom. Those protected categories are race, age, region of origin, gender (which does not cover trans people in most places), and in some places sexual orientation.

            You can refuse to serve someone in a BLM shirt. You can not refuse to serve black people. You can deplatform 4chan and 8chan. You can not choose to deplatform a group because it is male and white, but you can because it is incel and actively advocates for the assault and murder of women.

            Why are there protected categories? Because “free speech” requires preventing threats of violence and actual violence against groups of people and opinions.

            Systematic attacks on women organized on 8Chan and 4chan are silencing. 4Chan and 8Chan do not advocate for free speech, any more than the KKK burning a cross on a lawn does.

            Supporting GamerGate, QAnon, and other groups which coordinate to suppress the speech of others is not Free Speech you entitled vacuous fool. However, because of threats of government over-reach, acts against these by the government come under additional scrutiny.

            Businesses choosing not to associate with them is literally protected by the First Amendment.

            In summary, you are spouting well-written ignorance. That your ignorance is supporting murderous hate speech means that you are spouting dangerous ignorance. That you are supporting dangerous ignorance that is targeted at women and non-white men on a dominantly white male space in a time when such ideologies drive the major threat of domestic violence, you are literally advocating for violent bigotry. But having read your pompous post I think it actually comes from a place of ignorance and carelessness with other people lives, not actual hate. Just toxic ignorance.

            1. Magosis

              The eternal cry of the censor, “your words are dangerous”

      3. jodee

        Sounds about right , in this world , since the ancient human threw
        the bones into the sky , and technology was born (2001: a Space Odyssey)

    5. hmm

      bruh. what are you talking about. who’s side are you even on?

      then you added the little anonymous part which has nothing to do with anything.

  2. Terry

    I do not have a bone in this fight. I have no idea what Q is all about. Maybe it is Russian disinformation or just people who believe in some conspiracy theories.

    But I did look up Twitter.com/Redrum_of_crows (Raven le Maven). Twitter.com/redrum_of_crows is listed as the source of this information. Is that correct?

    So Raven le Maven is supposed to be a former federal agent of some kind and CEO of Antifa? Did I read that correctly? And in some of his posts he has maps and is telling where somebody is sleeping tonight?

    1. JamminJ

      You don’t have to know too much, but you do have to apply some logic and reason.

      Think about how easy it is to make unsubstantiated claims on the Internet. Ask yourself if Antifa is really organized like a corporation that could have a CEO.

      Think critically, and it falls apart easily.

      1. Terry

        I did not say that Antifa has a CEO. I said that in a Twitterpost the person who
        posted said that he was a former federal official of some sort and said that he was the CEO OF Antifa. He said that in the same Twitter post which makes me wonder about his credibility. And his credibility as a source of alleged information concerning connections between Trump and Russia.

        Check the Twitter posts for yourself. Unless the posts have been deleted they should still be there. And try to read with good understanding.

        1. Tony

          If you’re asking the internet if something else you read on the internet is true, then you’ve already lost the game…

          1. David R A Cravens

            You had to mention the Game…and now we’ve all lost.

        2. Lauren

          The ‘CEO of Antifa’ thing is kind of a multifaceted in joke within leftist online communities.

          One part is that describing oneself as ‘CEO of’ some (often trivial) thing arose from TikTok as a way to (sometimes self deprecatingly) say you’re very good / the best at something, e.g ‘CEO of memes’, ‘CEO of depression’. (Some have also spun it as meaning ‘certified expert of’ in this vein.)

          Another aspect is that right wing pundits like to portray antifascist collective moments as some kind of top down organised international terrorist organisation, with membership and such, often alluding to Soros conspiracies and the like that some shadowy liberal elite is running the show.

          That everyone is claiming that they are the ‘CEO of Antifa’ is an attempt to mock and subvert that portrayal, because antifascist movements have no such structure, and individuals are in charge of themselves, though collective agreement often develops to work together to further a cause.

          It’s deliberately as absurd as it would be to claim one was the ‘CEO of Anonymous’.

    2. Anonymous

      Rioting, looting, and burning buildings = good

      Freedom of expression = bad

  3. Sam in Superior

    Fomenting sedition and treason are not protected free speech activities. I hope the US will finally go after these networks just as we did against ISIS.

