RSS



Toggle Reverse
If you don't see the image, there is an error!


Status

Unique sites: 19
nicecrew.digital www.torproject.org inv.nadeko.net ralsei.tech luxfero.nekoweb.org fastsi.de trashmaster.net sandworm.cc nerdvpn.de bluechinchompa.com truina.org atuta.neocities.org wtf.3n.cc steamcommunity.com/app/261700 q4os.org sofascorner.neocities.org soyjak.st tapeykatt.neocities.org inv.nadeko.net/watch?v=Q
Unique names: 143
test oat Fijxu FrogGOD random_nice_guy RICOTTA_19216 anon Kinlay Oncologist redplanetoid Pareidolia ShaolinVagaMundo Grateful waff BlueChinchompa Some_guy Nicki Shitter KillAllFascists ANONsss re1nee Anon ilikecats lightwo tricky_eth fijxu User KillAllCommies a BRICK Nova Sigmul Pedro somCuntriesBanYT Nazrin Frog Magotrap K justarandomguy Polygon980 KillAllNiggers PYRATE vinny TerryWABAG ImHungryAf OnionsHaveLayers requestedformat tor_is_awesome Boukeri KillTheNWO Tkinter CrackCocaine shalom doge69420504 Dee Sneed Lux kjash HateShews DECENTRALIZE Chill FGijcxu thanks Paladin birdi ShyguymaskYT 1100b uwu Name_optional RICOTTA_12916 COMPLAINT birbsophone RESiST bluechinchompa HELP_ME RussianSpy FIjxu omensoflove Sommerwiesel AnonymousCatGirl EverySingleTime RuralAnemone John_Doe truina FavoritoHJS nadekofan Anpanman Atuta uwuhunter ykcyc _ laknicek eee glutty asmongold elo ohio NadekoAI NotAnon click Clippy Agus archangel mk0 Nigger Anon_loves_lain THANKS KillThEClankers jordi scythewalker Steven Zander 688 sofa alemagno12 bixnood buntaki Nicolas Thank_You Navas 41Percent neon_onion kqv TRS_80 Null consciousUser elanor hazel MurdaFake xXfixjuenjoyerXx SKD xXxTorEnjoyerxXx JS_Crapcuck snowflake invidious Nakedo Asshole kayloo OrangeCat Brapzil9688 mathfaggot leyat jnd
Unique IPs: 862
Number of Posts: 1700
Anon de on 2025-10-10 23:16 No.1600
>>1591
what? just take a look at the forced push towards wayland
trying to force X11 into being deprecated, it almost seems like it's organized by microsoft or someone else who's trying to ruin linux
When every popular distro moves away from something like X11, will you use the now deprecated EOL choice or the new supported choice?
Do this for a dozen critical packages and now you've boxed in every linux user in your walled garden where all packages are maintained by google and microsoft, and using anything else would mean using outdated, inferior or unobtainium hardware, with outdated software, etc. etc. etc.
to me it's pretty clear where this is going
Anon de on 2025-10-10 22:09 No.1599
Bait used to believable
Anon is on 2025-10-10 21:31 No.1598
>>1595
No. Ladybird and similar projects are inherently insecure. It's impossible for any company other than Google to develop a secure, modern browser. Those browsers do more harm than good.

Chromium should be the standard. Kill off Firefox and all other browsers. This is for everyone's safety and security.
Anon us on 2025-10-10 21:11 No.1597
>>1595
>The initiative is funded entirely through donations, with Cloudflare, FUTO, Shopify, and 37signals among its sponsors
>Welcome to Ladybird, a truly independent web browser
Yeah, not sure about that. Why would US-controlled MITM shithole make a $100 000 donation to "independent" browser?
Will be looking forward however, seems promising.
Anon de on 2025-10-10 20:52 No.1596
>>1593
>https://www.computerworld.com/article/1497796/use-free-wi-fi-get-arrested.html

That article is from 2007 dude.
Also yeah sure that happens all the time right?
OrangeCat nl on 2025-10-10 20:40 No.1595
We need to support Ladybird browser because will be the only non-Chromium dependent browser.
Anon se on 2025-10-10 20:36 No.1594
>>1593
>We don't say "Android/Linux" or "Mac/XNU"
Shame on us for that.
Anon ar on 2025-10-10 20:25 No.1593
>>1590
>Instead of Firefox, use TOR Browser.
TOR Browser is based on Firefox ESR which is just Firefox with slower updates and fewer security fixes. Do not use.

>Instead of uBlock Origin or Adblock Plus, use about:config javascript:enabled=false
This doesn't prevent fingerprinting or tracking. If anything, it makes you easier to track because you stand out from the masses. If you really need this, Chrome lets you disable javascript in the settings.

