January 21, 2021

Parler, the beleaguered social network advertised as a “free speech” alternative to Facebook and Twitter, has had a tough month. Apple and Google removed the Parler app from their stores, and Amazon blocked the platform from using its hosting services. Parler has since found a home in DDoS-Guard, a Russian digital infrastructure company. But now it appears DDoS-Guard is about to be relieved of more than two-thirds of the Internet address space the company leases to clients — including the Internet addresses currently occupied by Parler.

The pending disruption for DDoS-Guard and Parler comes compliments of Ron Guilmette, a researcher who has made it something of a personal mission to de-platform conspiracy theorist and far-right groups.

In October, a phone call from Guilmette to an Internet provider in Oregon was all it took to briefly sideline a vast network of sites tied 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. As a result, those QAnon and 8chan sites also ultimately ended up in the arms of DDoS-Guard.

Much like Internet infrastructure firm CloudFlare, DDoS-Guard typically doesn’t host sites directly but instead acts as a go-between to simultaneously keep the real Internet addresses of its clients confidential and to protect them from crippling Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) attacks.

The majority of DDoS-Guard’s employees are based in Russia, but the company is actually incorporated in two other places: As “Cognitive Cloud LLP” in Scotland, and as DDoS-Guard Corp. based in Belize.  However, none of the company’s employees are listed as based in Belize, and DDoS-Guard makes no mention of the Latin American region in its map of global operations.

In studying the more than 11,000 Internet addresses assigned to those two companies, Guilmette found that approximately 66 percent of them were doled out to the Belize entity by LACNIC, the regional Internet registry for the Latin American and Caribbean regions.

Suspecting that DDoS-Guard incorporated in Belize on paper just to get huge swaths of IP addresses that are supposed to be given only to entities with a physical presence in the region, Guilmette filed a complaint with the Internet registry about his suspicions back in November.

Guilmette said LACNIC told him it would investigate, and that any adjudication on the matter could take up to three months. But earlier this week, LACNIC published a notice on its website that it intends to revoke 8,192 IPv4 addresses from DDoS-Guard — including the Internet address currently assigned to Parler[.]com.

A notice of revocation posted by LACNIC.

LACNIC has not yet responded to requests for comment. The notice on its site says the Internet addresses are set to be revoked on Feb. 24.

DDoS-Guard CEO Evgeniy Marchenko maintains the company has done nothing wrong, and that DDoS-Guard does indeed have a presence in Belize.

“They were used strongly according [to] all LACNIC policies by [a] company legally substituted in LACNIC region,” Marchenko said in an email to KrebsOnSecurity. “There is nothing illegal or extremist. We have employers and representatives in different countries around the world because we are global service. And Latin America region is not an exception.”

Guilmette said DDoS-Guard could respond by simply moving Parler and other sites sitting in those address ranges to another part of its network. But he considers it a victory nonetheless that a regional Internet registry took his concerns seriously.

“It appeared to me that it was more probable than not that they got these 8,000+ IPv4 addresses by simply creating an arguably fraudulent shell company in Belize and then going cap in hand to LACNIC, claiming that they had a real presence in the Latin & South American region, and then asking for 8,000+ IPv4 addresses,” he said. “So I reported my suspicions to the LACNIC authorities in early November, and as I have only just recently learned, the LACNIC authorities followed up diligently on my report and, it seems, verified my suspicions.”

In October, KrebsOnSecurity covered another revelation by Guilmette about the same group of QAnon and 8chan-related sites that moved to DDoS-Guard: The companies that provided the Internet address space used by the sites were defunct businesses in the eyes of their respective U.S. state regulators. In other words, the American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) — the non-profit which administers IP addresses for entities based in North America — was well within its contract rights to revoke the IP space.

Guilmette brought his findings to ARIN, which declined to act on the complaint and instead referred the matter to state investigatory agencies.

Still, Guilmette’s gadfly efforts to stir things up in the RIR community sometimes do pay off. For example, he spent nearly three years documenting how $50 million worth of the increasingly scarce IPv4 addresses were misappropriated from African companies to dodgy Internet marketing firms.

His complaints about those findings to the African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC) resulted in an investigation that led to the termination of a top AFRINIC executive, who was found to have quietly sold many of the address blocks for personal gain to marketers based in Europe, Asia and elsewhere.

And this week, AFRINIC took the unusual step of officially documenting the extent of the damage wrought by its former employee, and revoking discrete chunks of address space currently being used by marketing firms.

In a detailed report released today (PDF), AFRNIC said its investigation revealed more than 2.3 million IPv4 addresses were “without any lawful authority, misappropriated from AFRINIC’s pool of resources and attributed to organizations without any justification.”

AFRINIC said it began its inquiry in earnest back in March 2019, when it received an application by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) about “certain suspicious activities regarding several IPv4 address blocks which it held.” So far, AFRNINIC said it has reclaimed roughly half of the wayward IP address blocks, with the remainder “yet to be reclaimed due to ongoing due diligence.”

374 thoughts on “DDoS-Guard To Forfeit Internet Space Occupied by Parler

  1. lol

    Did they really think no one would look into their operation with how much attention the Parler story has right now? Lmao. “You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take” -the russian govt with their hand up DDoS-Guard’s ass.

    1. The Crazy Russian

      The Russian regime will continue to shove sticks in our (US’s) bicycle wheels. This is the way.

      We have to get smarter, more efficient, and coordinated in how we step in against them. Divided we fail.

      1. JamminJ

        We’ve been very weak on Russia for so long… they cleaned our clock pretty badly, in a number of ways. We need to fight back.

        1. Foodandart

          We willl get back on track with the cat and mouse games with Russia, now that Trump is gone.

          For all his bluster about ‘sleepy Joe’s’ ties to Russia, it was HIS kids that were wheeling and dealing to try and get hotel contracts – amongst other things – in Moscow in 2014 and 2015.

          He was absolutely playing softball with Putin the past 4 years – he didn’t want to run the risk of losing Russia as an option to build in. (Right now, I think the only place left where he’s welcome is in the UAE – Dubai, to be exact)

          1. lmao

            Yet everyone looked away when Biden’s son had the money wired to him from Ukraine? Somehow it is strange that during the Ukraine war Interpol was found amongst the protesters in Crimea. I guess that is another fact overlooked.

            1. JamminJ

              Don’t use the word fact, when you spew conspiracy theories.

              Your lies have debunked, and you won’t be able to pass them off here as if they were true.

              1. Robert Michaels

                Guess again cowboy, the US senate committe found all kinds of dirt on your buddy Hunter Biden . . . .

                1. JamminJ

                  Provide your evidence with a credible journalist source.

                  Remember, investigating isn’t the same as finding something. People get investigated all the time for political reasons.

                    1. JamminJ

                      I know, right.

                      My theory for what happened to Trump is this:

                      Hillary Clinton was an establishment candidate with 30 years in politics and married to Bill. So she had a huge walk in closet full of potential skeletons and inherited all the political baggage that Bill had too.
                      She was a very easy target for any opponent willing to fight dirty. And Trump was very willing.

                      The Republicans spent years setting up never ending ‘investigations’. Benghazi and Clinton Foundation. In a never ending round robin of investigations and hearings in the Republican controlled Senate. Never turned up anything. The email scandal was absolutely nothing, just well timed investigations. Investigate any politician, and you’ll see mishandling of information.

                      The whole campaign worked. Get voters to have a generic, vague, “bad feeling” about Clinton.

