The Internet Archive is under a DDoS attack
The Internet Archive has been hit by a major DDoS attack that is knocking many of its services offline, raising concern over the vulnerability of one of the web’s key preservation institutions. Commenters speculate on motives ranging from cheap extortion and “DDoS-as-a-service” marketing to attempts at suppressing historical records, while noting how easy and inexpensive such attacks have become. The conversation branches into technical strategies for mitigating DDoS without relying on Cloudflare, the ethics of DDoS protection firms, and the importance of personal archiving and decentralized or mirrored archives to reduce dependence on a single point of failure.
Nature and status of the attack
- Internet Archive (IA) is under a DDoS; data is safe but many services became unavailable.
- Described as tens of thousands of fake information requests per second, i.e., a volumetric denial-of-service.
- Service later came back up; staff characterize it as a back‑and‑forth with attackers, with weekends/holidays being common attack times.
- The announcement is hosted on IA’s Mastodon instance; visiting that post is said not to worsen the core attack.
Speculation about motives
- “Cui bono?” answers include: large publishers, paywalled media, and the broader copyright industry that dislike persistent public access to historical content.
- Others suggest: extortion/ransom, DDoS‑for‑hire companies showing off capabilities, simple vandalism by bored individuals, or state/terror groups.
- A popular but contested theory is that someone wants incriminating or embarrassing archived content temporarily inaccessible; an IA insider firmly rejects this as a motive, which some readers accept and others wish had more explanation.
- Overall, motive is considered unclear, with many noting that DDoS is now cheap and commoditized, so “anyone” could do it.
DDoS ecosystem and Cloudflare debate
- Several comments describe DDoS‑as‑a‑service “stressers” as cheap subscription services using botnets and amplification attacks.
- Some criticize Cloudflare for:
- Protecting DDoS‑for‑hire websites behind its CDN while also selling mitigation.
- Alleged “extortionist” upselling (notably in a case involving an online gambling site and IP reputation).
- Others defend Cloudflare as a generally valuable, mostly ethical provider whose sales tactics occasionally cross lines, and argue its IP‑reputation concerns were legitimate.
Defenses and mitigation strategies
- Effective defense is framed mainly as an infrastructure and network‑position problem, not just software: you need huge spare bandwidth plus upstream scrubbing (often via Tier‑1 ISPs).
- Open‑source and architectural ideas mentioned: HAProxy, application‑layer filters, proof‑of‑work gateways, CAPTCHAs, and per‑request micropayments/“blockchain” fees.
- Critics note PoW/captchas don’t solve saturated inbound pipes, and micropayment schemes face practical and economic issues.
Decentralization and personal archiving
- Suggestions include a decentralized or distributed IA (e.g., via IPFS/Filecoin‑style systems or Arweave) to avoid a single point of failure; there’s interest but also concern about scope and governance.
- Many describe running their own web archives (wget mirroring, ArchiveBox, local WWWOFFLE‑style setups) to preserve sites and reduce dependence on any one institution.
Values and community reactions
- Repeated comparisons cast the attack as burning a library/orphanage—an attack on history, accountability, and human progress.
- Some worry persistent attacks could be used to justify broader rollbacks of privacy and civil liberties.
- There are strong calls to support IA financially and morally, alongside acknowledgment that it remains a single, vulnerable institution.