https://github.com/zedeus/nitter/issues/1150#issuecomment-18...
Extremely not-encouraging.
I didn't think much of it when I got an email with the subject "Njalla: New Message", and the body just being a link, while traveling.
This is not what I would call professional behavior by Njalla. Apparently everything they send you, including "hey try our new iOS app in the app store!", comes in the form of "Njalla: New Message <hyperlink>". So you have to click-login-read every one of those "new app in the app store!" spams in order to not miss the "hey we might suspend your domain" messages. And of course you can't write spam filtering rules for any of this since it's all forced through a browser flow instead of your mail client. Great.
And this login-to-read-the-link is with the credentials that control transfers of your domain -- heaven forbid you might not want to keep those on every machine from which you read email...
I've always wanted to own my domain anonymously and considered moving it to Njalla, but the idea that they could evaporate and I'd lose control of my domain forever put me off. Now I have another reason.
You seem to have selectively ignored everything about this discussion except "unhelpful subject line". All of Amazon's emails have a complete body with all the important text instead of just a "click link to read". Spamfiltering against this works very well.
Compare apples to apples: what do Amazon's account suspension emails look like?
https://github.com/zedeus/nitter/issues/1150#issuecomment-18...
That is extremely disturbing. Njalla is the owner-of-record (i.e. nominee) for all domains registered through them, rather than merely the registrar. If they run off with your domain you have significantly fewer options for dealing with it than with any other registrar.
I expected better than "shoot first ask questions later" from them. At least shoot while asking the questions; the owner should've had an explanation for the suspension waiting in their inbox.
Nitter should have anticipated this and planned accordingly. The law is the law. Njalla is a wonderful service but they are not outlaws. They are structured in such a way to make it more difficult to stop their customers, and they hold less data about them. But they operate within the law.
If you use their service and don’t take the adequate steps to protect your privacy, they will give away your data in accordance with the laws of the domicile they operate under.
You're jumping the gun here. The primary concern is the absurd radio silence from Njalla. Not acceptable. Once they rectify that maybe there will be other problems revealed, but at the moment them being AWOL is the issue.
> The idea behind Njalla is to make sure that your visibility to the public is minimised if you need it to be. We're not going to give your customer data out easily. However, we will help if there are legal merits to any formal government requests to our system. If you use our service in a way that affects anyones health or safety, we reserve the right to suspend your service.
Does this mean Twitter gave a very valid legal threat? Or worse, is there some Twitter content that is being mirrored that is unsavory and triggered an immediate suspension from Njalla? This is unfortunately very common for Nitter in particular [0] [1].
[0]: https://github.com/zedeus/nitter/wiki/DMCA-templates [1]: https://github.com/zedeus/nitter/issues/482
Since it mirrors all twitter content that seems almost a given.
That does not mean they're ok with illegal things... such as CSAM which was the case here. They're not a bullet proof registrar, they're meant to be private, they're not even a registrar
I've replaced 99 percent of my Twitter use with RSS now and oh my is it a more pleasant experience.
Good workaround, but not so helpful for iOS.
https://nitter.net(c/o 185.246.188.57)/something/other
I guess links would still be broken though. Maybe a browser feature for a hosts file?
GET / HTTP/2
Host: nitter.net
[…other headers]
A mainstream provider will handle this better.
He totally is responsible, the argument "i only serve it because twitter serves it" is bad in my opinion, he's still serving it, just because Twitter does it too doesn't absolve him of all responsibility
Is the certificate invalid? Is the DNS record missing? Was the IP address found, but is returning malformed answers? Is it returning nothing at all? Can I even reach any DNS servers, or is my connection to the internet itself dead?
The browser isn't telling, not even behind a "show details" button. There's only "trouble" and "an error", and some patronizing anthropomorphism with the "Hmm."
- Was the IP address found, but is returning malformed answers?
- Is it returning nothing at all?
Firefox returns "Your connection is not secure" for the first, and the raw data from the HTTP request for the others. (Or Secure Connection Failed for the second if you try to use HTTPS)
"We’re having trouble finding that site." is only ever given if the browser tries to do a DNS lookup and does not get an answer.
tbh I can totally understand why they acted this way.
1. Twitter posts something infringing and waits for it to sync to the clone.
2. Twitter removes the infringing post.
3. Copyright owner DMCAs the clone. Some little bird tells it about the infringing post.
4. After the clone does nothing, copyright owner DMCAs its infrastructure providers (ISP, DNS), who promptly kill the clone.
Given sufficiently big copyright owner (Warner Bros, etc.), providers will probably ban clone’s billing account permanently for good measure.
To avoid this scenario, all the clone needs to do is be a good citizen and respect DMCA takedown notices.