  4. Erik

    I’m not a fan of any of these nuts, but being able to completely de-platform anyone – and I do mean anyone – is a deeply and dangerously Orwellian concept. If you think this is a good thing and that it will never be used against you, I would invite you to crack a history book or two sometime. On the left we have people like Robert Reich on Twitter today proposing a literal Ministry of Truth, and I have zero doubts that the political right wouldn’t do the same thing if they thought they could get away with it. I also have zero doubts that if Reich did get his wish, that it would inevitably be turned against progressives once conservatives get power again. It is never a good thing for such power to exist, and only the most thoroughly evil and shortsighted humans would argue otherwise.

    1. security vet

      …I once sat in a room with lawyers who represented the MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL, and NCAA when the rules were being written for the unlawful offshore internet gambling enforcement act (a whole different set of fame goes with that!) – someone said (with all the seriousness that only a sports lawyer can have) “why don’t we just shut them down?”…

      …wow, what ignorance about how a free society actually works…

    2. Terry

      This is a really good post and I agree completely with it.

    3. JamminJ

      There should be rules though. Laws that society can agree on. Inciting violence and child pornography, and a host of other things… should be absolutely barred.
      In that sense, I don’t agree in the Libertarian ideal of “allow everything”.

      But I agree with you… the notion that ideas can be suppressed at the whim of those who control the largest botnet or anyone willing and able to get away with it… is scary.

    4. Orwell's Godwinism

      “but being able to completely de-platform anyone”

      Not anyone. shady organizations that abused their platform. Their ‘contributors’ or bs-inventors or whatever they call themselves are still on the internet and can post their inane propaganda to any number of places regardless.

      If all possible websites actively scrub their sh!t… good.

      But that’s not happening here. Their hosting is under fire.
      They’ve abused their reputation to the point of being pariahs.
      Not ‘anyone’ is being silenced though, in reality.

      It’s interesting that they had to move to Russia, isn’t it though?
      St. Petersburg, hmm, I remember something about that town..
      related to disinformation… ah well, years ago, doesn’t matter…

      “We were discussing… Orphans.. yes, of course…”
      Orwell was both a fiction writer and optimist, anyhow…

    5. digitl_bil

      It looks to me like he retweeted an article that the subhead says:
      “Let history, not partisans, prosecute Trump
      A truth tribunal is not the answer. Preserving presidential records is.”

      Am I missing something?

    6. Philip Elder

      Left or Right it does not matter. They both end up in the same place: Tyranny.

      Top down systems _don’t_ work despite those that exalt them.

  5. You people are too afraid to be proven WRONG

    I have followed Q for fun in the past, to see what the big deal was about… What you all don’t realize is first of all Q claims to be about UNITY between ALL RACES, ALL GENDERS, ALL RELIGIONS, & ALL POLITICAL AFFILIATIONS!!! Q has even talked about how ALL of the previous President’s (Republicans & Democrats) have been involved in stealing power from the people… It is NOT about a democrat pedophilia ring or calling the democrats satanist pedophiles lol… It encourages you to question EVERYTHING and to do diligent research outside of Google… Go read the Q “drops” and see for yourself,unless you are afraid that you are susceptible to being brainwashed why not take the time to see ALL the lies about Q!!! There are many different “anons” who merely decipher the Q drops & turn them into something else like all of the crazy different conspiracies theories but the ACTUAL Q drops do not even point to ANY of that rhetoric.. There are some that just take it to a whole new level after doing THEIR OWN RESEARCH but that does NOT mean that is what Q himself is saying… Many different sites spin their own theories but all Q claims to be is a high status of Military intelligence that helped Trump get into office to take down the deep state (drain the swamp) which consists of the elites ESTABLISHMENT REPUBLICANS & DEMOCRATS that have stolen the power out of the people’s hands for decades… It is NOT division, it encourages all political affiliations & all genders & races. of the PEOPLE of America to JOIN TOGETHER & do diligent research to take BACK the power from the government…. Many things that have come DIRECTLY FROM Q have come true, but the problem is ALL of the different theories & groups that spin out of control when they try to decipher the code in which Q writes in… So you cant pin ANY of insane theories straight to Q when its the anons trying to decipher & research and THEY cone up with THEIR OWN CONCLUSIONS…. But the actual Q is supposedly about UNITY of the PEOPLE and going against globalist, elitists deep state (bureaucrats that we dont vote for that pull all the puppet strings for a large majority of our government and MEDIA!!!!) Conspiracy theories can be FUN & some not so much…But I understand that it can be troublesome for SOME to draw their own conclusions & for it to spread instead of following the source but Q is ANTI RACISM. & ANTI GLOBALIZATION and whether they may have helped catch some elite pedophiles that is not what the Qs sole missions is & the anons turned it into the whole cabal of Satanist but they are ONLY talking about the Elites, not the democrat party lol

    1. Sam in Superior

      Anyone that infuses a post with that many ALLCAPS terms knows they’re short on facts and long on BS.

