Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

As another completely legitimate user what strikes me the most with this is how they did their best to basically pull off a sneak attack. I mean really? Microsoft just couldn't be bothered to give any forewarning to the millions of customers who's services they were directly interfering with?

Tack on the dubious reasoning and the alleged failure to even contact NOIP at all before having this court order issued and this puts Microsoft in a really bad light. I'm not mad at NOIP about malware (frankly- I don't give a single shit), but I'm absolutely mad at Microsoft for pulling this bullshit and interfering with services I paid for completely out of nowhere.



Indeed. Luckily I have a domain: now I'm going to fix this by setting up a CNAME and an account at another dyndns provider. Now if the other provider goes down, it should be possible to quickly make a switch without changing it in 1000 places*

Should've thought of this earlier. Well, hindsight is 20/20

* includes git remote configuration, configuration files, scripts, bookmarked/saved links, and the worst: other people's links.


Well, for "bulletproof" hosters that really are complicit in their customers' activities, you need to pull a sneak attack, so the bad actors don't have the chance to switch hosts. So I'm fine with that part of it.

I'm not fine with classifying noip as complicit. It's not.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: