Archive.today’s CAPTCHA Allegedly DDoS Attacks; Wikipedia May Ban It
▼ Summary
– Wikipedia editors are debating whether to blacklist Archive.today due to its alleged use in a DDoS attack against a blogger.
– The three proposed options range from a full blacklist and link removal to maintaining the status quo with no action.
– A full blacklist would be highly disruptive, affecting over 695,000 links across approximately 400,000 Wikipedia pages.
– Editors opposing a blacklist argue the site is a unique and vast archive, often containing snapshots unavailable elsewhere like the Wayback Machine.
– Editors in favor of a blacklist prioritize user security and the safety of references over the site’s utility for verifiable citations.
The volunteer editors of Wikipedia are currently engaged in a significant debate over the future of Archive.today on the platform. This discussion centers on whether the popular archiving service should be blacklisted due to allegations that its CAPTCHA system was exploited to launch a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack against a blogger. The potential ban could affect over 695,000 links to Archive.today embedded across approximately 400,000 Wikipedia pages, representing a major disruption to one of the site’s most utilized reference tools for circumventing paywalls and preserving web content.
Editors are weighing three distinct proposals. The most severe, Option A, calls for removing all existing Archive.today links and adding the domain to Wikipedia’s spam blacklist. A less drastic measure, Option B, suggests deprecating the service to discourage new links while preserving current ones. Option C advocates for maintaining the status quo and taking no action. This is not the first time Archive.today has faced scrutiny; it was previously blacklisted in 2013 over concerns about botnets and linkspamming before being reinstated in 2016.
Proponents of a ban argue that user security must take precedence, even over the encyclopedia’s need for verifiable citations. They contend that references are only trustworthy if they are also safe for users to access. Opponents, however, highlight the unique and irreplaceable role Archive.today plays. They note it employs advanced scraping methods and is often considered more reliable than alternatives like the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine, hosting a vast repository of snapshots unavailable elsewhere. Blocking it, they warn, would create a flood of permanent dead links and disrupt the daily workflow for thousands of editors and readers who depend on its archives. The outcome of this deliberation will significantly impact how Wikipedia balances security concerns with practical access to information.
(Source: Ars Technica)
