> Also, Cloudflare implicitly screws over everyone by leaking data to the NSA
I have always operated under the assumption that every cloud provider and telco does this, so this claim has always seemed very silly to me.
I have always operated under the assumption that every cloud provider and telco does this, so this claim has always seemed very silly to me.
That said, these are US companies subject to FISA court orders and NSLs or National Security Letters. If they want your data, they can just pull it from memory in real time or pull it directly from the hypervisor and dump it wherever they're instructed to. Any idea that your data is protected because you're not even using a provider WAF or doing TLS termination for load balancing is a fantasy.
And who even said we're talking about American ISPs and American clouds? I'm sure the NSA can get data from OVH, but not as easily.
I control which DNS server I use. It is not relevant to the matter at hand.
> If they want your data, they can just pull it from memory in real time or pull it directly from the hypervisor and dump it wherever they're instructed to.
You're confusing bulk data collection with highly selective court-ordered data collection. The two are not alike. Attempting to equate them is a dumb attempt at deception on your part. There is no obligation for a firm to share bulk web data with the NSA.
Which is easily sniffable, re-routable, and spoofable unless using DoH/DoT. Those lookups are plaintext. Keep in mind I'm talking about your cloud endpoint.
> It is not relevant to the matter at hand.
Metadata is relevant enough for the US government to drone strike, and relevant enough to issue a collection warrant if one were... desired.
> You're confusing bulk data collection with selective court-ordered data collection.
This is both bafflingly naive and dangerously arrogant.
Just one example, look up FISA Section 702. It does not require a traditional warrant to intercept data. To further this avenue for you, look up the 2024 congressional expansion of Section 702 (via RISAA). This was explicitly done to allow a much broader scope of classification and forced compliance with US intelligence, with extremely limited oversight, and a far reach (they were getting audit fatigue from submitting 702 requests, so why not just do the search and collection and have the courts deal with it later if it's a Real Problem(tm)). This collection doesn't just apply to the datacenter providers, landlords, etc now, it also applies to hardware vendors.
What am I preaching, exactly? I think you misunderstand.
All I'm saying is that if you want security, you will not have it if using another person's hardware. It's that simple.