>Instead of Linux, use GNU/Linux
It's "Linux", not "GNU/Linux". We don't say "Android/Linux", "Windows/Windows NT" or "Mac/XNU".

>Instead of VPN services, use public Wi-Fi
This could land you serious jail time.
https://www.computerworld.com/article/1497796/use-free-wi-fi-get-arrested.html
Anon ar on 2025-10-10 20:19 No.1592
>>1588
>ALL proprietary software MUST be ditched
No it must not. Whether or not something is proprietary or open source has almost nothing to do with how private or secure it is. It's merely a different release model. Most security researchers agree open source != security.

>Use your OWN cloud (sic, *4), SaaS (misleading, see *5), end-to-end encryption, and on-premise local solutions
Actually Google Drive, iCloud, and OneDrive might be more secure than your own local solutions. They use secure servers with minimal attack surface. Most people do not constantly harden their systems and install tons of bloat on their systems. Unless you're an experienced professional, do not attempt to self-host your own cloud. You will get hacked and lose everything.
Anon no on 2025-10-10 20:17 No.1591
>>1589
Nope. Linux doesn't have single point of failure. If you don't like where your distribution is going, you're switching to another.
Anon no on 2025-10-10 20:14 No.1590
>>1587
Instead of Firefox, use TOR Browser.
Instead of uBlock Origin or Adblock Plus, use about:config javascript:enabled=false
Instead of Linux, use GNU/Linux
Instead of Matrix or XMPP, use personal conversation
Instead of VPN services, use public Wi-Fi

fixed
Anon ch on 2025-10-10 20:13 No.1589
>>1588
Wouldn't government adoption of linux cause the enshittification of linux? We don't need Go, microsoft maintained packages, fed maintained packages, AWS and cloudflare dependencies, there's already too much of that bioluminescent crap in the linux community
After the year of the linux desktop arrives, will we be talking about the year of the freeBSD desktop?
a de on 2025-10-10 20:06 No.1588
Not to be political but look, Dr. Andy Farnell realized that for Digital Soverignty, ALL proprietary software MUST be ditched (*1). The EU is already ditching GAFAM for this (*2).

>TL;DR
Use ONLY Free Software (*3) as weapon against fascism,
Use your OWN cloud (sic, *4), SaaS (misleading, see *5), end-to-end encryption, and on-premise local solutions,
Prioritize Standards and Interoperability (*6, e.g. ODF) for resilience and as an escape path, and
How to manage and help colleagues or partners who are still stuck on GAFAM (e.g. DeGoogling).

1. http://cybershow.uk/blog/posts/layer10/
2. http://version2.dk/holdning/suveraenitet-er-vanskeligt
3. https://gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-even-more-important.html
4. http://techrights.org/n/2025/10/06/Fake_Economics_and_Clown_Computing_Circuses.shtml
5. http://gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html
6. http://techrights.org/n/2025/04/19/Free_Software_and_Standards_Not_Marketing_Blitz_Needed_Amid_Gro.shtml
Anon ar on 2025-10-10 20:02 No.1587
>MUH FREEDOMS
>MUH WEB STANDARDS
It's not freedom. It's a disservice to everyone including you to promote ideologies and biases over facts. You should be using the most secure solutions regardless of the source model or company behind it.

Instead of Firefox, use Chrome.
Instead of uBlock Origin or Adblock Plus, use the built-in reader mode.
Instead of Linux, use Windows 11 or macOS, or even better, ditch desktops entirely.
Instead of Matrix or XMPP, use Signal.
Instead of VPN services, use Apple Relay if possible, or if not, don't use anything.
Anon us on 2025-10-10 20:00 No.1586
This page is pretty cool. Indirect contant with the feds, Ive only ever talk to an Israelly shill before.
Anon de on 2025-10-10 19:54 No.1585
>>1583
>would you use youtube
No. Haven't read the rest of the post.
Anon se on 2025-10-10 19:40 No.1584
>>1574
This post glows so bright
Anon us on 2025-10-10 19:26 No.1583
Let me ask you these. If Google was made by AI instead of google would you use youtube instead of free pipe?
Anon de on 2025-10-10 18:57 No.1582
>>1567
>The longer it's around, the more likely a dedicated cracker will discover an exploit
Exact reason why everyone should be advocating for no-JS alternatives. >90% of exploits rely on JS, because people blindly allow any untrusted code to run on their device by default.
Anon pl on 2025-10-10 18:34 No.1581
>>1577
>refusing to eat food made by a black person just because it was made by a black person even if you're starving to death.
Yes.
kayloo pe on 2025-10-10 18:33 No.1580
>>1575
>>1576
OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH!
ANON! HOW DARE YOU TROLL OR FEDPOST! THAT'S IT! YOU ARE GROUNDED GROUNDED GROUNDED GROUNDED GROUNDED GROUNDED GROUNDED FOR 791802343129065233105573494248992648402728441094437433559948629941504248298410014375223317319796980902691 YEARS!
birdi ro on 2025-10-10 18:08 No.1579
>>1576
>>1575
Stop replying to the obvious troll.
Anon ar on 2025-10-10 17:33 No.1578
>>1576
>I think you actually mean Google Chrome, which has laughable privacy features.
Most other browsers have laughable security.
https://github.com/RKNF404/chromium-hardening-guide