                      Fast forward to today. Trump is trying the same strategy. But his opponent is different. Biden is an establishment politician, but nowhere near the slimyness of a Clinton.

                      Trump’s campaign strategy failed.
                      Attacking Hunter? Who cares? It doesn’t land with anyone, because Hunter isn’t in politics. And accusations of nepotism fall flat when you consider the Trump kids.
                      Trump seemed to be running against everyone else, and not Joe Biden. Hunter, Bernie, Warren, AOC, etc. He wished Clinton was still running and couldn’t take his mind off her.

                      Trump is a cult leader, and hating “leftist” is his religion.

                    1. JamminJ

                      And that worldview is exactly how you, millions of Americans, and millions of Germans get suckered into believing in the rhetoric of a madman. No trust in objective fact… so you fall back to getting your news from social media.

                    2. John Ramos

                      Then go do some reporting. Start a newspaper, web-site, blog whatever you feel adds to the conversation of ‘news’.
                      Or you’re just going to complain on a blog… Sad!

            2. Quinn Sysmith

              Exactly, but Soviet Leftists like the Radicalized bully and hate filled democraps don’t believe in fair play or equal treatment. Americans and the world are going to see how evil Leftists can be again, even though history is full of the evil of Leftists. Mao, Stalin, pol pot, etc.

              1. JamminJ

                It’s not really about left or right, liberal or conservative.

                If you have an authoritarian leader who loves power more than people… The outcome will be the same.
                Stalin or Mao, Hitler or Mussolini. Political spectrum it’s just a means to the end.

              2. Gob Bluth

                Seriously, brother, what are you blathering about? You seem a bit unhinged.

          2. James Freeman

            So when Hillary sold uranium to “Russia” while in office as SoS, is ok, but a year before announcing he’s running for president, he can’t continue to do business?

          3. Robert

            Hotel contracts in russia are a hell of a lot different then contracts with china’s military complex. And Hillary is the one that used fbi to purchase a fake dosie from Russian agents to win an election. See these are called facts and no matter how many lies you tell to disprove them they are still facts. So let’s try to stick to facts. The truth makes the world better place.

            1. JamminJ

              How about you actually reference a recognized Fact Checker before you use the word “fact”.

              Trump cult members don’t know the meaning of words like “fact” or “evidence”. They believe only what they see on TV or twitter from their cult leader and his sycophants.

                1. JamminJ

                  You cannot claim the entire voting population as a part of this group. Many people simply vote for the Republican party every time, but still aren’t political zealots.
                  The reality is more like a few dozen million… Which is a lot, yes. But not every complicit German following Hitler was a Nazi either. But still, their silence and willingness to go along is a stain upon millions of Germans.

                2. JamminJ

                  The cult isn’t ALL Trump voters.
                  Just the few thousand die hard followers/Qanon willing to destroy democracy on his very word.
                  Those who show up on random blogs defending an attempted coup d’etat.

        2. lmao

          Do you realize the United States does the same thing Russia does?

          1. PATRICK BRYANT

            I hope the dictionary editors add: “whataboutism: false moral equivalence,” in their next edition.

              1. Dan

                Dictionary.com. Rapid response dictionary of the PC elite.

      2. rofl

        You do realize the United States does the same? They have been trying to destabilize Russia for 80 years now…

        1. JamminJ

          Well, we tried to destabilize the Soviet Union. And succeeded. That is a main reason why Putin really has it in for us, as retaliation.

        2. Tom W

          When Russia was a democracy, the USA seemed far more inclined to support it.

      3. Mark

        What is the difference between Russian and Liberal regime?

        Can you name one? Things like freedom, speech, control, fear, bias, one opinion etc. just came to my mind. BTW – I came from regime and I know what it looks like, what it smells and how it starts….

        1. JamminJ

          Yes, it starts with a strongman wanna be dictator. Holding rallies and telling his followers not to believe journalists and that they’re enemies of the people. Rampant corruption at the highest level of executive power.
          Abusing the military to disrupt lawful protest, for a photo op. Extortion for personal political gain.
          Pardons to political allies and co-conspirators to cover up crimes.
          And course, insurrection and violent attempted coup de ta’s.

          Yes, it also involves shutting down communications for dissenters. But only when it’s the government who actually does it.
          Private companies operating in free markets still have a choice not to support a political movement.

      4. Hans

        Crazy, I would be more concerned about all of the additional nuke they are assembling that their accumulation of IP addresses.

    2. Danny

      I now trust Russia more than the US. The fbi/cia are completely corrupt. And they now have the social media companies aligned.

      They are much more dangerous than Russia.

      1. JamminJ

        Says the Russian troll / sock puppet account trying desperately hard to look like an average American

  2. Mark

    One person can wield this much power?

    What if I decided that I didn’t like the twitters, FB’s and Googles of the world because they host crap? I think I’ll get them exterminated from the internet.

    1. FC

      Well, if google and twitter are illegally obtaining IPs, I’m sure you’ll have no issues getting them “exterminated”. I wish you well trying to prove that google and twitter are no longer doing business in the US. Please report back on how that goes for you.

    2. Steve

      What power? Pointing out that someone is breaking the rules?

    3. JamminJ

      If you had proof that Facebook, Google or Twitter had defrauded the IP address space registry somehow… you are free to present that evidence to ARIN.

      1. Seth

        And it’s not like ARIN did anything based on RFG’s reports either.

        1. JamminJ

          His reports to ARIN were very different than this.
          Not having any actually location on a continent, but still getting IP addresses there… is different than what DDOS-Guard did in the US.

          Defunct businesses are the jurisdiction of individual states. Much weaker evidence, and not really something for ARIN to do.

        2. clewis

          ARIN has limited jurisdiction over what’s been delegated
          to LACNIC, especially when it’s LACNIC’s rules that have been broken.

    4. Teresa

      While most of what is hosted anywhere is dubious, Facebook, Twitter, and Google do not allow postings that may lead to violence. The United States freedom of speech has limits… Inciting violence, insurrection, and even just liable slander is not covered. I have no wish to debate election procedure, but if anyone decides there is fraud of any kind, you still need actual evidence to proceed. The courts need to see specific occurences of fraud before they can begin a proceeding. Statements about vague possibilities of fraud are not enough and considered hearsay.

      I suppose what I am saying is that Parler might still be around if it didn’t allow it’s users to make outright threats of violence against other people. For a group of people who say they were for ‘law and order’, they don’t seem to know much about it.

      1. Needle

        Teresa, this happens on Twitter all the time. The solution has never been to nuke the site. It’s been to suspend and delete those accounts. This isn’t about violence because BLM would be canned on TFI. It’s about control of social media. No competition allowed.

        1. JamminJ

          And who is “nuking the site”??

          If 90% of Twitter was only this extremist stuff, then yeah, maybe Amazon AWS would also consider terminating their services.

          Parler had many opportunities to moderate, and they chose not to.

          Twitter, having NOT been founded on the notion of being a specific haven for only right wing conspiracy theories… is not on the same level as sites like Parler or Gab.
          Stop trying to equate them. Twitter is actively moderating content that violates TOS. Parler is not. Amazon, has no obligation to let Parler slide for violations.

        2. David

          BLM accounts on twitter did get shut down, in the early stages. Then they changed their tactics to using ambiguous verbiage like “direct action”. The proud boys/bungaloo have made many mistakes, just look at their brilliant idea of “not looking like antifa with masks”. Big surprise that facial recognition was used after the fact

      2. Grisu

        The freedom of speech has limits, but you missed the most important one: Nobody is ever allowed to show nipples on Facebook

        1. Rick

          You have protections against speech being restricted by the government. You have no such protections against a private company doing so. It’s their sandbox and their rule….