    2. JamminJ

      Oh spare us the BS rhetoric. There is no legitimate message of unity. Its a smokescreen to hide the obvious antisemitic messaging.

      Dog whistles work exactly like this…. to the untrained ear, there its all benign words. Your EXACT words. But the racists hear the subtext loud and clear.

      Qanon is a cloaked collective of racist liars who manipulate people into spreading harmful lies.

    3. "Wrong" lol from a Q-compoop?

      “Q” drops are insane garbage, I’ve read a few and that was plenty.

      Anyone who finds any credence in those will believe anything.
      It’s an IQ-Anon test. A certain subset of the US is failing badly.

      A serious ongoing vulnerability was exposed in our experiment regarding representative government by informed populace.

      Trump exploited it for 4 years of prison avoidance, but not 8.
      I don’t think “General” Flynn was helped much by it either.
      He’ll have some time to ponder that Oath-breaking move.

      wikipedia. org/wiki/The_KGB_and_Soviet_Disinformation

    4. Turingtest

      I did my own research. Joe Biden didn’t kill Seal Team 6–all 2000 of them.

  6. Terry

    It will be interesting if whoever this is on Twitter cleans up his Twitter posts before people can check out his Twitter postings. I realize it is probably necessary to go to some shady sources sometimes to do investigations.

    More than 40 million dollars of taxpayer money has been spend investigating if Trump had connections to the Russians. Meanwhile the New York Post newspaper, fourth largest in the USA, has some of it’s reporting censored by Twitter and Facebook.

    If somebody really has information that Trump is involved with the Russians please let us see it. And please let the New York Post be allowed to have its information on Twitter and Facebook also.

    1. JamminJ

      The New York Post isn’t a reliable source of news.


      “Overall we rate the New York Post on the far end of Right-Center Biased due to story selection that typically favors the Right and Mixed (borderline questionable) for factual reporting based on several failed fact checks.”

      Also, the claim of $40 million being spent on the Russian investigation has been long debunked.
      $32 million is the expenditure for ALL SPECIAL COUNSEL services, which means most of that would have been spent elsewhere even if Trump was never investigated.
      “Mueller’s office said indirect expenses — such as personnel from the FBI or other agencies — aren’t really a use of additional tax dollars, since the personnel and resources would have been devoted to other cases if there had been no special counsel investigation.”

      “How does the Mueller investigation compare historically?

      As we’ve reported, the investigation of President Bill Clinton over Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky — headed by Kenneth Starr and then by his successor, Robert Ray — cost upward of $52 million over half a decade. Another $40 million-plus went toward a handful of other Clinton-era independent counsel investigations.

      Meanwhile, the investigation of Reagan administration officials over the Iran-Contra Affair, headed by Lawrence Walsh, topped out at more than $47 million over a roughly similar period.

      Those figures are direct costs only, and are not adjusted for inflation. Their price tags would be far higher if converted to 2018 dollars.”

      But of course, you have no problem spending a lot more on investigations into the Clinton’s. So any outrage into the cost, is completely fake and hypocritical.

      1. Chuck2C

        At the top of your post, you attack the source (NYP), but you haven’t laid out any argument- either disputing or supporting the validity of BH’s emails presented by the paper.

        Are they a hoax? Why? Are they legitimate/true? Why?

        So, the validity of the content they’re presenting isn’t worth investigating because Media Bias Fact Check says the NYP sucks?

        Whenever I hear “They’re terrible- ignore whatever they say”, I’m always suspicious.

        In 2007, a sensationalist, universally mocked “news” source, the National Enquirer, published a story about John Edwards’ philandering and illegitimate child that was factually true- Those facts derailed his presidential candidacy, if I remember correctly.

        Other than maybe “Bat Boy Lives!”, claims that could be have a big impact if true are always worth examining critically. When any person or organization wants me to uncritically turn my opinion over to them, it causes me to ask “Why”?

        1. Chuck2C

          Excuse me- I meant to say “HB’s” emails, not “BH’s”. Publication of this content by the NYP is the reason Twitter and FB blocked the NYP, hence the reference.