>chrome allows websites to fingerprint
All browsers do.

>brave (chromium)
Do not use Brave. They still support retarded Manifest V2 which is a disservice to everyone and promote unmaintained extensions like uMatrix. Their cryptobloat and ad blocking adds attack surface and there are no real security improvements from Chrome.

>Go try this test: https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/
less bits of identifying information is better
Literally every security expert or even novice will tell you those tests are inaccurate.
Anon ar on 2025-10-10 17:22 No.1577
>>1575
>In what way is deGoogle conspiratorial?
Because avoiding something just because it's made by Google is bullshit. It's like refusing to eat food made by a black person just because it was made by a black person even if you're starving to death.

>people want to degoogle because they don't to be subjected to Google's shitty ass privacy policy and data harvesting, it's a similar situation with Microsoft and apple.
All services are subject to data harvesting and privacy policies. Using Proton services requires just as much trust as using Google services.

Chrome is the most private and secure cross-platform browser. You can disable telemetry through Chrome flags, policies, and settings.

>And it is still possible to have security without google/Microsoft/Apple.
Theoretically yes but the browsers and OS developed by Google, Microsoft, and Apple are the only ones without serious security issues at this time.
Anon de on 2025-10-10 17:17 No.1576
>>1574
stop drinking the cool aid
https://theconversation.com/google-has-dropped-its-promise-not-to-use-ai-for-weapons-its-part-of-a-troubling-trend-249169
https://www.macrumors.com/2025/10/01/uk-issues-new-order-for-icloud-data/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Copilot

https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/privacy/privacystatement
https://policies.google.com/privacy?hl=en-US

at first I thought you might mean a chrom(ium) browser but now I think you actually mean Google Chrome, which has laughable privacy features.
chrome allows websites to fingerprint your hardware, fonts, timezone, battery charge,
not sure if it gives access to wifi signal strength.
meanwhile browsers like librewolf, or brave (chromium) disable excess features that would lead to a very unique fingerprint. mullvad or tor disables even more.
Go try this test: https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/
less bits of identifying information is better
Anon ch on 2025-10-10 14:22 No.1575
>>1547
In what way is deGoogle conspiratorial?
people want to degoogle because they don't to be subjected to Google's shitty ass privacy policy and data harvesting, it's a similar situation with Microsoft and apple.

And it is still possible to have security without google/Microsoft/Apple.
Anon us on 2025-10-10 12:32 No.1574
No. It's not fedposting. These are facts. You must accept that security matters more than your retarded ideologies. DeGoogle and similar things are conspiratorial nonsense.

>>1569
Google, Microsoft, and Apple are creating a more secure internet. Mozilla, Proton, and other companies deceive people into thinking they can have privacy by pushing them into using insecure, privacy-unfriendly software and protocols like Email (use Signal, SimpleX, or iMessage instead).

People today are misinformed and vulnerable because they listen to random FOSS ideologists instead of actual security experts who know what they're doing.