      3. Phil

        I believe Rebecca Mercer stepped in to keep the extreme Right alive on the internet by funding Parler, nice follow up to her and her father’s Cambridge Analytics project a few years back.

        1. Ron G

          Not nearly enough has been written about the Mercers and their apparent rather sinister efforts to manipulate the body politic.

      4. Robert

        That’s a lie they have let blm and especially antifa and members of the democratic party actually anybody that was a liberal preach hate and violence all day every day for a year and can’t say they haven’t face book and twitter are the biggest threat to the united states their filled with nothing but anti american propaganda and they suppress any opinion that doesn’t match theirs that my liberal friend is facisom.

        1. John Ramos

          Presents facts not in evidence…
          Care to link to anything backing that assertion? Of anything you claimed?
          Or is this just troll tripe?!

  3. Osiris

    Wow, just wow… great that they caught this criminal. Fraudsters everywhere, at every level.

    “…His complaints about those findings to the African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC) resulted in an investigation that led to the termination of a top AFRINIC executive, who was found to have quietly sold many of the address blocks for personal gain to marketers based in Europe, Asia and elsewhere…”

  4. Michael

    Blah, Blah, Blah. I can’t believe people (including me in this instance) spend their time reading this crap. What about using the time to help your local healthcare workers. What about helping all those people who currently can’t work due to lock downs. What about getting the groceries of your local old folks. What about helping people and being nice. That way you won’t “lose your country”, you will help to “build your country”. Get off the damn internet and go and help someone.

    1. JFT

      You first, Michael.

      And Brian, it is a free speech alternative. Putting it in quotes is disingenuous and your bias is showing, bub. What Amazon/Google did was collude to remove a competitor.

      Guess where the riot planning originated? Facebook group. Guess where the live update setups were happening? Twitter.

      Grow up and stop buying the oligarch’s pablum.

      1. JamminJ

        And Facebook and Twitter have every right to remove those groups and posts. Including banning the inciter in chief himself.
        We’ve been criticizing Facebook and Twitter for not doing more, sooner. Now that they are acting… good.

        1. jackisanass

          It’s exactly perspectives like yours that are the problem. You can say Trump is the “inciter in chief” yet you can’t cite a specific comment he made where he incited that riot because it doesn’t exist. By contrast, you have numerous Dem politicians calling for people to “get in their faces”, Kamala saying the protesting/rioting of BLM and Antifa will and should continue. You have Jack telling people during BLM and Antifa rioting to switch to Signal because Twitter was being monitored by law enforcement. The constitutional limits to free speech are NOT being equally enforced, and it’s obvious to those of us who dislike any censorship at all.

          1. JamminJ

            What are you talking about? Incitement doesn’t have to be overt and explicitly telling people to do anything. Just like Trump didn’t have to say the literal words, “quid pro quo”.

            People can read between lines. His followers, after their arrest, would admit that they thought they had the permission of the President to storm the Capitol.
            That’s how mob bosses try to get away with racketeering. By not using certain words, but nonetheless make it clear their intentions.

            Private companies are free to take sides if they want. They are free to enforce speech unequally if they please. The constitutional limits have already ended and do not apply to Twitter and Facebook.

            Hitler didn’t personally order Kristallnacht. He didn’t say, go do this. But the rhetoric showed clear intention.
            The German people were ashamed of Germany the next day, but not ashamed enough. You Trump supporters have to face what happened at the Capitol, and also your own shame.

          2. Dan Brandon

            ” Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!”

            Verbatim from Trump’s Twitter account on December 19th.

            The violence of January 6th gets the go-ahead right there.

        2. Right is right

          Hey JamminJ:

          Let’s how much you cry WHEN you are censored!!

          It WILL happen.

          1. JamminJ

            Nope. I am not stupid enough to believe in dangerous conspiracy theories or advocate violent overthrow of the government.

            If I get censored… so what? I am not ignorant of the Constitution and understand that many private companies make up the infrastructure and platforms on the internet. My comments are posted under their discretion… and I won’t be a whiny little entitled snowflake like you guys are right now.

          2. John Ramos

            How sad, cry more!
            How is ‘Big Tech’ going to censor me?
            Oh wait… what is this, I’m posting freely on this message board.
            I’m amazed at the stupidity of the posters here, you included! It’s amazing!

        3. Grisu

          I cannot agree or applaud the one psychopath is pulling the plug of another one. Deplatforming has to follow rules. And these rules have to be applied to all and be transparent.
          The tweets of Dumb Donnie or his FB postings did not start in 2021. If rules apply, he should have been removed from these platforms 5 years earlier.

      2. JET

        Agree completely…Michael could have added feeding hungry children, taking in rescue animals etc…I would love to hear his definition of being nice, would it include sending snotty responses on this forum?

      3. JoHon

        No, it is not a free speech alternative. Parler has banned many left wing folks from their platform. It is just an alternative to places that don’t allow hate speech and conspiracy to commit acts of violence, insurrection, etc.

        1. Evan Rowley

          >No, it is not a free speech alternative. Parler has banned many left wing folks from their platform. It is just an alternative to places that don’t allow hate speech and conspiracy to commit acts of violence, insurrection, etc.

          I don’t care how many left wing folks were banned from Parler. Facebook and Twitter are run by democrats and leftists. Hate speech exists on Facebook and Twitter, only the rules aren’t enforced – I have seen so many accounts promoting violence towards republicans and conservatives for the last 4 years. I would rather have a site that lets voices on the right be heard versus two sites that are controlled by leftists. No fairness or objectivity exists in your world, where anyone on the right is dehumanized with all the labels you people have come up with over the years.

          1. JamminJ

            Whining about being the victim of censorship looks pretty pathetic since you are here, visibly whiny.

            Right wing conspiracy nuts have shifted so far to the right, that everything looks like ‘far left’ to them.

            Twitter and Facebook are capitalist organizations. Selling data and advertisements to provide a free service. They are under no obligation and under no incentive to enforce their policies unevenly for conservatives.

            The real answer, you won’t like it.
            The right wing is more prone to conspiracy theories and thus this abuse of social media to perpetuated. You are not the victim of censorship… you are the perpetrators. Stop with the nonsense, become moderates, and you won’t get censored.

            If you don’t want to stop, then you have to build your own servers, platform and infrastructure.

          2. JoHon

            That’s fine but it’s not “free speech” just because they allow racism and plotting violence. There are plenty of Republicans and far right people on mainstream platforms, they just don’t say overtly racist or
            criminal stuff. Very simple.

        2. Jonas

          It’s amazing seeing people who carry water for these big tech companies knowing that these companies knowingly & willingly host content (as in the recent court case) like child porn, but think persecution of legal and protected speech, in some cases as innocuous as cartoons, is acceptable.

          1. JamminJ

            You’re gonna have to put up proof of your allegations.

            Too many conspiracy theory nutjobs on here have been spoiled over the past 4 years, being able say any wild accusation without offering a shred of evidence.

            They go around labeling the media “fake news”, “enemy of the people” and now having a go at “Big Tech”.
            You are just parroting Trump.

            “Big Tech” isn’t like Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Agro, etc. They didn’t get their power from government corruption.
            WE gave the tech companies power over us, when we decided that we would conduct our social lives over the Internet, using their infrastructure and platforms for free (agreeing that our data, would be payment).

            Now, self-entitled snowflakes demand to use these platforms as if they pay for them.

