I am open to chat about any of this. Threat modeling is complex.
But, injecting malware to scuttle their own incredibly popular network would benefit them how?
Its incredible popularity has long since led to the emergence of virtually unsolvable CAPTCHAs, designed to reduce this level.
So far, the only benefits of this popularity are the AI crawlers which cause the site to run intermittently (same issue this year with archive.org and commoncrawl) plus Finnish doxxers and fake child-porn fighters trying to shut it down.
OK, but what if they track all of who watches what. Isn't that the entire Facebook model? Metadata is extremely valuable. That's just facts, right? And, they are literally doing that.
Next, IIRC, one DNS provider stopped working with them for insane privacy reasons? [0]
Now, tinfoil hat time: what about the AI labs using them for training data, and it getting steered one way or another now that we know for a fact that archive is not reliable?
[0] It is Cloudflare due to EDNS Client Subnet (ECS) privacy, right?
You have to hang out on Epstein Island to find buyers for metadata. Have you heard of any small indie projects with this kind of business model? Maybe PirateBay, Sci-Hub, Flibusta? I haven't. That's why I'm sure CloudFlare is selling your metadata (and not just that), but the archive isn't. Simply because it doesn’t fly that high. Banners, pop-unders, pop-ups—what people here like to call “malware”—yes, that’s it. Just a normal pirate website with too many too cheap visitors and an unpassable captcha and a pop-under as the result.
What makes you think that archive.today is any kind of indie project?
Isn't just the scale of cost indicative that is not aligned with anything close to indie?
{"deleted":true,"id":50283929,"parent":50283898,"time":1793241442,"type":"comment"}