Instead of Firefox, use Chrome.
Instead of uBlock Origin or other dangerous adblocking extensions, use Chrome's reader mode.
Instead of SponsorBlock and other YouTube extensions, use NewPipe or inv.nadeko.net.
Anon us on 2025-10-10 10:17 No.1573
VirusTotal for: https://ayaya[.]beauty/LFnGL <- https://www.virustotal.com/gui/url/83564a00747bf5506a858ec04d860e7293c6b99dd7c522d5b5ea8e3c8694e506/details
Anon de on 2025-10-10 07:50 No.1572
Also a note for less seasoned people
Don't give Apple money if you can help it
Don't give it to Google
Don't give it to Amazon
Don't give it to Surfshark, or any other VPN's that commonly sponsor youtubers
Cloudflare is very spooky too
your best bet is with something like MullvadVPN, look for VPN's that scizos use, check out MentalOutlaw on yt, but you're still trusting some company to not give your data to someone.
Tor and I2P is decentralized so theres less chance that multiple nodes you're using are compromised
Anon pl on 2025-10-10 07:39 No.1571
>>1567
Yeah troll or fed posting
Anon pl on 2025-10-10 07:37 No.1570
>>1565
The idea that you will be targeted for looking like a criminal is retarded
Everybody is targeted, maybe normal people even more than criminals. You don't actually believe the NSA spies on every single human so they can catch terrorists, do you?
And if they actually cared about crime, with all the data they capture they could've stopped SO MANY mass shootings, terrorist attacks, etc.
"We've had him on our radar for years" - The FBI every time someone shoots some political figure.
Also if the tor was ONLY used by criminals or journalists then there would be a gurantied reward on exposing tor users, but if half the traffic is hentai then there is a risk that all the resources you invest to compromise tor will be for nothing. So your advice is malicious to privacy since less normal traffic over tor = less privacy for sensitive traffic.
Every ISP is required by law to record your telemetry and give the government access to it since 1998

>Use Apple Relay or Cloudflare WARP
FED!
a nl on 2025-10-10 04:35 No.1569
>To all Chrom* shills
GAFAM is murdering Web standards, pushing the defective-by-design "you own nothing and be happy" apparatus known as "Digital Restrictions Malware" used by Netflix et al., and now, everything is a proprietary WebApp (JavaScript/WASM traps).

>Remember KHTML by KDE?
None does because of GAFAM blinked it using Chrom* and Edge.

http://defectivebydesign.org/repeat-offenders/
http://techrights.org/n/2025/07/25/The_Future_of_the_Web_is_One_Rendering_Engine_or_Flavours_of_Ch.shtml
http://techrights.org/n/2025/09/02/Google_e_Chrome_Passes_70_and_Web_Standards_Are_Dying.shtml
http://invent.kde.org/frameworks/khtml
Anon de on 2025-10-09 23:24 No.1568
>>1558
Recently, I was watching Asmon reacting to the controversy surrounding Charlie's rant about Hasan, and I said, "Fuck 'em. I'll rather just watch some cheaply-made content for kids."

SlopTubers mean nothing to me, and so does mainstream news.
Anon us on 2025-10-09 23:00 No.1567
>>1565
This all seems like a troll post designed to rage bait seasoned veterans.

Anyhow, Tor, the majority of VPNs and ISPs in general's compromisation aside... there is absolutely no such thing as a totally impenetrable browser and there probably never will be. The longer it's around, the more likely a dedicated cracker will discover an exploit in its code. Doesn't matter if it's spaghetti or lasagna, sooner or later, it eventually gets found. This exploit will be either internalized in the browser itself, or externalized through malicious + spying software disguised as a quaint add-on which is installed by an naïve unsuspecting user unaware of the snake that is about to come flying out of what they think is a can of nuts.
Asshole de on 2025-10-09 22:35 No.1566
>>1565
lol edge lord
Anon cz on 2025-10-09 21:08 No.1565
More private = more secure

Edge is more private than Tor browser because it is more secure. Tor uses retarded Firefox ESR which doesn't get most vulnerabilities patched by Firefox.

Most people shouldn't use Tor anyways. Tor can be dangerous since Tor nodes are usually malicious, easily identifiable, and associated with illegal activity. Tor is intended to be used only by activists, journalists, whistleblowers, and people in oppressive countries, not regular users. By using Tor you're robbing those in need of bandwidth and putting more unnecessary load on Tor nodes thereby hurting privacy. Your ISP and even many VPNs are likely more trustworthy than Tor. Use Apple Relay or Cloudflare WARP if needed.
RICOTTA_19216 cl on 2025-10-09 20:32 No.1564
>>1552

Mmmm! To my shopping cart!
Anon us on 2025-10-09 19:26 No.1563
>>1560
>>1562

>Unironic Chrome shills

The only thing that could make this any sadder is if you did it for free.

I seriously hope you guys don't do that.
Anon us on 2025-10-09 16:50 No.1562
>>1561

What >>1560 is saying is correct. Chrome is more secure and is used by tens of billions of people daily, and they are impossible to hack. And linux is for hackers not normal people that should use windows 11.
Anon pl on 2025-10-09 16:12 No.1561
>>1560
gaslight fedposting af

>guYs JuSt uSE ChrOEM iT SeCuRe Bb bEcuz iT pOular!!!1
Anon ch on 2025-10-09 15:22 No.1560
>>1554
>I mean, use the Un-Mozziled Firefox (e.g. IceCat, LibreWolf, Mullvad), to be exact. Those forks have the "Digital Restrictions Malware" handcuffs crippled in favor of user freedom, with some hardening against "device fingerprinting".
No. That's worse because you get slower updates and all browsers you listed are bloated with ridiculous uBlock Origin and other Manifest V2 malware. And those browsers are actually more fingerprintable because few people use them.