        3. James Freeman

          If you want true hate speech, try Reddit. If you don’t follow their beliefs you’ll have a hard time.

      4. Mark

        #1) Facebook and Twitter have moderation and will remove content advocating violence, rape, torture, murder, etc… though many people are complaining that it is not enough
        #2) Facebook and Twitter (mostly) run their own servers, they do not contract them from others
        #3) Amazon warned Parler (months ago) to moderate content that advocates violence, rape, torture, murder as that was a violation of their terms of service… Parler’s response was a refusal
        #4) Apple and Google’s terms of service (like Amazon’s) give them the right to remove apps that expose them to potential liability (such calling for violence, rape, torture, murder, etc)

    2. Another Gnostic

      Your comment is an interesting proposition. If your passion for helping others is sincere (I have no reason to doubt it), is it possible for you to deliver your great suggestion in a fashion where people will hear your message and move toward your suggestion? “Wrong making” strangers on the internet through a comment-shaming comment is certainly an oxymoron.

      I agree with your suggestions superficially, but I think the real answer to your question is that in the 21st century helping people (strangers) has become painfully more complicated than it was in the 20th Century. Old people are most vulnerable to CVNineteen and a younger person could a carrier but never really get sick or not sick enough to notice (helping could be lethal). “Helping” people who are unemployed when a greater portion of our workforce are all unemployed at the same time is more like Philanthropy/Charity than the average person “Helping” folks who need stimulus checks/unemployment/job opportunities. I’m not suggesting at any point that people should avoid helping, but the basic truth of humanity is that we all give and receive according to our individual capacities to do so, which are all unique, not homogenous.

      “Being nice” – this concept has caused a GREAT DEAL of pain socially. “Be Nice” is a command that parents give young children (usually) as a way of trying to get them to conform to social norms without having to explain what a social norm is. The FLDS are known to use a version of this phrase “Be Sweet” to their religiously enslaved plural wives anytime they behave outside an acceptable model of behavior.

      It is much easier not to take people seriously than it is to require them to “Be Nice.” And the problem with this request is that – they may think they are being “Nice”. Then you have to explain what Nice is or “your” Nice.

      I have enough space in my heart for people to make comments and help, I don’t think the 2 ore mutually exclusive!

    3. DelilahTheSober

      I generally agree with Michael’s comments. Even though I am a total lefty, I am not comfortable with this massive corporate takedown of Parler. Just because I don’t believe in the same things they do, that doesn’t make my beliefs more worthy than theirs.

    1. JamminJ

      They didn’t. The right just started claiming that everything is free speech. The right became entitled whiny snowflakes triggered and wanting to play the victim.

      1. Another Gnostic

        Umm, they didn’t “start” claiming “everything is free speech”. Everything IS FREE SPEECH. There are some legal limits when it comes to using language to cause harm ie “Yelling Fire in a theater”, making terroristic or other legally coded threats to others and so on and this exceptions in most State Laws and Federal Law are seldom vague, non specific and left open to wide and creative interpretations of what “harm” is. I’ve noticed as the hyper-partisanship reached its peak in 2020-2021 that creative “idea mashing” has replaced well constructed logic and I’ve named this vari0us metaphors but I need to come up with a permanent one so I’m consistent. I see you using this “idea mashing” logic with “Everything is Free Speech” = “Snow Flake”…huh? So, you think if someone has to courage to say what’s real for them, instead of repeating approved comments or regurgitating the mashed-ideas logic is “weakness”?

        “That dude is saying whatever the hell he wants…what a [word self-redacted]!” that doesn’t even make sense. I’m super-fine with any US Citizen having as many strange and different beliefs from me as they want or need, but as a Citizen who has an equally vested interest as all Citizens do about how my government regulates or deregulates activities that our founders wrote “Congress shall make NO LAWS…” regarding our liberties – that is what I expect from OUR GOVERNMENT.

        And Republicans might have a specific and to some/many distasteful construct of “Free Speech”, but what does that have to do with each of our liberties? Our liberties aren’t subject to any random majority of politics and politicians (they are but they absolutely should not be by law).

        Thanks for your interesting comment.

      1. JamminJ

        About the time the right started hating state’s rights and the police.
        When it served them, they were all about it. But how dare a cop stop a white person violently trying invade a building. And after the state’s exercise their constitutional rights to run and manage their own elections, they now want the federal government to step in and override the will of the people.

    2. Another Gnostic

      I don’t think their reaction is toward speech specifically. I think it is more about feeling like they are in control again and perhaps needing to let others FEEL their control as an attempt to regain what they might see as a loss of Respect for the last 4 years. It is the desperation of the need to REACT to the last 4 years that infects their ideas with a perma de-evolve on some of their current tactics. Also, the phenomena of echo chambers and insular reasoning and circular logic seem to be a major side effect of unregulated Social Media.

      It isn’t like we don’t know better. There have been laws on the books for at least decades perhaps centuries about Criminals who earn their freedom NOT associating with known Felons. If any political party were to incorporate the Easter Bunny as a serious pillar of their Political Platform, anyone who hasn’t inundated themselves with Political Easter Bunny echo chambers WON’T UNDERSTAND or get it. The new trick now is to punish people for not hallucinating with the group correctly or challenging crazy-sleep-deprivation logic with facts based logic.

      This is perhaps stranger than the “Mandela Effect” as a evolutionary outcome of the Internet. I’m not a self-identified Republican or Democrat. I try to think of myself as a human when I’m awake. So, if there was a humanity party I’d belong to that one (as long as Tulsi was in charge :-)).

      It is a crazy CRAZY thing for people to need other people to follow a long list of their own personal rules in order for the needy person to feel “OK”. Nothing wrong with making a request and what comes with that is both agreement and disagreement. Vulnerable Narcissism is on the rise (according to entities that track such things)for Millenials and Zoomers. Not sure what the cause of that was/is but attacking other people for completely constructed slights is a predictable and typical SOP for VNs.

    3. jose

      hmmm…free speech. the first amendment begins:

      Congress shall make no law…

      twitter and fb aren’t congress and they’re not making laws. they’re enforcing their tos. no big.

    4. John Ramos

      What’s the ‘Left’?
      Come on, use your words. The political spectrum is far bigger than just ‘Left vs Right’, but I shouldn’t presume any intelligence from posters like you. Sad!

  5. Bill

    I don’t like self appointed censors any better than conspiracy theorists or anarchists.

    Free speech is free speech, like it or not. I am smart enough to decide for myself and don’t want the likes of Guilmette inserting himself into things.

    1. JamminJ

      People who say they are smart enough to decide for themselves… usually aren’t.

      Journalism has a role. Why do free speech people not care about the free press? Instead, they believe the lies that legit journalists are just “fake news”… then they retreat into echo chambers full of pundits telling them what they want to hear. They do google searches and use youtube to “research” in their half assed attempts to “decide for themselves” what is true or not. They stop as soon as someone just reconfirms their preconceptions.

      No, Guilmette isn’t censoring anyone. Nor are the IP address registrars. The only connection is that shady organizations like DDOS-Guard have broken several policies with several other companies.

      1. Scarmouche

        Journalism does have a role. Promote their own specific/paid for agenda. It’s not impartial anymore. You pick which way it leans to serve your purpose, but it is not without bias. Someone is paying their bills, that’s their bias.

        1. JamminJ

          Journalism was never impartial. Even when it did enjoy much more of the public trust. It’s not that journalism has really changed, it’s the public’s perception and confidence in it that has shifted.

