Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old August 26th, 2017 #1
Blusnayl
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 63
Blusnayl
Default It Appears Stormfront Has Been Compromised

I had been there for nearly a decade of the sites two decade run.

Just a heads up that this site may be next. You folks should best prepare.

White Nationalists are having to move to the darknet. I'd look into it if you still value a social medium in the times that are about to come.
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #2
Hugo Böse
Jeunesse Dorée
 
Hugo Böse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Four Seasons Jalalabad
Posts: 8,544
Hugo Böse
Default

Shock! Stormfront Allegedly Broke, Nearly Ready to Shut Down

https://saboteur365.wordpress.com/20...omment-page-1/

Black´s been threatening to shut it down for years.
__________________
_______
Political correctness is an intellectual gulag.
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #3
Jeffrey Smither
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 3,319
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugo Böse View Post
Shock! Stormfront Allegedly Broke, Nearly Ready to Shut Down

https://saboteur365.wordpress.com/20...omment-page-1/

Black´s been threatening to shut it down for years.
Many say he makes money off SF. I can't see how it cost 7k a month.

Anyway, I was banned there awhile ago and I wasn't a sustaining member which is a factor$.

I like it here much better.
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #4
Crowe
Senior Member
 
Crowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,355
Crowe
Default

I haven't been keeping tabs on Stormfront, but was anything mentioned by Don Black recently, like within a week of the site going down? If this was a ploy for donations, I don't see why this isn't something he would have mentioned prior to this? Like "we're going to get shut down if we don't make a certain amount", etc. Was this a desperate month for SF? How much below their $7500 mark were they?

It looks like there was a "hold" placed on the registrar. But I'm not convinced that Don Black couldn't have done this himself. I've seen no mention on top enemy websites of there being any claims of victory here like there was when (((they))) got Daily Stormer shut down.

We haven't heard anything from David Duke either. And he has an invested interest in Stormfront.

FYI, I still think it's too early to know for sure exactly what happened. It wouldn't surprise me either way, honestly. Let's wait until we know more before jumping to conclusions. I'm not seeing anything definitive so far.
__________________
Low-IQ bible scholars are legion, the big book o' bullshit is catnip to the underbrained. --ALEX LINDER

Last edited by Crowe; August 26th, 2017 at 01:58 PM.
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #5
Jeffrey Smither
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 3,319
Default

Did the processing service he use for donations decide to cut ties with the website? There are other payment processing companies to use.
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #6
Dan T N Ford
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 848
Dan T N Ford
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowe View Post
I haven't been keeping tabs on Stormfront, but was anything mentioned by Don Black recently, like within a week of the site going down? If this was a ploy for donations, I don't see why this isn't something he would have mentioned prior to this? Like "we're going to get shut down if we don't make a certain amount", etc. Was this a desperate month for SF? How much below their $7500 mark were they?

It looks like there was a "hold" placed on the registrar. But I'm not convinced that Don Black couldn't have done this himself. I've seen no mention on top enemy websites of there being any claims of victory here like there was when (((they))) got Daily Stormer shut down.

We haven't heard anything from David Duke either. And he has an invested interest in Stormfront.

FYI, I still think it's too early to know for sure exactly what happened. It wouldn't surprise me either way, honestly. Let's wait until we know more before jumping to conclusions. I'm not seeing anything definitive so far.
Well, Don Black gets a lot of flack here on VNN, but I seriously doubt that it would be in his interest to"shut down"SF..............how would that even work?
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #7
garryowen
Junior Member
 
garryowen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 23
garryowen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowe View Post
I haven't been keeping tabs on Stormfront, but was anything mentioned by Don Black recently, like within a week of the site going down?
I was a member there, and I didn't see anything in that time frame that sounded like things were that desperate. I might have missed it though.

Quote:
It looks like there was a "hold" placed on the registrar. But I'm not convinced that Don Black couldn't have done this himself.
From whois.com:
Quote:
Domain Information
Domain: stormfront.org
Registrar: Network Solutions, LLC
Registration Date: 1995-01-11
Expiration Date: 2018-01-10
Updated Date: 2017-08-25
Status:
clientDeleteProhibited
clientHold
clientTransferProhibited
clientUpdateProhibited
Name Servers:
dave.ns.cloudflare.com
linda.ns.cloudflare.com
Note that the registration date was 1995-01-11, and the expiration date was 2018-01-10. This appears to correspond with when the site first went up, and also appears to indicate that the domain name services were paid through early January of 2018. Note further that one of the status flags is listed as clientHold - which normally indicates that the domain name is being held by the DNS provider and not allowed to be used by or released to the website holder (ie, Don Black). This could be for a short period of time (for example, to clear up some dispute about payment or content) or indefinitely. Since it appears that the site name was paid through early January, that would tend to indicate that the site name may have been sent into the same kind of limbo affecting the Daily Stormer (for which whois also shows its status as clientHold).

