View Larger (Source: Getty Images)
The longstanding debate surrounding Cloudflare, a content delivery network known for its protective services against denial-of-service attacks, has resurfaced. This conversation focuses on whether Cloudflare serves as a protector of free expression or if it inadvertently facilitates spam, harassment, malware distribution, and even the DDoS threats it ostensibly aims to combat.
This issue is not new; Cloudflare has historically adopted a laissez-faire approach to regulating the massive volume of traffic passing through its system. With Cloudflare accounting for approximately 16% of total worldwide Internet traffic, managing around 57 million web requests each second, and supporting between 7.6 million and 15.7 million websites per day, its choice to accommodate nearly any user—regardless of their online conduct—has drawn fierce criticism from various quarters. Advocates championing free speech and internet neutrality praise this policy while many law enforcement groups confronting online abuse label it as counterproductive.
A Line Through Neutrality or Support for Misconduct?
Spamhaus—a nonprofit organization focused on identifying and blocking networks that spread spam, phishing attacks, malware, and botnets—has recently raised concerns about Cloudflare’s practices. According to their latest report released on Tuesday, they revealed that approximately 10% of the domains listed in Spamhaus’s blocklist utilize Cloudflare’s services. Moreover, these sites are associated with over 1,200 outstanding complaints regarding abusive activities.
Continue reading| Leave Your Thoughts Below