        2. JamminJ

          I wasn’t attacking the New York Post. They are Center-Right, with “Mixed” factual reporting. Much better than a tabloid… which MBFC would categorize as “Questionable” with Low or Very Low factual reporting. For a left-wing example, The New York Times is Center-Left, with High factual reporting.

          I never said to ignore any source. As you point out, sometimes even a questionable source can break real news. But guess what happens the very next day (sometimes later that same day)? More reputable news organizations verify, validate and corroborate that breaking story. That did not happen with the NY Post peice. Why? Because the claims were dubious and poorly sourced. The WSJ, Forbes, and even Fox Business are center-right and rated as Mostly factual, and they won’t even make the same claims as the NY Post.

          There is something worth investingating all right… but it isn’t the claim made by Giuliani… it is the journalistic practices of the author of the NY Post article.
          Reputable news sources have NOT validated any of the facts that the NY Post assumes to be true. Only other right-wing, “Mixed” factual reporting rated or below have picked up the story and are running with it hinging on the validity of the original NY Post article.

          How do we know the email is authentic?
          We do not. The New York Post published PDF printouts of several emails allegedly taken from the laptop, but for the “smoking-gun” email, it shows only a photo made the day before the story was posted, according to Thomas Rid, the author of “Active Measures,” a book on disinformation. “There is no header information, no metadata.” The Washington Post has not been able to independently verify or authenticate these emails, as requests to make the laptop hard drive available for inspection have not been granted. The New York Post said it obtained the material from former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, a personal lawyer to President Trump.

          You have to think critically here. Use something called lateral reading, and apply logic to reading news. This came out as an October Surprise, so even if it turns out to be complete made up BS… it will still be effective to publish. Republicans don’t even care about investigating Hunter Biden. They just want to replicate the unsettling feeling of corruption in the minds of swing voters. It worked very well in October of 2016. They didn’t have to actually find Hilary’s emails, they just needed to get enough voters to have a feeling that they “don’t trust her”. Same now with Biden.

        3. JamminJ

          Also ask why Giuliani chose the NY Post. He was worried that real journalist would attempt to verify, validate and corroborate the claims. The NY Post was willing to run the story exactly as he wanted to present it. That should raise red flags too.

          1. SeymourB

            Giuliani didn’t necessary choose the Post as much as settled on them. He first shopped them to Fox and other larger publishers, who all refused to publish a story due to the inability to confirm the information from a source other than Giuliani, since they too were refused access to the source material for analysis. The NY Post, being the NY Post, had no problems with this, although there is a very interesting story about attribution of who wrote it – the people who actually wrote the story all refused to have their names put on it, while people who hadn’t worked there in some time suddenly found out that morning that they had written this article at their former employer.

  7. Qultists are mentally deficient

    This comment section = L-O-FUKIN-L

  8. Sam

    I’m going to start posting as “R” (for “Restricted, one of the highest security levels in the NSA!) at a web site that already caters to a desperate, lonely, confused, impressionable, ignorant imbeciles. RDrops. I will claim to have shocking inside knowledge that the world is controlled by a hidden cabal of hidden people, operating in secret at a hidden location. I will take small bits of truth (there are pedophiles!) and create webs of conspiratorial activity (all Democrats are pedophiles!). I will not present any evidence to support this claim just to make it seem more legit.

    We Are R! (Sounding like a pirate is strictly coincidental)

    1. JamminJ

      It seems like you don’t know what either of those words mean, and are just a sheep to some right-wing propaganda that tells you to love one thing and hate another.

      I disagree with Marxism too. But I understand its a failed economic philosophy, not whatever demon you think it is.

    1. Anon

      You mean non lactose non gmo pesticide gluten free mozzarella, can’t upset little Jimmy’s tummy after working so hard in the basement on his computer

  9. johan0s

    When these sites are mentioned in the news people always talk about CDN/DoS protection companies and how these sites won’t stay online without them. But no one seems to question why causing a major DDoS attack is so easy and risk-free in the first place. This is not only a problem for “controversial” sites, it can affect any site.

    1. mealy

      It’s easy because of the nature of the internet, and the nature of the botnets that create DDOS attacks generally of the scale required.

      In theory they could mostly be stopped but that would require a governing framework that does not exist for obvious reasons.

      The problem for such sites that are so radioactive that cloudflare and even minor subhosts won’t take their money is their own doing, in every case I know about, certainly including 8chan/Qninny.