IceCat, LibreWolf, and Mullvad cause more harm than good because they promote the harmful idea that Firefox can be private and secure instead of encouraging users towards the actual private and secure Chrome.
Anon de on 2025-10-09 14:56 No.1559
>>1558
replace it with the guestbook or a separate chat
Asshole pl on 2025-10-09 11:41 No.1558
>>1556
yea and it sucks slop balls
oh heres propaganda disguised as news n heres videos about guys spewin nothingburger
doesnt matter if we can hid channels that "popular" shit needs to be removed imo
Anon pl on 2025-10-09 09:30 No.1557
>>1556 it always has been >https://americasdigitalshield.com/
Anon ch on 2025-10-09 06:23 No.1556
popular tab getting demonic influenced so sad to see. much love
Anon us on 2025-10-09 01:39 No.1555
>>1554
Say you're running Safari on mobile. Is it safe to say the trick won't work and the user will keep getting blocked with "denied by administrative rule" or "bad request"?
a se on 2025-10-09 01:21 No.1554
>>1553
I mean, use the Un-Mozziled Firefox (e.g. IceCat, LibreWolf, Mullvad), to be exact. Those forks have the "Digital Restrictions Malware" handcuffs crippled in favor of user freedom, with some hardening against "device fingerprinting".

>>1545
Forgot to point out the undo trick ONLY WORKS if you are in the tab with the "anti-bot" when the URL flashes, if you switch tab you'll miss. Chromium discards the undo buffer when you switch tabs.

>Why Un-Mozilled?
https://techrights.org/n/2023/10/11/Mitchell_Baker_Running_a_Bank_in_Silicon_Valley.shtml
http://techrights.org/n/2025/07/07/Mozilla_Had_No_Good_Reason_to_Outsource_Firefox_Development_to_.shtml
http://techrights.org/n/2025/10/05/Mozilla_Throw_Away_Your_Old_PC_and_Enable_Digital_Rights_Manage.shtml
TL;DR GAFAM
Nakedo us on 2025-10-08 22:23 No.1553
>>1545
>Get a FireFox-based browser
Insanely insecure.
https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/firefox-chromium.html
https://github.com/RKNF404/chromium-hardening-guide#firefox

Use Chrome, retard.
Anon us on 2025-10-08 19:24 No.1552
fijxu the website has naughty booru girls on the bottom
Anon us on 2025-10-08 19:06 No.1551
why is my name Anon?
https://ayaya.beauty/LFnGL
Anon at on 2025-10-08 15:40 No.1550
hi
Anon se on 2025-10-08 05:23 No.1549
>>1548
Thanks
This captcha spam is getting ridiculous, and if you click the "allow refresh" too quickly it blocks you
a no on 2025-10-07 23:33 No.1548
>>1545
Get a FireFox-based browser, open up the page containing that "anti-bot" and then CTRL-Z the URL entry until you find that link you want to copy. Chromiums discard the undo buffer while FireFox doesn't.

>Doesn't apply to proprietaries like Gulag reCaptcha or ClownFlare captchas though.
Anon us on 2025-10-07 23:30 No.1547
>2025-10-01: Please take this quick strawpoll~~ ;)
>2025-10-07: Chile backend is back! Currently in testing, only use it if you are from south america please!
WHAT A TWIST@!!!
Anon de on 2025-10-07 23:05 No.1546
>>1535
If current setup works well, how about an old good image captcha in case bot owners got creative? As a seasoned datahoarder/scraper (never abused inv btw), I usually feel demotivated if I encounter custom one and immediately look for alternatives.
Invidious even has one inside, that clock on login page if you register with a fresh login.
Anon at on 2025-10-07 20:40 No.1545
The refresh captcha makes it so the url is unreadable if you want to quickly copy the link
Fijxu cl on 2025-10-07 17:27 No.1544
>>1542
I had no idea collabs existed, well I don't use youtube ;3
Submitted as feature request on Invidious issues.
Anon pl on 2025-10-07 17:23 No.1543
>>1541
The best way to ensure that the user is definitely running JavaScript would be to use all of JavaScript's fucked up quirks, perhaps something like https://github.com/aemkei/jsfuck
FavoritoHJS cl on 2025-10-07 15:25 No.1542
Suggestion: Collabs should have all channels involved listed instead of just one
example: https://inv.nadeko.net/watch?v=b2_vBMQmi3M says the author is D/V (without a pfp!) but doesn't mention FLDE.
Anon nl on 2025-10-07 14:37 No.1541
>>1540
PoW is an option for sure, though its main advantage (driving up costs for malicious actors) wouldn't work too well here, since handling the video behind the captcha is orders of magnitude more expensive.
For a quick'n dirty solution, just a slightly harder js check would probably hold up for quite a while, splitting the solution url between multiple script tags and/or giving it some parameter that must be calculated via the js: even very easy stuff like doing +10 in one place and -1 in another would be unfeasible to solve without full parsing and evaluation.
Fijxu cl on 2025-10-07 13:44 No.1540
>>1538
Yeah the JS-Refresh is a meme, just a link lol.
I have found this https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aeternal-flame-AD%2Fpow-buster+go-away&type=code and solves the sha256 PoW of Go-away (I haven't tested it yet tho and I'll try it later), pretty interesting.

