AT&T is blocking 4Chan

Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by Pika, Jul 26, 2009.

  1. Pika macrumors 68000

    Pika

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #1
  2. lionheartednyhc macrumors 65816

    lionheartednyhc

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
  3. Hrududu macrumors 68020

    Hrududu

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Location:
    Central US
    #3
    4Chan can be dangerous
     

    Attached Files:

  4. oregon2 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2009
    #4
    yes. 4chan is not a site to mess around with, and AT&T is sure to feel it. i was curious so i went and checked the /b/ board and i saw many posts about dealing with att. some suggestions included

    -calling local and national newstations
    -ddos attacks against att
    -harassing the ceo of att
    -harassing apple about getting out of the iphone contract with att
    -contacting politicians (lol)
     
  5. J the Ninja macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2008
    #5
    I've already contacted politicians (well, one. But it was a senator from my state on the Senate net/telecom committee.)

    AT&T was really NOT smart to do this. They're going to get a massive PR &%*storm in the coming few days. Hopefully, net neutrality can gain a bit of traction from this one.

    (I came in this board to start this thread, but it seems I was beaten to it)
     
  6. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #6
    AT&T blocked 4chan because the site was a constant target of DDoS attacks and AT&T didn't want to carry all of that traffic, sounds reasonable to me.

    I wish 4chan would disappear off the face of the net, they're the most useless bunch of morons to ever walk this planet.
     
  7. benthewraith macrumors 68040

    benthewraith

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    #7
    Can't you bypass this by a proxy or change DNS settings?
     
  8. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #8
  9. iBlue macrumors Core

    iBlue

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    London, England
    #9
    Sure but that's hardly the point. AT&T blocking them makes a statement which is likely going to be a crapstorm of problems for them. I can understand why they did it but I don't think it was a good idea.
     
  10. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #10
    The block's already been lifted according to that article and it was only for a few hours during the attack, it's not going to bring a crapstorm of problems. What are the 4chan pissants going to do, rickroll the CEO of AT&T?
     
  11. benthewraith macrumors 68040

    benthewraith

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    #11
    Or DDoS his home?
    Hack into his email.
    Publish very personal information, such as SSN# and home address.
     
  12. belvdr macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    #12
    If there was a DDOS attack originating from their systems, I would certainly hope my provider would block access. There's no reason to let that traffic onto AT&T's network and wreak havoc.
     
  13. iBlue macrumors Core

    iBlue

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    London, England
    #13
    Ah I see.

    I don't know what they'd do but when 4chan decide to cause internet problems, they do a pretty decent job of it. In addition, AT&T risk pissing off their own customers and they would have been risking a PR drama with this:

    "Under the FCC’s Comcast/BitTorrent ruling, Internet Service Providers may only slow or cap connection speeds. They are not allowed to block any service or protocol on the internet. Here, 4chan as a web site appears to fall under an internet service, but it is also conforming to standard web page protocols. It appears AT&T does not have the legal right to block 4chan, only to cap customers who are “abusing” their access to the internet."


    I really don't give a crap either way, it doesn't affect me, I just thought if AT&T did decide to block 4chan that it probably wasn't that great of an idea.
     
  14. belvdr macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    #14
    From the sound of things, I don't believe 4chan sits on AT&T's network. So, AT&T can block them if they so wish. They are just not allowing their customers to get to 4chan; they are not disallowing everyone.

    Even if 4chan is an AT&T customer, if a DDOS attack stems from them, I don't see any fault with shutting it down to prevent further disruptions for everyone else. It's no longer just a bandwidth issue; it's a security issue on top of that.
     
  15. iBlue macrumors Core

    iBlue

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    London, England
    #15
    That's not how I read it. I took it to mean AT&T was not legally allowed to censor which websites their customers go to.

    Honestly though, I don't care. I'm not fighting for either side. I was merely saying that if AT&T or any other ISP decided to block 4chan or any other notoriously undesirable website that it may not be a good idea. Sounds like it was all blown out of proportion though anyway.
     
  16. belvdr macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    #16
    Sorry we're on different wavelengths. :) It wasn't blocked because AT&T just didn't want their customers going there. One of the article's states there were ACK scans originating from 4chan, thus the block and only a certain IP from what I'm gathering. They didn't block the whole domain. Nowhere do I read that AT&T has confirmed this, but that's the view I was taking above.

    I don't care either. I have no use for 4chan personally.
     
  17. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #17
    AT&T isn't censoring anything though, there was an attack on 4chan which brought traffic across AT&T's network, and they temporarily blocked access to investigate and stop the attack. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
     
  18. Unspoken Demise macrumors 68040

    Unspoken Demise

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Location:
    >9,000
    #18
    And now there will be 4chan and AT&T CEO porn on top of a shoop and a busty anime chick being sodomized by Sonic the Hedgehog. :rolleyes:
     
  19. Consultant macrumors G5

    Consultant

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    #19
    Perhaps do the Verizon Privacy thing

    Prankster Gets Verizon's CEO Private Address, Visits Him to Discuss Privacy
    http://gizmodo.com/5320173/prankste...isits-him-to-discuss-privacy?skyline=true&s=i
     
  20. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #20
    It was img at first but now it seems I can't connect to anything beyond the front page now.

    To be honest nothing of value was lost on img. /b/ and /r9k/? :rolleyes:
     
  21. SFStateStudent macrumors 604

    SFStateStudent

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    Location:
    San Francisco California, USA
    #21
    I'd rather have AT&T suspend/block 4Chan, until the issues are addressed. Personally, I have no desire to visit the 4Chan website.....:eek::eek::eek:
     
  22. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3

    TuffLuffJimmy

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #22
    First they came for the pedophiles, but I did not speak up for I was not a pedophile.


    In all seriousness I think it's pretty odd that AT&T would block 4chan, first because it's censoring the net, second because if anyone is going to do anything about it it's 4chan.
     
  23. belvdr macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    #23
    They weren't censoring though. They filtered only one server because an attack was originating from it. They didn't filter the entire domain.

    Evidently 4chan wasn't able to do much and was having issues keeping their own stuff running because of the attack. From what I understand, they even went down due to it.
     
  24. iBlue macrumors Core

    iBlue

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    London, England
    #24
    Precisely my line of thinking.

    (for anyone wanting a reference)

    As it turns out it wasn't censoring in quite the way I thought:
     
  25. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #25
    Case buried. Apparently, it wasn't a deliberate action to censor, rather an action to protect costumers.


    FYI - Its the July 27 entry the one you should read.
     

Share This Page