Who Has Your Back 2014: Protecting Your Data From Copyright/Trademark Bullies | Hacker News Reader

Who Has Your Back 2014: Protecting Your Data From Copyright/Trademark Bullies

eff.org

162 pointsjoeyyang33 comments

If I view the results as a trademark & copyright troll, I'd guess Tumblr is the one who's got my back. Conversely, perhaps Tumblr's most valued customers are trademark & copyright trolls, aka large media companies.

[1] - http://www.adweek.com/news/television/viacom-tumblr-team-off... [2] - http://www.thehubcomms.com/with-newly-appointed-director-of-...

Ah yes, the trolls are the companies who actually create content, while the companies that trade in other peoples' content for profit are heroic do-gooders.

Is anyone else not seeing a bunch of the companies' logos? It looks like I get an HTTP header redirect to a 1x1 PNG:

http://i.imgur.com/NFjIedl.png

http://i.imgur.com/yRwP4q1.png

It can't be a transparent proxy interfering because it's an HTTPS connection...

Chances are you have an extension/plugin to block social media scripts or the like. They're missing on my Chrome browser (Privacy Badger, Ghostery, Disconnect, HTTPS Everywhere, etc) but the vanilla Safari (no plugins) shows them fine.

This is correct. I uploaded the images and used names like facebook.png, which sometimes produces false positives on those extensions. I can confirm they're being served from eff.org and are not doing any tracking.

Excellent.

This is ironic: The EFF's report about privacy protections offered by companies is published on a page with tracking beacons from websites with well-deserved terrible privacy reputations.

I'm using Ghostery and I'm not seeing any off-site tracking beacons on the eff.org page (they have a locally hosted PiWik analytics install but that's it).

If you look upthread, you can see these are probably false positives due to the image names of the corporate logos (see the note from 'thisisparker).

The EFF site tries to be very careful about embeds and not serve scripts or images from third-party sites. For example, YouTube embeds there use youtube-nocookie.com with a click-to-load wrapper so that users have to affirmatively choose to interact with the YouTube servers. That's described at

https://www.eff.org/pages/mytube-limit-privacy-risks-embedde...

Surprised GitHub isn't on the list.

Shouldn't we also care about who the copyright trolls are? I'm all for accountability from the provider side, but why not dig deeper into those that are issuing notices in bad faith, or that are being countered most often?

Anyone able to recommend namecheap?

Been looking to ditch enom.

I've been with them since SOPA. Never had issues but I'm not power user.

I'm using Namecheap and GoDaddy. Both works functional wise. So given the reputation Namecheap has and GoDaddy has not, I will go with Namecheap for the future.

Why not just transfer all the GoDaddy domains to Namecheap? I did that after numerous terrible GoDaddy experiences and couldn't be happier.

Godaddy supports a lot of international TLDs that Namecheap does not.

I recommend Gandi (https://gandi.net) for TLDs namecheap does not support. Both companies are extremely good, no-bullshit, against censorship, took a stand against SOPA, etc.

Namecheap support has been sketchy recently. I tried to add an IPv6 glue record through a ticket recently, and didn't get any response whatsoever after about a week. The only way I was able to get an answer was to use their live chat feature.

Other than their support via tickets, they're a decent registrar.

Thanks, everyone. Switching this weekend.

I've started using Namecheap after the SOAP story. Still didn't migrate all my domains from GoDaddy, but get a much better experience with Namecheap: their site works correctly, do not try to trick me into buying extras, support actually answers (didn't solve my issue, but that was because it couldn't really be solved).

Anyway, I'm already looking into migrating to Gandi because of Namecheap's lack of support for DNSSEC.

I find gandi's interface a little confusing at times, but the "No Bullshit" tagline is taken seriously.

Isn't DNSSEC trivially defeated right now, as any machine will accept a non-signed DNS record currently? I don't see any rush to get in on that, if you can beat DNS with an MITM, you can just as easily downgrade DNSSEC right now. We're many years away from DNSSEC actually being viable, if it ever will be. Wait till it's actually being enforced by OS-level resolvers or there's simply no threat model in which it is beneficial.

Well, not defeated, but bypassed.

It's still extremely easy to use it securely, just refuse to load a non-signed record. But, of course, it's not really desirable to do that for any query, just for the ones you care about.

Hey guys - Tamar from Namecheap here. Just an FYI - we've been promising this for quite some time and we're still working on it. I can't offer an ETA just yet, but it's on our roadmap.

I have had nothing but great experience with Namecheap.

They've been mostly fine for us

* We haven't been able to transfer all our domains as they don't support all the TLDs (notable we have an .it domain languishing on godaddy)

* Their admin UI is still pretty confusing and bad. Granted not as bad as GoDaddy...

* The one time I used chat support it took 20 minutes for them to pick up

Also last I checked they were still an enom reseller.

No DNSSEC, and it's been that way for countless years while they still promise to do it.

Try Gandi.

Somehow I'm not surprised to see tumblr get 0/5.

As someone who knows next to nothing about Tumblr, why?

I'm also confused. Flickr, another Yahoo product has 4/5. Perhaps it's due to it being a more recent acquisition and the wheels are still in motion, or perhaps since there is so much sharing of copyrighted information it would be near impossible to maintain the cost of keeping up with these standards.

https://hn.algolia.com/?q=who+has+your+back#!/story/forever/...

The link from 5 months ago regards protection of data from government requests; today's report regards protection of speech from copyright and trademark bullies. Perhaps the title should be edited.

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com