>>1539
>You should probably consider cookie-bound rate limits on the backend instead, still a bandaid measure but at least it might catch an abuser or two scraping videos in parallel: also the per-cookie request data might provide some insight into how to better distinguish normal users from abnormal ones, as long as the cookies live long enough that is.
Yes, I was thinking about that a few days ago. Although I don't have time to work on it right now :/

>Ultimately, you need more clever go-away challenges since the ones you're using aren't holding up well.
I have metrics so I can say it for sure it's working fine, but sooner or later it will die just like any captcha
Anon de on 2025-10-07 13:28 No.1539
>>1535
>That's to prevent bots/abusers from using the Cookie 7 days in a row without any restrictions.
They pass the challenges, they WILL pass them again: and you're not beating them on costs either, 3 additional requests for lightweight pages every hour or so isn't even a rounding error given they're scraping videos.
You should probably consider cookie-bound rate limits on the backend instead, still a bandaid measure but at least it might catch an abuser or two scraping videos in parallel: also the per-cookie request data might provide some insight into how to better distinguish normal users from abnormal ones, as long as the cookies live long enough that is.

Ultimately, you need more clever go-away challenges since the ones you're using aren't holding up well.
Anon se on 2025-10-07 13:16 No.1538
>>1535
>Is not for low effort bot scrapping, not anyone can bypass it
Note the "Why do this?" and "Can't scrapers adapt?" sections of the go-away docs: the whole project was started to deal with ultra-simple braindead crawling (presumably for LLM training), in the hopes it would drive it away by making it harder and costlier.
in your case, abusers have already adapted, and sending them more of the same challenges isn't going to do anything.
On the technical side of things, yes anyone can bypass go-away: not only my search for "go-away" returned pages compiling bot check bypasses before the repo itself, not only are all three checks solved automatically by any headless browser, but even if someone was to code a scraper from scratch none of the three checks requires more than basic HTML parsing (even the js one is a bit of a meme, doesn't even requires eval'ing the contents of the tag, could be probably done just with regex)
Fijxu cl on 2025-10-07 12:55 No.1537
...->

IP addresses filter not a silver bullet, they are more like a wallet bullet, they are just a number pointing to some machine. Bots can change their IP easily, specially with IPV6.

I have been always very supportive with people that don't like JS since I started with the instance and Youtube started to rate limit, but I'm honestly getting tired of caring about the <1% of people that use Invidious without JS.

For now I'll keep the Invidious captcha as is, but if some day I see bot behavior using the instance, I'll leverage it to Proof of Work.

And >>1528 is extremely right lol
Fijxu cl on 2025-10-07 12:47 No.1536
... ->

If you want to protect yourself from JS RCE, then use NoScript and JShelter and read what the JS does before executing it.

>http://fsf.org/bulletin/2025/spring/defending-savannah-from-ddos-attacks
>Bob added corresponding allowlists, tracking confirmed "real user" behaviors and exempting them from future bans. This isn't a perfect solution, but it is amazingly effective.

That not an option with Invidious and what I provide at all. Is clearly extremely effective to use allowlists, but I'm a single individual, Is literally impossible for me to keep allowlists updated. If I were to ban abusive IP addresses, for sure a LOT of Tor and VPN IPs would be blocked because people abuse Tor and VPNs, so they get on a blocklist, leading to high levels of false positives and people complaining in your Email about them getting blocked (which happened the time I blocked some ASNs, which worked pretty well, but TOO many false positives).