      If you’re behind one of these major co-hosts DDOS is a non issue for all but the biggest targets/circumstances. It’s not free.
      The internet isn’t actually a perfect democracy. /shocker

  10. Sorryj

    Sorry English is not my first language.
    Can’t undestood, the russians, trump, website…???
    WHO is the bad guys here?? And who’s good?
    Are trump good guy? Or im Missing Something?
    Was the russians Against HIM or with HIM?

  11. Readership1

    Wow. I took a six month break from the site and came back to see BK maligning Q and Ron G being a snitch. What happened to you guys?

    1. Ron G

      Whatever rock you were hiding under for the past 6 months, get back under there, because you’re just making a fool of yourself.

      A “snitch” is what mafiosi call one of their own who goes and blabs to the cops. But see, I was never a part of the Q mafia. So yea, any sooper sekrits they have that I can find will become public. Do you have a problem with the public’s right to know?

      1. mealy

        The first rule of snitch club is do not snitch on Q-Anon!

        How one would do that is unclear, but a rule is a rule.
        Q-Anon has to have rules… or it’d be like… anarchy.

  12. Jake B

    Fundamentally, is an ISP a common carrier, or is it something else?

    In other words, the phone company will give a phone number and service to anyone, regardless of who they are or what beliefs they espouse. A grocery store will sell groceries to anyone who walks inside, provided that they do not impact the store’s ability to operate. You might be able to make an argument regarding web services such as Facebook or Twitter. But an ISP?

    It seems to me that the ISP owes service to whomever requests it of them and pays for it at the common prices they have advertised. If they do not offer service, then how does a person with unpopular views post or read a web page on the Internet?

    So, while I do not subscribe to the political views of the people who were denied service, I do wonder if it should be legal to deny them access based only on the fact that their views are odious to many people.

    1. JamminJ

      DDOS protection services are NOT the same as ISPs. ISPs are often granted status as common carrier because subscribers often have no reasonable choice of service. DDOS protection services are a dime a dozen, and this article proves the point, because they simply went to another (located in Russia).

      Private companies are still entitled to rights to refuse service to anyone… except if they are discriminating on a protected class ( On the federal level: Race. Color. Religion or creed. National origin or ancestry. Sex. Age. Physical or mental disability. Veteran status. Genetic information. Citizenship.)
      Political views are NOT a protected class.

      Common Carriers have less freedom to refuse service, true. But they also have broad user service agreements. And with enough small print, they could certainly find violations to boot a user or group of users.
      But again, this is NOT a case of common carriers.

  13. KrebsIsARetard

    Lmao, you can’t stream on 8chan or 8kun, do your research better next time, I expected more of you.
    I haven’t seen a single CP media in 8chan/8kun.
    Manifestos are speech.
    Why wasn’t Facebook “ostracized” because the New Zealand shooting was streamed there?

    1. JamminJ

      Your attempt to revise history won’t work here…

      “The original 17-minute live stream was announced on 8chan, an underbelly of the Web known as a haven for far-right extremism and hate speech, and posters there shared tips on how to save and share the video for “posterity” and maximum distribution. The ease with which anyone could save and re-upload it online, using a vast network of underground “mirror” sites, ensured it would be permanently stamped across the Web.”

      Not the traditional concept of “streaming”, but really the same effect.

      Also, Facebook was hauled in front of Congress to explain why thousands viewed the video before it was taken down.

      “The spread of the violent video has drawn sharp rebukes on Capitol Hill, where the House Homeland Security Committee, led by Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson, asked Facebook, Microsoft, YouTube and Twitter for a briefing next week on the matter.

      In a note to those companies’ top executives sent Tuesday, Thompson stressed, “You must do better.” He also threatened possible regulation on the horizon. “If you are unwilling to do so, Congress must consider policies to ensure that terrorist content is not distributed on your platforms — including by studying the examples being set by other countries,” he said.”

      1. KrebsIsARetard

        Great job on Krebs for deleting my comment.
        He is trying really hard to censor the truth.

        Go ahead, visit 8chan and stream yourself there, I’ll wait.
        Streaming on 8chan is IMPOSSIBLE.

        Facebook hosted the stream and wasn’t removed from anywhere or anything.

        1. Bradl

          “Facebook hosted the stream and wasn’t removed from anywhere or anything.”