          They’ve always been private sector, funded by advertisers, etc. That’s not what changed.

          The primary thing that changed was the technological medium. It’s always been elites since the evolution from pamphlets, newspapers, radio, and television. All of those forms of media cost money with significant barriers to entry.

          But the internet changed everything. The barrier-to-entry has dropped to virtually nothing.

          Now with the democratization of news media, every Bozo with an opinion (which is everybody) need only afford a camera/microphone, a desk and a computer. And suddenly, they can obtain an audience that rivals major networks.

          What this means is that now a politician can freely disparage news media that opposes him, and call them the enemy of the people. Before the internet, they could not do this because they needed the media. Now, they could simply discredit them, calling them fake news, and know that the public will have to turn to alternative news media that the politician Can control.

          Look how quickly Trump supporters turned away from Fox news at the drop of a hat. That could not be done unless there was Trump media ready and willing to accept those viewers.

          1. Julianm

            Holy crap, you replied to everyone in this thread. How pathetic are you? Was this thread your (self-)righteous, noble cause of the week or something? You people are all the same, but at least the particular windmill crusader this article is about is smart about his crusade, you’re just some anonymous internet tough guy whining at other, similarly anonymous people.

            … For that matter, I’m not entirely sure that half these comments weren’t made by yourself, just to have a weak/straw man to yell at. False flags too are common among you guys.

            1. JamminJ

              Nope. It’s easy to respond when you know how to use an RSS feed.

              As for the others, Krebs is investigating an Internet cult, Qanon. And they come running, professional trolls who post under different names.

            2. John Ramos

              Another troll enters the feed…
              JamminJ has posted on numerous articles on here (you can check yourself.)
              Your bad faith, intellectually dishonest tripe is amusing, to say the least.
              As this article was about IP address space leased incorrectly, and clawed back… your ignorance to this topic shows.
              Have anything to add about the article?

    2. Another Gnostic

      I’m with you on self-appointed Censors, but I really don’t think you should talk like that about Anarchists and Conspiracy Realists (jk does absurdity count as trolling, I’m not a troll).

      Seriously though, I see “Censors” as a label for people who demonstrate a very specific behavior “censoring”, whereas Anarchists and Conspiracy Theorists represent 2 sets of beliefs. Why do you care what others believe? Or do you see the 3 as one set based on something else I have a blindspot toward?

  6. John Doe

    Couldnt they just put one server in Belize and now they have a prescence in Latin America? This is ridiculous the left really loves censoring people they don’t like. If its illegal extremist content – the courts will handle it asap its very high profle.

    1. JamminJ

      They were granted a huge block of IP addresses. A single server would not justify that to LACNIC.

      It is not about being “illegal extremists”…. they fraudulently represented themselves to LACNIC in order to obtain IP space.

      They are NOT being censored… they will just have to use more of their legit IP addresses, that might properly show their location in Russia.

  7. Wils

    You really missed the opportunity to type “Former President Donald Trump”

    1. JamminJ

      Silence isn’t even happening.

      No one is louder than someone claiming to be the victim of censorship.

      We don’t want to silence you… we just don’t want to hear it in places we just want to keep up with family. Go shout into a void designed for such crap.

      1. Right is Right

        “ We don’t want to silence you… we just don’t want to hear it in places we just want to keep up with family. Go shout into a void designed for such crap.”

        There is now NO “ void designed for such crap.”

        Why do you get to keep up with “family”.

        Who determines the definition of “family”.

        If this was happening to your “family”, you would be
        crying about being censored.

        1. JamminJ

          There are many sites designed for such crap. Krebs has even written about many of them. Yes, some often also deal in overtly criminal activity. They figure, once they are on the outskirts of society, might as well cater to those on the outskirts of the law too.

          You are triggered by the definition of “family” now?
          You Qanon nutjobs have really lost your grip on reality.
          Family, as in relatives by blood or marriage.

          Nobody is deciding who I friend on facebook, or follow on Twitter

          Of course, we all have someone in our family that has fallen for Qanon or some other conspiratorial nonsense. I am glad when they get censored on social media. Saves me the trouble of blocking them.

        2. whitneyw

          “Keeping up with family” is defined by the money I spend on goods and services advertised on the platforms I use. It seems they want my business more than they want yours. Spend more. Maybe then they’ll kick me off.

  8. Kent Brockman

    Could this be a record post day? Good to see so many of the QAnon , 8chan,Parler,etc. zombies have found a new site to congregate on here at krebs.com! It would seem “free speech” isn’t dead afterall….LOL

    1. Phil

      I’m just wondering if the comment section could somehow be used as a ‘honey pot’. It does seem to be a reliable magnet for questionable points of view, reliable enough to be put to work?

  9. A friend

    I love how Krebs complains that he won’t be allowed to use anonymous shell corps anymore which are solely used for tax evasion and money laundering, but it is ok to use a VPN that fakes your country location. Yet doing that with an IP address is wrong?

    Do as I say, not as I do’ism. The definition of Liberal is respecting someone else’s point of view.

    Janet Yellen just announced today that she plans to outlaw cryptocurrency. Be careful what you wish for. I think many of you are wishing for a world that you will quickly come to hate. The authoritarianism won’t only be directed at those you disagree with. They are now the low hanging fruit. Soon it will be you too losing your rights. Whenever you wish harm against someone it usually has a boomerang effect. You know – do unto others.

    1. Copsewood

      No need to outlaw cryptocurrency. Just go after and close down the $/BTC exchanges as the money laundering accessories they are, using existing or extended that way regulations against money laundering, given lack of other genuine use cases.

      1. JamminJ

        Yeah. This is the common “exaggeration”.

        Yellen says to be cautious and that she may look to increase reporting requirements for crypto currency exchanges… And their reaction is that it’s being “outlawed”.

  10. Vesl

    It is a funny case, I am from Russia. In my country are blocked many and many websites (like LinkedIn). The DDoS-Guard position is “we just provide secure”, but in Russian mass media they say “Brian Krebs says this only because we need to find a Russian trail of hackers, and in general he called for sanctions” expecting no one to read the original

    It is very sad…

    1. John Ramos

      The geopolitics of Russia (and any internal conflicts) are very expansive and difficult for the average American to understand. Deep diving into the history of your country and everything it’s transitioned through…I’m still aghast at how strong your people are at living (and surviving.)
      All I can say is read news sources from all over the world to get a better idea of what’s going on.
      Nationalism and propaganda affects every nation, and I truly hope you come together for a positive change internationally.
      Peacefully from the U.S.

  11. Sean

    Stunning to see how many people don’t understand:
    A) The private sector is not the government and this has no requirement to follow the 1st Amendment
    B) That the entity in question is not The United States nor is it in the United States
    C) That a simple case of breaking a company’s rules is a pretty simple thing to avoid. You know, you can’t walk into Target without shoes or a shirt…

  12. Brian S

    Reading through the comments, I have noticed a lot of misconceptions and misinformation.

    This article had nothing to do with free speech. The comments section should not have devolved into a cesspool of us vs them. The article was about how Ron Guilmette has worked to make the Internet better.

    I’ve had the privilege of knowing Ron through various spam fighting endeavors and am thankful for the time and energy he puts into these sorts of endeavors.

    Because the comments have devolved in the manner it has, I’d like to share this:

    “White supremacist extremists will remain the deadliest domestic terror threat to the United States, according to the Department of Homeland Security’s first annual homeland threat assessment, which details a range of threats from election interference to unprecedented storms.