... ->
Fijxu cl on 2025-10-07 12:38 No.1535
>>1533
Works pretty well if you ask me. Is not for low effort bot scrapping, not anyone can bypass it
>And there's even less of a point in having validation last a short time
That's to prevent bots/abusers from using the Cookie 7 days in a row without any restrictions.
>Apparently, anti-bots use "proof of work", which, according to the FSF, is the same as cryptomining, making it malware as it is done without the end-user's permission.
Sorry but I couldn't care less about the FSF and their standpoint about anti bot protections. Saying that a Mathematical calculation to pass a challenge is malware makes no sense. You are not cryptomining anything here, nor the server and the client try to mine a small block for profit, they say cryptomining because both calculate hashes, but they purpose is completely different.

... ->

What I'm dealing with here are abusers, not simple LLM bots that you can just IP ban and call it a day
a de on 2025-10-07 11:12 No.1534
Apparently, anti-bots use "proof of work", which, according to the FSF, is the same as cryptomining, making it malware as it is done without
the end-user's permission.

>Sure, Anubis and go-away is Free Software (both are MIT licensed) so what's the FSF grudge?
The scheme where it is done is too similar to a malware to be accepted as respecting the end-users' autonomy, independence, and freedoms.

>Source
http://fsf.org/blogs/sysadmin/our-small-team-vs-millions-of-bots/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptojacking

Look at how FSF did it without resorting to crytomining: >>1479
Anon se on 2025-10-07 10:00 No.1533
Go-away is meant to filter low effort bot scraping: there's no point in issuing triple challenges all the time, and there's even less of a point in having validation last a short time.
It's time to search for a better solution instead of piling on bandaids.
Anon us on 2025-10-07 07:33 No.1532
post your favorite lesser-known websites, here's some of mine:
arete.network
rdrama.net
communities.win
wikileaks.org
www.amren.com (cringe cloudflare captcha)
kingdomtruther.com
Anon us on 2025-10-07 07:30 No.1531
Thank You Fijxu
Anon us on 2025-10-07 07:14 No.1530
>>1526
Listen up folks — it is pretty safe to say the server is BACK IN BUSINESS! :-D
Anon us on 2025-10-07 06:48 No.1529
Yeah nadeko is down right now, but the minecraft server works (:

Fuck Youtube btw
Anon se on 2025-10-07 06:44 No.1528
>>1504
>something which acts anti-privacy
More like privacy-agnostic, I don't see ill intent here.

It's basically all the same:
- YouTube wants money, bots make it harder for them, they block bots and harm low amount of legit users
- Fijxu wants to run stable instance, bots make it harder for him, Fijxu blocks bots and harms low amount of legit users
Projects mostly start with good intent until real life make them do fucked up decisions.

Would be funny if yt-dlp changed its stance on invidious and added support, as well as captcha bypass. At that point we would have gone full circlejerk and internet could be closed for good.
invidious id on 2025-10-07 06:17 No.1527
Hi, coming here for invidious. Sadly, the service is down. Hope it will be back shortly!
Anon us on 2025-10-07 05:30 No.1526
I want you all to know this — THE SERVER (inv.nadeko.net) IS DOWN; AGAIN! >:o[
Anon us on 2025-10-07 03:57 No.1525
>>1524
An internet without privacy for its users is like a house without any support beams. Totally unsafe in every way, completely unfit for the owner or their guests, and unstructurally sound to the core.
Anon de on 2025-10-07 01:39 No.1524
>>1513
Isn't the whole point of Chat Control to be device-based? They might grab what you use no matter what.
Anon us on 2025-10-06 23:13 No.1523
jews
Anon de on 2025-10-06 21:36 No.1522
>>1500
>OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH!
>GROUNDED GROUNDED GROUNDED GROUNDED GROUNDED GROUNDED GROUNDED GROUNDED GROUNDED
We get the point. You're retarded.

>5108073328584689523533903348554098233210687514985379707 YEARS!
That's an absurdly high number of years.
Anon de on 2025-10-06 21:06 No.1521
>>1516
Finally, someone said it. i knew techrights was sus
if only there was a credible tech news sites
Anon us on 2025-10-06 19:36 No.1520
>>1518
This has been happening to me every time I attempt to use the public instance (never used the .onion link, don't use Tor). Doesn't matter which video it is. Not trying to hack, flood, or clog invidious's traffic with spambots so I have no idea why this is.