          You kiddies really can’t help your perpetual lying.
          Now your playing semantics with the word “stream”.

          The primary link to the stream was on 8chan, regardless where the actual video gets hosted.

          “Facebook moderators removed it sometime after a user first reported it as troubling, 29 minutes after the stream began”.

          But you racist, hate-mongering, pedophiles on 8chan kept the link active and kept re-uploading to other Facebook pages, YouTube accounts, and other places.

          Now your defense is, “well, technically ‘stream’ isn’t the right word”.
          Who cares? 8chan was the first place where degenerates like you go to see such gore porn.

          1. WhatHappenedtoKrebs

            Thank you, I was wondering who streamed it since it was really hard to tell from the way people are talking about it. Good to know it was in fact Facebook the streamed the video. Thanks again for sharing the facts.

            1. JamminJ

              Nobody “streamed” the video.
              It wasn’t live.

              Uploaded to Facebook, yes. Taken down very quickly.
              It can’t even be called “hosted”, because it kept getting taken down and re-uploaded to other Facebook pages.

              Promoted by 8chan, as they kept the links up.
              Qanon just wants to be held blameless for their own activity.

              The narrative they want to tell, is that Facebook or YouTube gave this content “legitimacy”, by “streaming” it. But that term shows the ignorance of how Social Media works.

      2. bradle

        “Facebook hosted the stream and wasn’t removed from anywhere or anything.”

        You kiddies really can’t help your perpetual lying.
        Now your playing semantics with the word “stream”.

        The primary link to the stream was on 8chan, regardless where the actual video gets hosted.

        “Facebook moderators removed it sometime after a user first reported it as troubling, 29 minutes after the stream began”.

        But you racist, hate-mongering, pedophiles on 8chan kept the link active and kept re-uploading to other Facebook pages, YouTube accounts, and other places.

        Now your defense is, “well, technically ‘stream’ isn’t the right word”.
        Who cares? 8chan was the first place where degenerates like you go to see such gore

  14. Gus

    This Krebs post is VERY odd.
    – Usually Krebs is about investigating security problems, or helping victims try to understand what is happening to their broken security
    – First time in years that I’ve seen Krebs advocating and taking forceful action to take down a site that hasn’t broken any laws, hacked any victim, or just done something fundamentally wrong – apart from expressing free speech.

    Is Krebs the investigator, turning into Krebs the judge and enforcer?

    1. JamminJ

      You haven’t been paying close attention. KOS has done stories of Internet sub-cultures for years. Whether or not they are criminal cases, civil, or just consequential business actions. DDOS protection services is a big deal, and having one deny services (which is legal), is newsworthy.

      What is really odd, but kinda expected… is that readers are only willing to support someone taking down the bad guys, when they aren’t the bad guys.

      We saw this before when Ashley Madison was the subject of a hack. Suddenly people who were totally on the “law and order” bandwagon, started cheering for the criminals.

      So because Qanon is an antisemitic hate group and 8chan harbors/encourages such activity, then do not expect people to take their side just because they are still “legal”.

      You claim Qanon has not “just done something fundamentally wrong”. That is a subjective statement. Obviously Krebs and the majority of people disagree with that assessment.

      1. WhatHappenedtoKrebs

        I’m sorry your Ashley Madison account got hacked.

        1. JamminJ

          Me too, your mom and I will remember that site fondly.

  15. c1ue

    QAnon is the internet equivalent of the Kardashians.
    I checked a half dozen of their claims, 4 years ago.
    Every single one was wrong.
    It is clearly a handful of smart manipulators using fortune telling tactics to make money via eyeballs.

  16. scamFRAUDalert

    I think this is great news. It’s about time that regulators, state governments, local officials and other guidance of the internet go on the offense. These guys are relentless. They are wacked a mode.
    They need to be made aware that their activities online are being monitor and follow – “qualification only cyber criminals need to be watch.”

  17. WhatHappenedtoKrebs

    Now I am going to read you a list of institutions in American society. Please tell me how much confidence you, yourself, have in each one — a great deal, quite a lot, some or very little?