Even if their hosting provider terminated them (or were terminated by Black), whether for content or non-payment or whatever, the DNS would not show a status of clientHold. Since website names are normally paid in advance, there would be no reason to put the site name into clientHold if they had simply lost their domain hosting service.

I think the most likely reason is that there's some dispute about content, but who knows. I would think it would be somewhat surprising, because there was a real attempt on that site to remove any content that was clearly illegal, or even a bit 'over-the-top' as deemed by the moderators, who granted could sometimes be a little heavy-handed in their self-censorship.

If that's the reason, and the dispute (whatever it is) isn't cleared up in a few days, then I'd have to say that nobody is safe at this point.

Quote:
I've seen no mention on top enemy websites of there being any claims of victory here like there was when (((they))) got Daily Stormer shut down. We haven't heard anything from David Duke either. And he has an invested interest in Stormfront.

FYI, I still think it's too early to know for sure exactly what happened. It wouldn't surprise me either way, honestly. Let's wait until we know more before jumping to conclusions. I'm not seeing anything definitive so far.
Agreed.

Sean.
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #8
Emily Henderson
Intellijintly Dezined
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Pre-Rapture, USA ⚛️
Posts: 3,871
Emily Henderson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowe View Post
I haven't been keeping tabs on Stormfront, but was anything mentioned by Don Black recently, like within a week of the site going down? If this was a ploy for donations, I don't see why this isn't something he would have mentioned prior to this? Like "we're going to get shut down if we don't make a certain amount", etc. Was this a desperate month for SF? How much below their $7500 mark were they?

It looks like there was a "hold" placed on the registrar. But I'm not convinced that Don Black couldn't have done this himself. I've seen no mention on top enemy websites of there being any claims of victory here like there was when (((they))) got Daily Stormer shut down.

We haven't heard anything from David Duke either. And he has an invested interest in Stormfront.

FYI, I still think it's too early to know for sure exactly what happened. It wouldn't surprise me either way, honestly. Let's wait until we know more before jumping to conclusions. I'm not seeing anything definitive so far.
Jebusfront was seized by domain hosts.

Means they aren't even allowed to upload to a new server.

http://www.knoxnews.com/story/news/2...sts/604902001/
__________________
"Inquiry and doubt are essential checks against deception."--Richard Carrier
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #9
Jeffrey Smither
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 3,319
Default

Read the article. Some communist lawyers group worked on getting it removed. While I dislike stormfront, that's bullshit. Fucking JEWdicial system. I fucking hate lawyers and the JEWdicial system.

Hopefully our Supreme Leader Linder doesn't let this shit happen.
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #10
Dan T N Ford
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 848
Dan T N Ford
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emily Henderson View Post
Jebusfront was seized by domain hosts.

Means they aren't even allowed to upload to a new server.

http://www.knoxnews.com/story/news/2...sts/604902001/
Regardless of SF`s reputation here,this is very bad news for all who value free-speech!

Last edited by Dan T N Ford; August 28th, 2017 at 05:29 AM.
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #11
Eire
Member
 
Eire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 349
Blog Entries: 1
Eire
Default Is it legal.

knoxnews.com

appears to have been seized by its website host, Network Solutions, LLC.

The forum disappeared Friday. WhoIs, a web service that tracks site ownership, reported the Stormfront domain's status as "under hold."

According to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, a nonprofit that coordinates name spaces on the Internet, a hold status is an uncommon status that indicates a site is under legal dispute or about to be deleted.

Network Solutions has also prohibited Stormfront from updating, transferring or deleting its web forum on its own. That means Stormfront's web masters cannot re-introduce the site on another domain.

Should Network Solutions go through with deleting the website itself, any re-emerging version would have to start from scratch.


They had awesome pictures and info library there. Looks like all sites with high traffic will be shuttened first.
muh constitution.


ADDENDUM:
Anglin posted regarding the knoxvillnews article:

This is inaccurate information. They have been giving inaccurate information since this shutdown began. Newsweek did a long piece where they confused web-hosting, domain name registry and DDoS protection.

I get that journalists are not tech experts, but it is somewhat absurd that they don’t have someone review these posts.

Stormfront, I assume, still has all of their data on their server, which is separate from the domain registry. All the domain registry does is resolve the IP address of the site into the letters that you type in your address bar – “stormfront.org.”

What you are reading now on the Darkweb version of the Daily Stormer is simply a redirection of our server to the Onion address.

Last edited by Eire; August 26th, 2017 at 03:23 PM.
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #12
garryowen
Junior Member
 
garryowen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 23
garryowen
Default

From the article:

Quote:
Network Solutions has also prohibited Stormfront from updating, transferring or deleting its web forum on its own. That means Stormfront's web masters cannot re-introduce the site on another domain.

Should Network Solutions go through with deleting the website itself, any re-emerging version would have to start from scratch.
I don't believe that they can legally do that, because the only thing that Network Solutions controls is the Stormfront name (ie, stormfront.org).