Error: access denied: denied by administrative rule e9dd27462f7df3d23a77cb91d5c0d0b0/64611ec8cb0e2da6c931
Anon se on 2025-10-06 19:08 No.1519
>>1518
works now, thanks a lot
Fijxu cl on 2025-10-06 18:48 No.1518
>>1515
Fixed, try again
Anon de on 2025-10-06 18:15 No.1517
>>1516
..., which the US' is not
Gonna clarify, not found guilty of that yet*
Anon de on 2025-10-06 18:13 No.1516
>>1511
Those techrights articles are BS
NYT is controlled by the CIA, so what if Trump wants to sue them.
Keir Stahmer is not some "worker's party advocate". Half of the UK's parliament are pedophiles, which the US' is not
That whole article is just a rant on anyone who isnt trans or gay or black or cyberbullied
It might as well be a collection of posts from bluesky or the writings on Destiny's rubber room walls
Apple is far more controlled by the CCP than the US, their whole production relies on the CCP's cooperation, not US'. Their icloud scanning "feature" was forced by the UK, not the US. But Trump bad and UK wonderful so that wont get mentioned
Anon se on 2025-10-06 18:06 No.1515
for some reason this error always happens on the .onion but going to nadeko.net (still through Tor) works

Error: access denied: denied by administrative rule e917d397285e3a00f05c9c3ebf59e97a/75ca35fd7d644c91a083
Fijxu cl on 2025-10-06 18:01 No.1514
>>1513
Already built, we have yggdrasil and I2P.

https://yggdrasil-network.github.io/
https://i2pd.website/
Anon de on 2025-10-06 17:34 No.1513
>>1512
we could build a decentralized p2p mesh network
kinda like tor but without the ISP middleman
Anon de on 2025-10-06 13:02 No.1512
>>1509
If so, what can we do to circumvent it? We can't just go outside to send mails physically
a fr on 2025-10-06 12:06 No.1511
>>1508
>>1510
Don't forget TiVoization, the proprietary tyrant that lives on today as UEFI Restricted Boot, where only Microsoft-approved OS will boot and nothing else.

>Basically Chat Control on the CPU level.

>Right to Read
http://gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
>Techrights on Chat Control
http://techrights.org/n/2025/09/18/Project_2030_to_Cover_How_Project_2025_Styled_Anti_Media_Zealot.shtml
http://techrights.org/n/2025/10/05/Chat_Control_2_Them_Not_2_U.shtml
Anon se on 2025-10-06 11:44 No.1510
>>1508
I feel like shit's gonna be inevitable no matter how hard we fight. I feel sick to the core
Anon us on 2025-10-06 10:42 No.1509
>>1508
If it does get passed I won't be surprised if some corrupt clowns write a similar bill here and it ends up passing the house. Another strike against anonymity, and a win for draconian corporations, datamining advertisers and three-letter government agencies.
Anon nl on 2025-10-06 09:44 No.1508
Am I get the feeling that Chat Control is close to being passed. Like I'm really worried about Germany's stance on such proposal
birdi ro on 2025-10-06 07:11 No.1507
Let me give an example: When i load a 5 hour long video that wasn't split into multiple parts for some reason, with the intent on watching a single hour from the 3 hour mark i left off last time. I load the vid in your instance and i have to start the video in order to skip ahead, because i can only do that with arguments not from the JS-player for some reason. Then let's say that after half an hour of watching the instance starts loading from YT past the 4 hour mark (which i wasn't going to watch at that time) and it sends it to me, wasting the bandwidth.

If i could skip ahead without starting the video and set another point on the bar limiting how far ahead the instance will have to load and another point that stops loading at a given time mark and then has to be re-set again in order to load again, your instance will only have to load from YT the 1 hour 3 to 4 hr mark as opposed to loading the beginning for no reason and then still loading past the 4 hour.
birdi ro on 2025-10-06 06:58 No.1506
>>1494
I wasn't going to bother with the poll anyway since i'm fine with the backends you have now, i just asked that since obviously the Tor posters here are mad, calling you anti-privacy because of the JS-captcha.

My recommandation is to consider the buffering limit thing i said in the previous post and maybe ask the invidious devs on github to implement it, because i would definitely use that.
Anon us on 2025-10-06 01:50 No.1505
What's with the "denied by administrative rule" error popping up all of a sudden? The site worked just fine a few hours prior. What is it rejecting exactly, my IP, user agent or anything else?
Anon de on 2025-10-06 01:41 No.1504
>>1480
>I'll remove JS on Tor tho

Apparently this instance went TOR-HOSTILE recently, as it loads js-challenge and then BooM! Forbidden

Looks like some false benevolence is somewhere, something which acts anti-privacy in the name of anti-abuse (just like Netflix et al.)
Anon us on 2025-10-06 00:06 No.1503
>denied by administrative rule

The hell with this. Off to VidLii
Anon se on 2025-10-05 23:59 No.1502
>>1491
A lot of people are really fed up with everything what is going on. They are just completely disorganized, so they vent where they can.
bluechinchompa us on 2025-10-05 21:50 No.1501
>>1499

dont forget to watch it on your TV as well and watch each AD fully.
Page:
First Prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next Last