    TV News, 2003
    Very little or none: 17%

    TV News, 2016
    Very little or none: 40% (+23%)

    Newspapers, 2003: 17%
    2016: 36%

    Banks, 2003: 12%
    2016: 26%

    Criminal Justice System, 2004: 26%
    2016: 36%

    Public Schools, 2004: 19%
    2016: 30%

    Big Tech, 2020 (first year): 24%

    Congress, 2002: 17%
    2016: 55%

    The Presidency, 2003: 15%
    2014: 44%

    And numbers for those who trust the Presidency great deal or quite a lot:
    2015: 35%
    2016: 36%
    2017: 32%
    2018: 37%
    2019: 38%
    2020: 39%
    2021: And rising

    And one more, for the long-time lurkers:

    Brian Krebs, 2004: are you mad cause I’m asking 21 questions?

    Brian Krebs, 2020? Damn homie, in high school you used to be the man homie.

  18. SwissBrisQ

    Dear Brian,

    I have always enjoyed your investigations and assumed these are highly trustful. But on this topic you are missing the clue IMO.

    As a former co-worker in Big Pharma and Politics, I have discovered enough frauds that are proof for me that Deep State is not just a conspiracy theory – but a very hard to swallow reality.

    Finding Q was a confirmation and a very helpful source that gave insight in the structure and its enormous scope. I saw Q being framed as a dangerous and extreme movement – while IMO it is the opposite – an OSINT research database that connects many dots.

    In your article 3 statements are simply incorrect.

    1) in the FBI database there are ZERO documents to find that lead to Qanon. Just try to type in QANON in the FBI search function. ZERO results. While MS-13 gives tonnes of research. You better sue YAHOO for spreading lies > https://www.fbi.gov

    2) I doubt your claims about 8Chan-Kun about related to a place for violence and Q being extremist or far-right. Have found many different views on this – for example the shooting at COMET PIZZA happened after PIZZAGATE publications in December 2016. The first Q post was placed end of October 2017 – and this incident and Q are NOT related

    I want to ask you for a rectification – as these type of simply ‘framing a topic’ and false accusations are not acceptable for a journalist. I am also a victim of Deep State attacks, like hacking, telephone calls, workforce fraud, just because I have found to much evidence (available on request).

    Thank you for your attention and greetings from Switzerland.

    1. JamminJ

      “As a former co-worker in Big Pharma and Politics, I have discovered enough frauds that are proof for me that Deep State is not just a conspiracy theory – but a very hard to swallow reality.”

      This is the essence of conspiracy theories. They always have a basis in truth. It’s the jump to illogical conclusions that makes them conspiracy theories.
      “Deep State” isn’t the normal ‘hard to swallow reality’ that every is present in every bureaucracy and institution… it goes beyond that to claim a vast “conspiracy”.
      Any large organization will invariably have insiders that see even normal incompetence as “fraud” and “proof” of some larger nefarious plot. But that is because not every employee understands what is happening across the entire organization, and without adhering to logic, reason and rational thinking. Hanlon’s razor is a great example of what people do not understand.

      Anonymously claiming to be a former co-worker, some position of privileged knowledge, is exactly why we are so vulnerable to foreign interference. Anyone can claim to be anything on the Internet. And the general public does NOT know how to evaluate evidence for credibility. That’s what journalists like Brian are for. But now every idiot on a keyboard thinks they can verify that Q has a security clearance and works in government. It’s BS. There is no credibility in Q’s claim, and he’s just as likely to work for some other government, than ours. He could just be some dude who knows how to use the Internet to find bits of info that sounds impressive to ignorant people on the Internet.

      “Finding Q was a confirmation…”
      This should be a Red Flag. This isn’t about some global conspiracy. It’s about basic human psychology. The world is a scary confusing mess, and we are all looking for confirmation to support our belief structure.
      “OSINT research database that connects many dots”
      Connecting dots isn’t hard to do. In fact, it doesn’t take evidence to connect dots, it just takes imagination. This is what fiction writers have done for ages. But now with the Internet, fiction is weaponized.

      “in the FBI database there are ZERO documents to find that lead to Qanon”
      That merely speaks to your inability to research. If you spent some actual time, you would find the memo that this article refers to in it’s only mention of the FBI. Search for the “FBI-ConspiracyTheoryDomesticExtremism” pdf, it should be the first result. Beware of Google or any search engine that uses past search history to curate future results… their algorithm has already pegged you as a conspiracy theorist and will skew what it shows you because Google does understand how “confirmation bias” works.
      The reason why this pdf isn’t listed in their own document search, is because it is still under review as UNCLASSIFIED//LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE

      “The first Q post was placed end of October 2017 – and this incident and Q are NOT related”
      That’s not how this works. The Pizzagate conspiracy is a predecessor to Qanon. They are related. Q is more specifically the anonymous poster claiming to have Q clearance (which is only related to DOE, which would only cover Top Secret information related to nuclear weapons, not Justice Department/FBI stuff). Q also came after FBIAnon, who claimed to know secrets about the Clintons, which led to Pizzagate.
      So Qanon’s link to Pizzagate, is that Qanon COMES FROM the same conspiratorial operation where some anonymous Internet dude claims to be an “insider”, convinces others on the Internet who don’t know how to verify evidence, and makes wild claims that incite people to act violently out of a misguided sense of justice.