    Since 2018, White supremacists have conducted more lethal attacks in the US than any other domestic extremist movement, demonstrating a “longstanding intent” to target racial and religious minorities, members of the LGBTQ+ community, politicians and those they believe promote multi-culturalism and globalization, according to the report.
    “As Secretary, I am concerned about any form of violent extremism,” wrote acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf. “However, I am particularly concerned about white supremacist violent extremists who have been exceptionally lethal in their abhorrent, targeted attacks in recent years.”


  13. America

    This looks like fascism to me.
    The sad thing is that you fascists think you’re the good guys.

    1. JamminJ

      Fascism is easy to recognize. It started by calling the news media the “enemy of the people”… in order to get people distrustful of real fact-based news sources… and have the masses instead get their info from controllable propaganda sources.

      Fascism is the “Big Lie”, that there is a deep state cabal or that communists are around every corner, and that they burned the Reichstag.

      This, however, letting private companies run their businesses according to their own policies… is called capitalism. Behold, the free market. The government cannot tell a private citizen or private company that they MUST host everyone with an opinion.

      1. DefiniteRev

        “distrustful of real fact-based news sources”

        -like those who repeat, as if by mantra, “mostly peaceful protests” while people burn and loot buildings all across the country for months, even take lives or idk maybe corner off a little section of a major city that doesn’t belong to them and call it their own country and protect it with armed guards, and enforce their de facto immigration policies and press restrictions at gun point.

        You’re totally right though, the problem is people being distrustful of “fact-based” news sources.

        It’s kind of funny how the same terminology always seems to echo across multiple channels. Does that make it an echo chamber? Or do you only consider it an echo chamber if a listener is also allowed to speak? I guess in either case, the left seems to be the only ones in an echo chamber, since they’re the only ones allowed to speak.

        Even freedom loving, war opposing, non-aggression principle advocating Ron Paul was blocked in the purge. Do you think he was advocating violence too? What’s that old saying? First they came for the communists… Or is it the communists came for the first.. amendment… Something like that, you get my point.

        1. JamminJ

          No, I am not talking about Low, Mixed or even Mostly Factual news sources. CNN, MSNBC, ACLU are similar (if not opposite on the left/right spectrum) to Fox News, NY Post, Drudge and others on the right.

          Check out the International Fact Checking Network, Poynter Institute Mediabiasfactcheck service.

          They rate left/center/right bias, but most importantly, they rate on factual reporting.

          Reuters and AP, are least biased and Very High factual reporting.
          MarketWatch, Chicago Tribune, Reason and Cato are all Right-Center but with High factual reporting.
          NY Times, PBS, LA Times and EFF are all Left-Center but with High factual reporting.

          Ron Paul wasn’t banned by the way, one of the admins on that profile was accidentally locked out from changes for a few hours. It doesn’t help your case when you exaggerate everything into a world ending grievance. How does it feel to play the victim and be offended (triggered) by everything.
          You get your news from non-factual sources… so you automatically believe the exaggerations and lies.

          There are real fact-based news sources out there. But they lumped all news media together, used the legitimate failings of some, to discredit the entire field of journalism. They did this so the public would have no where to turn for the facts, and that makes them sheep (go one, go all) and prone to follow the loudest voice they hear.

  14. JamminJ


    A federal judge has ruled against Parler.
    Parler sued to have Amazon reinstate Parler’s hosting services.
    A judge sided with Amazon, stating that Amazon has a right to refuse service based on violations of their terms of service.

    Judge: Amazon does not have to host ‘abusive, violent content’

    “The Court rejects any suggestion that the public interest favors requiring AWS to host the incendiary speech that the record shows some of Parler’s users have engaged in. At this stage, on the showing made thus far, neither the public interest nor the balance of equities favors granting an injunction in this case”

    1. james

      that same ruling could just as well have been applied to Twitter. The two sites had essentially the same content and trash, just from different political spectrums.

      1. JamminJ

        No. That false equivalency won’t fly.

        Twitter does remove content when flagged. They make an honest (albeit futile) effort to enforce their policies.
        Parler wasn’t even trying.

        Also, Parler is founded on the principle that ‘anything goes’. Twitter was not. So it is no wonder that Parler has no intention of adhering to basic moderation as required by terms of service.

        1. SteveN

          Twitter only applies their policies to who they choose. If you don’t like what is posted online then stopping looking. Find me someone who believes everything they read and see online. We should have the choice to filter what we see and read online, not Big Tech and the government. I don’t need them to hold my hand. I don’t care if someone has anything bad to post. The internet is full of garbage, but I don’t go looking for it. If I don’t care to see or read it then I block or filter the content. My choice. My freedom.

          1. JamminJ

            The government isn’t choosing anything here. “Big Tech” isn’t some nebulous entity interfering with your social media.
            You are on THEIR property. You are free to filter what you see and read online… that choice is made at your browser. If you go to puppies dot com, you cannot complain that you are not seeing many cats. You aren’t being censored, it is just the website is owned and operated by someone that specialized in limited scope.
            If you want to see dead bodies, a family friendly social media platform isn’t the right place for you.

            I know it is confusing, because Facebook, Youtube and Twitter don’t really advertise that they have limits on their content… but that is because you ignore the Terms of Service. These services seem like they offer everything… but they still have rules. Just like you should not expect cats on a puppy website, you should not expect violent hate speech on a platform that tries to be a place where that kind of content is NOT even stumbled upon.

            Your choice and freedom end at the browser. You can choose not to use Big Tech… and browse to your niche dark corners of the Internet.

      2. JamminJ

        Also, two important distinctions that destroy your false equivalency.

        1) The volume of content is orders of magnitude higher on Twitter than it is on Parler. A few thousand posts on Twitter, is a drop in the Ocean, while on Parler it is a rampant infestation. If Amazon AWS were to threaten to terminate all of Twitter over such a minor percentage, they would not be justified in calling it a breach of contract.

        2) The real violation was that Parler refused to, or was unable to perform basic moderation when given specific posts to remove. If Amazon were to highlight specific posts, and give Twitter months to address them… Twitter would easily remove them. Parler would not, and did not.

      3. JamminJ

        Lastly, Twitter is less dependent on other Internet companies than Parler. So if Amazon were to decide to end their relationship (not even for breach of contract, but just decide not to renew)… Twitter will be okay. They do a lot in house, compared to a startup like Parler which CHOSE to grow fast by relying on 3rd parties for practically everything.

        1. FactsAndScience

          Hi JamminJ

          Please keep up the posts! Agree with your fact-based comments and also with putting up a fight against the trolls and other simple-minded idiots who comment. The conspiracy mob will eventually go back down into the sh*thole where they came from and keep talking themselves into knots and other forms of lunacy. As for the russian trolls – there is no hope for them as they are just lemmings.

  15. SteveN

    What does this article have to do with security? It seems like another attack. No longer will one side be silenced.

    1. JamminJ

      How about you read the article. It is obvious you didn’t read it.
      DDOS protection services, regional Internet registries and those who abuse it, are exactly on topic for this site.

      You aren’t being silence.
      Geez the sound of so many people screaming that they are being silenced, is deafening.

    2. John Ramos

      Reading comprehension fail… I really hope you’re not paying back loans on the lack of education. What a poor state of affairs in this world, when that was probably the best formatted sentence you could come up with. Try harder! Read a few more of the intelligent articles that Mr. Krebs provides (for free) to increase your knowledge.

  16. SteveN

    Big Tech and our government are only applying their rules & policies to who they choose. This is not good! That is what China does.

