Open-source projects are built on collaboration, but what happens when a dispute turns malicious? The Wikipedia community is considering blacklisting Archive.today, a popular archiving website, after its maintainer allegedly launched a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack against a blogger who criticized the site. This incident raises questions about acceptable conduct within the open-source ecosystem and the responsibilities of website operators.
Key Takeaways
- Wikipedia is considering banning Archive.today due to a DDoS attack allegedly launched by its maintainer.
- The DDoS attack was reportedly triggered by a blogger’s criticism of Archive.today.
- The incident highlights the potential for abuse and the need for clear guidelines in the open-source community.
- The Wikimedia Foundation has stated they are monitoring the situation and considering the implications for Wikipedia’s referencing practices.
What Triggered the Conflict Between Archive.today and the Blogger?
The conflict reportedly began when a blogger, Patokallio, criticized Archive.today on his blog. In response, the maintainer of Archive.today allegedly launched a DDoS attack (Distributed Denial of Service) against Patokallio’s website. DDoS attacks flood a target server with traffic, making it unavailable to legitimate users. In emails referenced in Ars Technica’s report, the Archive.today maintainer appeared to confirm the attack. The maintainer’s actions were apparently triggered by Patokallio including a link to Wikipedia’s page on the Streisand effect in one email. The Archive.today maintainer viewed this as a threat.
The situation escalated further with personal attacks and threats, as detailed in Patokallio’s blog post. A Tumblr blog seemingly managed by Archive.today’s founder criticized Patokallio and accused him of hiding his real name. The emails also contained threats of creating a “gay dating app” using Patokallio’s name in retaliation, and alluded to Patokallio’s grandfather being a Nazi. Patokallio noted that the DDoS attack didn’t cause him any real harm because of his flat fee hosting plan.
What Are the Implications for Wikipedia and the Open-Source Community?
The Wikimedia Foundation, the organization behind Wikipedia, is now considering the implications of this incident. Wikipedia relies on Archive.today as a source for archiving URLs, ensuring that references remain accessible even if the original website goes offline. Blacklisting Archive.today would mean that Wikipedia editors could no longer cite the website as a source. This could potentially disrupt Wikipedia’s referencing practices, as Archive.today is a valuable tool for preserving information.
The incident also raises broader questions about the conduct of maintainers of online resources. “The actions of Archive.today’s maintainer are unacceptable and undermine the principles of open collaboration,” said Bruce Schneier, security technologist and cryptographer, in a recent interview with Wired. “Accountability is key in maintaining trust within the open-source community.” The debate within the Wikipedia community highlights the challenges of balancing the benefits of open access with the need to address harmful behavior. According to W3Techs, Archive.org is used by 0.4% of all websites.
Products/Companies Mentioned
- Archive.today – An archiving website that takes snapshots of webpages.
- Wikipedia – A free, open-content online encyclopedia created through the collaborative effort of a community of users known as Wikipedians. It is the largest and most-read reference work in history.
- Wikimedia Foundation – The non-profit organization that operates Wikipedia and other related projects.
- Tumblr – A microblogging and social networking website, founded in 2007 and currently owned by Automattic.
- Cloudflare – A web infrastructure and website security company, providing content delivery network (CDN) services, DDoS mitigation, and other services.
What This Means
- For Wikipedia editors: The potential blacklisting of Archive.today could require finding alternative archiving services and updating existing citations.
- For website operators: This incident serves as a reminder of the importance of responsible behavior and the potential consequences of malicious actions.
- For the open-source community: The situation highlights the need for clear guidelines and mechanisms for addressing conflicts and promoting ethical conduct.