      “Q being framed as a dangerous and extreme movement – while IMO it is the opposite”
      The dangerous thing about Internet conspiracy theories like Qanon, is the ability for people to pick and choose a selection of theories from a smorgasbord of an interconnected web of lies.

      The shooter in the Pizzagate incident, chose a specific set of theories related to a pedophilia ring led by the Clintons.
      The Illinois Capitol building bomber (twarted), stated he was trying to, “make Americans aware of ‘Pizzagate’ and the New World Order (NWO), who were dismantling society.”
      The Tree of Life Synagogue shooter/murderer, was a Qanon believer. He specifically singled out on the anti-Semitic rhetoric that is part of Qanon culture.
      Nevada gunman with the armored truck, wanted to expose government corruption and lies. He was also driven to violence by Qanon theories.
      Two men were in preparation to attack the government-funded research facility in Alaska, claimed the government was using HAARP to control the weather and prevent humans from talking to God.
      The LAX killer said he had a desire to kill TSA personnel, who he associated with the New World Order.
      … there is more too.

      “Although conspiracy theory-driven crime and violence is not a new phenomenon, today’s information environment has changed the way conspiracy theories develop, spread, and evolve. The advent of the Internet and social media has enabled promoters of conspiracy theories to produce and share greater volumes of material via online platforms that larger audiences of consumers can quickly and easily access. Based on the increased volume and reach of conspiratorial content due to modern communication methods, it is logical to assume that more extremist-minded individuals will be exposed to potentially harmful conspiracy theories, accept ones that are favorable to their views, and possibly carry out criminal or violent actions as a result. The Internet has also enabled a ‘crowd-sourcing’ effect wherein conspiracy theory followers themselves shape a given theory by presenting information that supplements, expands, or localizes its narrative. The examples above demonstrate how crowd-sourced conspiracy theories can influence which entities extremists choose to target. These examples also substantiate concerns expressed by some researchers who believe a rise of conspiracism, fostered in part by the Internet, may be accompanied by a search for scapegoats-those believed to be the conspirators’ allies, henchmen, or collaborators.”

      Bottom line. Nobody should believe an anonymous person on the Internet who claims to have inside knowledge. Evidence takes work to verify, and the layperson are NOT equipped to do the work of journalists.
      Confirmation bias is real and being exploited/weaponized.
      And lastly, Qanon is a broad term that covers all manner of anti-government conspiracy theories that people can pick and choose from, to validate existing extremism and potentially act on them.

  19. JamminJ

    Great analysis about Qanon


    “These were normal people and their assumptions were normal and logical and completely wrong.”

    “QAnon grows on the wild misinterpretation of random data, presented in a suggestive fashion in a milieu designed to help the users come to the intended misunderstanding. Guided because the puppet masters are directly involved in hinting about the desired conclusions. They have pre-seeded the conclusions. They are constantly getting the player lost by pointing out unrelated random events and creating a meaning for them that fits the propaganda message Q is delivering.”

    “It works very well because when you “figure it out yourself” you own it. You experience the thrill of discovery, the excitement of the rabbit hole, the acceptance of a community that loves and respects you. Because you were convinced to “connect the dots yourself” you can see the absolute logic of it. This is the conclusion you arrived at.”

    “It’s like a Darwinian fiction lab, where the best stories and the most engaging and satisfying mis-interpretations rise to the top and are then elaborated upon for the next version.”
    “The theories that didn’t work, disappeared while others got up-voted. It’s ingenious. It’s AI with a group-think engine.”

    “It’s easy for people to forget that they are not discovering the story, but creating it from random data.”

    “I’m afraid this needs to be said. Q is not a real person, but a fictional character.”
    “Q is NOT a whistleblower. Q is a “plot device”. Q is fictional and acts exactly like a fictional character acts. This is because the purpose of Q is not to divulge actual information, but to create fiction.”

Comments are closed.