There's absolutely nothing preventing the same content from being re-hosted under a different domain name (and possibly a different web content server, depending on whether they were booted off their hosting service as well) - for example, stormfront.us or stormsite.tw. The journalists don't appear to be very familiar with the way the Internet works (not surprising in this day and age, when journalism has mostly degenerated to the level of the National Enquirer).

The problem, of course, will be finding a DNS service that will be willing to sell a domain name to Don for that purpose. This may no longer be possible in the US, given the anti-free speech climate here nowadays, but it may well be possible elsewhere.

If nothing else, there's always the .onion network.

Sean.
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #13
Gunter
Registered User
 
Gunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 13
Gunter
Default

A more comprehensive article from Kikington Times:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...white-suprema/
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #14
Crowe
Senior Member
 
Crowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,355
Crowe
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emily Henderson View Post
Jebusfront was seized by domain hosts.

Means they aren't even allowed to upload to a new server.

http://www.knoxnews.com/story/news/2...sts/604902001/
Don Black hosts his own server in his own home. SF's data is on his server, not theirs. If he's got the data, he can do whatever he wants with it. Including open the website back up under a different domain name. He might have to do what Anglin did by moving the website to the dark web.
__________________
Low-IQ bible scholars are legion, the big book o' bullshit is catnip to the underbrained. --ALEX LINDER
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #15
littlefieldjohn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048
littlefieldjohn
Default

It is unclear whether this was the result of the domain registrar companies or of ICANN. The latter organization used to be under the control of the US government, but it was transferred into private ownership in late 2016—a move which has left the right to be on the internet in the hands of a handful of tech industry companies.


http://www.newobserveronline.com/201...as-second.html
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #16
Dawn Cannon
Senior Member
 
Dawn Cannon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Waiting for the solar micronova
Posts: 4,238
Dawn Cannon
Default Controlling the last free voice in the world

Controlling the Internet/ICANN

https://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p=1666609
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #17
Emily Henderson
Intellijintly Dezined
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Pre-Rapture, USA ⚛️
Posts: 3,871
Emily Henderson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowe View Post
Don Black hosts his own server in his own home. SF's data is on his server, not theirs. If he's got the data, he can do whatever he wants with it. Including open the website back up under a different domain name. He might have to do what Anglin did by moving the website to the dark web.
Looks like the 'journalists' may have lied (what a surprise).

However, it depends on why it's held whether he can upload to a new server or not.

If it's for legal reasons, that will have to be settled first. But that is usually a totally different thing, it's an error code 451, which would mean it's blocked for legal reasons:

https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/201...legal-reasons/

Why or legality of it is not known as of now.

If Censorfront goes up on darkweb then he is not having a legal issue, just means it's part of the WN purge.
__________________
"Inquiry and doubt are essential checks against deception."--Richard Carrier
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #18
Emily Henderson
Intellijintly Dezined
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Pre-Rapture, USA ⚛️
Posts: 3,871
Emily Henderson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by littlefieldjohn View Post
It is unclear whether this was the result of the domain registrar companies or of ICANN. The latter organization used to be under the control of the US government, but it was transferred into private ownership in late 2016—a move which has left the right to be on the internet in the hands of a handful of tech industry companies.


http://www.newobserveronline.com/201...as-second.html
Lots of red tape on whom you let have control of what when you own anything, website or otherwise.

This is why cyberlaw is so important.

I wrote during the Trump campaign about that on SF, including the TPP agreement that Hillary (and Pence) had been supporters of which had all manner of cyberlaw that would make 'hate' speech illegal in an 'international' kind of way, meaning no freedom anywhere.

They have several new similar laws they're workin' on re the internet, including weaving it into international trade agreement law.
__________________
"Inquiry and doubt are essential checks against deception."--Richard Carrier
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #19
Dan T N Ford
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 848
Dan T N Ford
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emily Henderson View Post
Lots of red tape on whom you let have control of what when you own anything, website or otherwise.

This is why cyberlaw is so important.

I wrote during the Trump campaign about that on SF, including the TPP agreement that Hillary (and Pence) had been supporters of which had all manner of cyberlaw that would make 'hate' speech illegal in an 'international' kind of way, meaning no freedom anywhere.

They have several new similar laws they're workin' on re the internet, including weaving it into international trade agreement law.
Agreed! Someone at SF BADLY Fed-up!

Anyway, there was way TOO MUCH support for CHUMP on SF!
 
Old August 26th, 2017 #20
Dan T N Ford
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 848
Dan T N Ford
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emily Henderson View Post
Lots of red tape on whom you let have control of what when you own anything, website or otherwise.

This is why cyberlaw is so important.

I wrote during the Trump campaign about that on SF, including the TPP agreement that Hillary (and Pence) had been supporters of which had all manner of cyberlaw that would make 'hate' speech illegal in an 'international' kind of way, meaning no freedom anywhere.

They have several new similar laws they're workin' on re the internet, including weaving it into international trade agreement law.
Agreed! Good post!
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:37 PM.
Page generated in 0.13405 seconds.