The Fediverse has a DDoS problem : fediverse

[-] Zak@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago

The proposed solution of an intermediate server caching embeds is needlessly complex. The first server a link is posted to can fetch the embed, then push it out to every server receiving the post.

[+] skullgiver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

[deleted]

[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 9 points 1 month ago

The first server should be the one it was posted to. Then federate the embed just like the post itself.

If a server is malicious, it doesn't matter if that malice is transmitted in the post or in the embed, it should be defederated just the same.

[-] rimu@piefed.social 3 points 1 month ago

Not all servers are equal. I would trust a post from lemmy.world or lemmy.ml to have valid metadata, for example. It'd be great if admins had some way to specify trusted instances (with the biggest 6 instances as initial defaults).

There would be other uses for the trusted instances concept. Automatic sharing of moderation actions, block lists, community lists, etc

[-] punkyblob@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 month ago

Actually an interesting point. My immediate concern with that idea is that it would open the door for disguising things for what they aren't. The solution was made from the general caution of not trusting remote servers regarding content they not necessarily control.

But yes, that would definitely be a solution, too.

[-] andyburke@fedia.io 16 points 1 month ago

How is this not a caching issue on the linked server? Serving the same info up over and over from memory should be incredibly fast.

Are their pages dynamic and filled with ads and stuff or something that makes this a problem?

[-] chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net 18 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

If you’ve skimmed over the original publication, it is actually worse: it is a non problem. Other users have pointed out already: ~100MB served over 5 minutes period is quite literally nothing for even one small VPS serving the content independently, let alone a site with CloudFlare in front like they claim to have.

[+] Carighan@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago

[deleted]

[-] erlend_sh@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

This is certainly not spam but rather a blog response, a time honored practice as old as blogging itself.

OP’s article links to the source article (albeit via its fedipost rather than its blog post; maybe best to link both) and contributes to the online discourse with a long form reply, detailing a possible solution.

Mischaracterizing such a clearly well-intentioned contribution as “blog spam” is disingenuous.

edit: thanks for retracting your comment. I hope my retort won’t dissuade you from continuing to engage in this community :)

[-] punkyblob@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 1 month ago

How is this blog spam if it provides an approach on how to fix it (next to a recap)? I just put it on there because I collect stuff there.

But yeah, whatever, Lemmy is an interesting place.

[-] ThillyGooth@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

This is not spam. The blog post discusses a current hot topic. There's no advertising on the site. OP has nothing to gain by sharing this. Don't make people hesitate to post quality content just because the topic has been discussed elsewhere.

Fediverse

Rules