    1. Jonas

      I have more trust in China than in Google/Apple/Facebook/Amazon.

      1. foodandart

        So do I, Jonas, because China can’t affect me here in the US!

        But honestly, neither can google, amazon and facebook.

        It’s only a problem if you cannot live without these social media sites that HAVE been created to be addictive.

        If you are old enough to have come of age before these businesses were created, you can easily walk away.

        I mean, I got banned by twitter after 11 years and 25 Tweets.

        I got salty at an insurrectionist two weeks before the Capitol riot and got smacked down. In order for me to even get back on the site to remoove the offending tweet, they want my phone number and I’m not going to give it. I didn’t when I signed up in 2009 and the fact that in 11 years only used it 25 times.. well, it will stay banned.

        The Twitter and facebook apps were the FIRST things deleted when I got my new cellphone and I won’t even go to those sites while I’m using it.

        All you have to do is be strong enough to realize they are NOT necessary to having the right to speak. They are nothing more than privately held FREE tools for the public to use which are built to glean marketable data for advertisers.

        It’s not like the users of sites like Twitter or facebook or google PAY a monthly supscription price – like one does for a phone line.

        Anything free is worth what you pay for it.

        1. JamminJ

          “All you have to do is be strong enough to realize they are NOT necessary to having the right to speak. They are nothing more than privately held FREE tools for the public to use which are built to glean marketable data for advertisers.”


        2. Jonas

          Google/Facebook/Apple/Amazon and basically all tech companies have built a surveillance state and monopolized the economy. Most websites depend on Google or Facebook for ads, so they can throw their weight around and get virtually any news site to repeat whatever they want said — Or else.

          Meanwhile, they can buy up competitors, bully them out of the market (per this article), and use lawfare to shut down opponents.

          Only shills would be so oblivious to the problems this poses.

          1. JamminJ

            You’ll get a lot of agreement here.

            But still, nothing to do with their rights not to be forced to grant a platform to people who violate their policies with hate speech or incitement of violence.

  17. The Sunshine State

    Social media websites like Facebook, Twitter and Instagram should be also shut down permanently as they are causing way to many issue within our society.

  18. Ryan T

    Parler is a free speech social media platform that does not allow threats of violence or illegal activity. They’ve even worked with the FBI to help apprehend and prosecute violent extremists. As conservatives and Trump supporters were purged en masse on a seemingly coordinated effort, these people moved to an alternative – Parler. Fox News’ Sean Hannity then made a statement that President Trump has joined Parler after being silenced by Twitter. This was incorrect but literally 15 minutes later Apple dropped the Parler app and 45 minutes later Google followed suit.
    Next, Amazon pulled web services but not before the company securing it dropped services without any warning. Parler conveniently stayed up unsecured until a Reddit campaign lead by “security researchers” had scraped all the site’s data to hold the users “accountable”

    26 different services dropped them or refused to provide service after being contacted by other parties. Essentially blacklisted from the internet by a group of monopolistic tech companies, they had to resort to looking outside the US for DDOS security – something they cannot survive without due to persistent attacks. When you exclude the US you aren’t left with many DDOS protection options. Once they found an outside service provider, the cries of “Russia, Russia, Russia” began. The same cries we’ve heard for the past 5 years in an effort to attack and slander a certain particular political party. All without evidence and all now proven to be complete fabrications.

    Russia is a diversion. This is McCarthism scare tactics to seed distrust and division. Russia hasn’t been a legitimate danger to the US or it’s interests since before the fall of the Soviet Union. China, on the other hand, is the only other legitimate super power at this point. They’ve taken the lead in a number of cutting edge technologies and sciences – stealth, 5G, CRISPR/genetic research, AI, quantum breakthroughs, super computing,… And that’s just the short list. They’re also communist that enslave people and harvest organs from ethnic minorities. The Chinese people are great but the CCP is dangerous and is quickly becoming a major threat on the world stage.

    Everyone needs to stop with the Russia stuff because its entirety political and it’s been beaten to death for the past 5 years. Just days after Solarwinds broke every major news site was attributing the hack to Russia in the very 1st paragraph. But every single one was based on a single quote from Mike pompeo and he’s not any kind of expert. It might turn out to be Russia but the fact is we won’t know for some time or possibly even never. It was clearly sophisticated enough to be a result of a state sponsored actor and these groups aren’t stupid. They’re not going to accidentally leave a bunch of Russian string literals in the clear. They specifically catalog the tools and tactics of outside groups to draw suspicion to other targets. The fact that the entire internet in unison declared Russian responsibility for such an unprecedented attack based on a single comment from a non-expert is reason for suspicion. I don’t care about the politics involved, I just want people to be accurately informed, have the freedom to converse and voice dissent, and have access to information without shadow bans and fears of deplatforming.

    1. John Ramos

      That was a long winded post of non-sense.
      Care to talk to my team of Net. Engineers that are constantly dealing with intrustion attemps/ddos/attacks/pen-tests from RU leased IP’s.
      At one point they had to actually contact a Berlin-based internet provider (owned by Sergey K. — Moscow based company) why they allow the vast amount of junk traffic from them. (there’s more, but I had to gather and report to the DHS/FBI – can’t give more details)

    2. JamminJ

      Why are you making so many claims based on what you hear from Fox News pundits?
      Parler was given specific content flagged by Amazon, Google and Apple. Parler was given time to respond, review and remove this content that was in violation of their policy.
      Yeah, Parler has taken down some things in the past. But they were unable or unwilling to take down what was previously flagged. They were given many chances and proved ineffective at even basic moderation.
      Apple and Google had dropped the Parler app after months of trying to get Parler admins to respond. Amazon also send letters way in advance to comply. This notion of instant retaliation is a fiction. Stop listening to pundits and get real news from legit journalists.

      Yes, other hosting services did not want to touch a toxic asset. That is perfectly normal in business. You are only as credible as your reputation. If you breach a contract, that stuff follows you around, so no wonder other firms don’t want to take on unnecessary risk.

      Russia is a significant enemy in cyberspace and espionage. The Mueller investigation resulted in the indictments of 34 individuals and 3 Russian businesses on charges ranging from computer hacking to conspiracy and financial crimes. Those indictments have led to 7 guilty pleas and 5 people sentenced to prison.
      It concluded that Trump could not be touched since he’s president. Far cry from “proven to be complete fabrication”.
      It isn’t based on a public quote. The bulk of the intelligence community, private sector experts, are in agreement that the TTPs and methodology point to Russia. They were looking at Russian fingerprints a while before Pompeo said anything about it.

      Methods of attribution are mostly about TTPs (Tactics, Techniques and Procedures). Not “string literals”. There is a lot of sharing of code once it’s out in the public space, which is why leaks like Vault7 are so bad for intelligence gathering since it becomes hard to attribute an attack.
      But for the most part, a lot of these APT groups are still very much siloed and like to do things a specific way that, when combined, can profile them in a fairly accurate way. THIS is how nation state attribution is possible, even down to the APT group.
      Unmasking UNC2452 (DarkHalo)

      Then their is the higher level targeting and objectives…
      Rule of Thumb, if its attacking finance, business or intellectual property… China is indeed the first suspect. If it is military, infrastructure or energy… we looking at you, Russia.


      In contrast, there is McCarthyism still going on. When people blame the CCP for everything without evidence.
      China is certainly an enemy, but it’s not because they are Communists. Rather, because they are half-capitalists with no regard for the concept of Intellectual Property.

      Russia and China are BOTH waging war. China’s is a trade war for the most part. Russia’s is something entirely different. They both want us weak, but in different ways.

      The media frenzy around 2 million CPC members throughout the world is just another Red Scare.
      CPC members, are just members of the communist party, not necessarily spies as the pro-American business news would have you believe. And CPC is not the same as MSS (Ministry of State Security), which was a legit advisory by CISA.
      It is absolutely not surprising that a communist country, with a billion people, which exports a lot of talent, would have people everywhere who have not renounced party affiliation. Doesn’t mean they are spies. It’s McCarthism all over again.

      Look closely about which part of the media is reporting this. Business News.
      It is similar to what happened in 2018, which was another US propaganda campaign in Trump’s trade war.

      China got blamed for the last big supply chain hack way back in 2018.
      “The Big Hack: How China Used a Tiny Chip to Infiltrate U.S. Companies”

      Of course it was reported by business news as fact, and not by cybersecurity or tech blogs as such.
      It was a huge accusation, that all the victims (Super Micro, Apple and many others) denied. What happened? Nothing. Just the trade war with China, that made Bloomberg sound the alarm for a hypothetical attack that never happened. It was a political stunt that garnered continued support for a Trade War.
      Secret chips were never found.

  19. Laughing Man

    Is there anything funnier than lolbertarians suffering at the hands of private corporations and wanting them to be regulated? The free market isn’t so fun when it’s aiming it’s unregulated power your way I guess.

    1. JoHan

      Yeah big free market fans want Twitter to be regulated like a
      public utility so they can freely discuss plans for
      coups and banning Muslims from traveling here. Big freedom lovers.

  20. Evil Left

    Dedicating your entire life to stopping any speech you disagree with is definitely not fascist or bigoted.

    We’ve definitely never seen all this in 1938.

    1. John Ramos

      Another troll enters the chat…
      Come on, use your words, what do you really want to say?
      Does it start with 14 words, or contain 88??
      You’re thin veneer of Fascism was slowed down… aww sad.
      Try again next year!
      The honeypots are all over the internet now, from MeWe (guess who’s tracking that) to Parler (oh wait!), Facebook/Twitter/etc. (all watched), and you know Telegram is too.
      We’re watching!

    2. JamminJ

      Projecting much.
      Arnold Schwarzenegger already compared Trump supporters to the dejected former Nazi sympathizers who went into depression, abuse and alcoholism after WWII.
      And I’ve been comparing Trump’s failed 2021 coup to Hitler’s failed 1923 coup in Munich

      Fascists are on the right, 100 years ago, and today.

      1. John Ramos

        I like your jibe, using facts and verifiable information to slow down the spread of misinformation. Great work!
        Now Twitter…that’s a beast (of bots it seems) that can’t be contained.

  21. JohnIL

    Freedom of speech has certainly taken a hit lately. But even more disturbing is that this censorship is selective and not a blanket censorship. Of course it’s acceptable as long as it does not affect you or your message. But it seems that we have allowed certain entities to make decisions on what is accepted speech and what is not acceptable. These social sites seem to not realize that having a platform for social interaction means that sometimes you have to allow the good with the bad. Entities like Twitter, Facebook are there to provide the podium and not to decide who is to speak.

    1. JamminJ

      You sound like you’re new to the internet.

      You think these social media companies exist provide equal podium for people to speak, good or bad?

      That is both naive and idiotic.

      These social media companies are corporations for-profit.
      They provide a free service to users, in exchange for the audience with advertisers which pay their bills.
      If you do not pay for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT.

      This is not new. They have always had specific limitations and what they will not allow in their terms of service. Just because you have not bothered to read anything, and just accepted it, does not make it go away.

      This naive ideal that’s a platform can be perfectly neutral and allow all content without moderation, is impractical. If you don’t have some rules and limitations, it will be abused and overrun by the loudest voices. What might have been intended as all inclusive, would dissolve into chaos and won’t be inclusive anymore.

      The proper balance is to moderate certain content that is socially regarded as offensive. it is asking too much to think that all content should exist on a single site or platform. If you want a particular brand of hate speech, you’ll have to go to another website.

      1. security vet

        …a lot of people equate free (fakebook, twitcher, etc.) with free speech…

        …they even call them “platforms” to aid the confusion with a soapbox and police…

        …clearly they are not the same thing…

  22. IPv4

    This type of fight based on supremacy over the scarce internet resource IPv4 will vanish proportionally to the use of IPv6.

    1. Ron G

      Actually, no, it won’t.

      IPv4 is the lowest common denominator. It’s going to be with us for a long long time.

  23. Tech

    So Parler cannot exist because right people go there? And Twitter can exist because left people go there? Am I hearing this right?

    It is insane how you treat people in USA. We all thought US democracy is the template for the world but after what we have seen after Jan 6, we need to think twice.

    Is there a place in this world where all people are respected no matter of their color, orientation, age, believes and political views?

    We need freedom!!!

    1. JamminJ

      No, you did not hear this right.

      You should probably read the articles, and not just the comments from dozens of qanon people who show up here to spread lies and claim to be victims.

    1. JamminK

      Yeah, some fools fought, bled, died, and sacrificed in a war so that you and me could be birthed into existence. I bet those folks would regret the hell out of that. I have seen you call people stupid, ignorant and incompetent. A person who constantly pokes at others intelligence, competence or intellect is a weak minded individual. You should probably work on that and maybe become a better human being. I have also seen you spout your biased opinions as if they were the 100% verified fact. I find that absolutely ridiculous. You’re probably going to deny that or elude it to me being a cult right wing conspiracy theorist. I can assure you that I am not. I have just thoroughly read through your comments. Private companies should enforce their TOS. However, people use those private companies resources to express themselves in different ways. Taking that away is viewed by some as taking their voice away. Amazon, Apple and Google knew well that Parler wasn’t moderated and that it probably violated its TOS. Those companies probably should have never done business with them in the first place. But they did and that is going to cost them eventually.

      1. JamminJ

        As a veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan myself, it’s insulting when other veterans (as portrayed in the video clip) use their status to play the victim all the time. No, your first amendment rights are NOT being violated.

        You make general statements about my comments… But other than being offended by my insults, you have not actually refuted Anything I have written.

        There are many people who deserve to be insulted, ridiculed and shamed for their complicit part in the insurrection and the spreading of lies.
        If you’re one of them, then yes, you’re in a cult. And cult members never see that fact, until after they have left.

        Arnold schwarzenegger and I both made apt comparisons to the millions of Germans caught in the alluring spell of nationalism and fascism, who eventually had to recognize defeat and their own sins of complicit acceptance… After decades. And only after Hitler was gone for good.

  24. Bill Ashbaugh

    “free speech” tells me all I need to know about how you think.

    I want to get technical for this comment. There is no shortage of IPv4 addresses.
    Many companies have large blocks of IPv4 addresses that they don’t need. All of the internal computer systems can use non-routable private IPs and Network Address Translate them to Internet routable addresses.

    From Wikipedia…

    Private networks
    Of the approximately four billion addresses defined in IPv4, about 18 million addresses in three ranges are reserved for use in private networks. Packets addresses in these ranges are not routable in the public Internet; they are ignored by all public routers. Therefore, private hosts cannot directly communicate with public networks, but require network address translation at a routing gateway for this purpose.

    1. JamminJ

      Ummm… Who cares?

      The scarcity or abundance of IP address space has NOTHING to do with the Internet Registrar’s rights and policies to require that addresses accurately reflect physical locations on the continent of jurisdiction.

Comments are closed.