Hacker News Reader

Comment by bigiain | Hacker News Reader

Am I the only one cynically thinking that "Russia, Iran, DPRK, PRC, etc" is the "But think of the chiiildren!!!" excuse for doing this?

And when Google say

"IPIDEA’s proxy infrastructure is a little-known component of the digital ecosystem leveraged by a wide array of bad actors."

What they really mean is " ... leveraged by actors indiscriminately scraping the web and ignoring copyright - that are not us."

I can't help but feel this is just Google trying to pull the ladder up behind then and make it more difficult for other companies to collect training data.

View on HN

>I can't help but feel this is just Google trying to pull the ladder up behind then and make it more difficult for other companies to collect training data.

I can very easily see this as being Google's reasoning for these actions, but let's not pretend that clandestine residential proxies aren't used for nefarious things. The vast majority of social media networks will ban - or more generally and insiously - shadow ban accounts/IPs that use known proxy IPs. This means that they are gating access to their platforms behind residential IPs (on top of their other various blackboxes and heuristics like fingerprinting). Operators of bot networks thus rely on residential proxy services to engage in their work, which ranges from mundane things like engagement farming to outright dangerous things like political astroturfing, sentiment manipulation, and propaganda dissemination.

LLMs and generative image and video models have made the creation of biased and convincing content trivial and cheap, if not free. The days of "troll farms" is over, and now the greatest expense for a bad actor wishing to influence the world with fake engagement and biased opinions is their access to platforms, which means accounts and internet connections that aren't blacklisted or shadow banned. Account maturity and reputation farming is also feeling a massive boon due to these tools, but as an independent market it also similarly requires internet connections that aren't blacklisted or shadow banned. Residential proxies are the bottleneck for the vast majority of bad actors.

> The vast majority of social media networks will ban - or more generally and insiously - shadow ban accounts/IPs that use known proxy IPs. This means that they are gating access to their platforms behind residential IPs (on top of their other various blackboxes and heuristics like fingerprinting)

Social media will ban proxy IPs, yet gleefully force you to provide your ID if you happen to connect from the wrong patch of land. I find it difficult not to support any and all attempts to bypass such measures.

The fact is that there's now a perfectly legitimate use for residential proxies, and the demand is just going to keep growing as more websites decide to "protect their content", and more governments decide to pass tyrannical laws that force people to mask their IPs. And with demand, comes supply, so don't expect them to go away any time soon.

This really just sounds like a rehash of the argument against encryption. "Bad people use it, so it should go away" - never mind that there are completely legitimate uses for it. Never mind that using a residential proxy might be the only way to get any privacy at all in a future where everyone blocks VPNs and Tor, a future where you may not even be able to post online without an ID depending you where you live, a future which we're swiftly approaching.

It's already here, in fact. Imgur blocks UK users, but it also blocks VPNs and Tor. The only way somebody living in the UK can access Imgur is through a residential proxy.

> The only way somebody living in the UK can access Imgur is through a residential proxy.

And very little of value was lost.

> This really just sounds like a rehash of the argument against encryption. "Bad people use it, so it should go away" - never mind that there are completely legitimate uses for it.

Except that almost everything that uses encryption has some legitimate use. There are pretty much no legitimate uses for residential proxies, and their use in flooding the Internet with crap greatly outweighs that.

If I plumbed a 30cm sewage line straight into your living room would you be happy with it? Okay, well, tell you what, let's make it totally legit - I'll drop a tasty ripe strawberry into the stream of effluent every so often, how about that?

It's another type of proxy. Legitimate uses are the same as for other types of proxies.

No, what they're saying is what they said, what you're implying reveals a strange bias. Web scraping through residential proxies? Please think through your thoughts more. There's much more effective and efficient ways to do so. Multiple bad actors, like ransomware affiliates, have been caught using residential proxy networks. But by all means, don't let facts and cyber threat intelligence get in the way.

What are the much more effective and efficient ways — since you said it ?

>let facts and cyber threat intelligence get in the way

Appeal to authority by way of invoking the megacorp-branded "threat intelligence" capability (targeted PR exercise).

Residential proxies aren't used for scraping? That doesn't align well with my experience...

> Am I the only one cynically thinking that "Russia, Iran, DPRK, PRC, etc" is the "But think of the chiiildren!!!" excuse for doing this?

Maybe. But until I dropped all traffic from pretty much every mobile network provider in Russia and Israel, I'd get up every morning to a couple of thousand new users of whom a couple of hundred had consistently within a few hundred milliseconds created an account, clicked on the activation link, and then posted a bunch of messages in every forum category spreading hate speech.

If they said "could" then I would agree but they said it did happen. those actors DID do it, not could. So it's not a think of the children excuse. Unless they are outright lying but I doubt the security team came up with a business type excuse

Reply on news.ycombinator.com