>>7171
Someone could have reported this particular website for any of the following criteria (Picture included).

The fucking owner himself even stated in the policy statement that defamation of Justin Bieber, Opera Winfrey, and himself was forbidden.

They are trying to censor real news.

Probably something involving the cp spam.

>>7171
Censorship. Someone is reporting endchan to get the domains seized. Similar to what happened with 8chan.co. Admin can't really do anything, it's just the way the web is.

Stay strong endchan, brave the storm. Also the onion should still work.

>>7176
>Also the onion should still work.
Everyone should have been using the hidden service anyway.

http://s6424n4x4bsmqs27.onion

>GoDaddy
You were warned.
What's odd is the silence from admins site wide.
>>7176
It's librechan all over again.
>the way web is
Domain registration isn't the http "web"
Semantics aside, admins asked for this the moment they registered with GoDaddy.
>>7177
.onion, .bit, .chan all suffer the same problems ICANN registration domains suffer:
Centralized trust
Only blockchain w/PKI or PKI addressable content is the only way free. Study material for the ignorant:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zooko%27s_triangle#Solutions
Freenet and GNUNet GADS

>>7171
We confirmed it was CP related. We have deleted the reported files and are waiting on the registrar to see if we're going to get it back.

We believe someone is posting CP, deleting the post but lynxchan keeps the file on the server. We're working on a complete purge.

>>7175
ding

>>7176
And precisely why we had multiple domains.

>>7179
GoDaddy? who's using GoDaddy?
Endchan.xyz is with namecheap
The .nets are with name.com

>>7179
>.onion
>suffer the same problems ICANN registration domains suffer
>Centralized trust
Ooh, so close, buddy. You were almost not retarded. Then, well...

You would do well to actually read the Wikipedia article that you posted. And this: https://www.torproject.org/docs/hidden-services.html.en (which, amusingly, refers to the same Wikipedia article).

>>7178 1) thx4official response
2) forgot about .net, multiple domain tolerance++
3) Read who.is took endchan.xyz by GoDaddy
4) namecheap ToS is still just as bad
>>7181
Note "ignorant" naturally bears no derogatory. The torproject's HDirs still depended on a centralized WoT, it doesn't allow democracy or popularization to lead what an address is or is not. Whose to s6424n4x4bsmqs27.onion is endchan's true address or fbi.gov's secret portal or Series batan 4x4 site? You are still trusting that HDir to accurately yield you an address, when mathematically a blockchain can prove you the address you are seeking is the correct one everytime to verify their key.

I have no idea why the whois record you're seeing says GoDaddy, not even I'm dumb enough to register an imageboard domain with those assholes. I registered with Namecheap, the whois records I'm seeing say Namecheap and I'm trying to respond to the ticket on Namecheap's website.

That said, there's been no word from the abuse department, so I suspect it's going to go to Monday at the least. I'm sorry, endchan, I fucked up. (For the record, Namecheap's actually been chill about previous reports we've gotten, so I'm hopeful this can be resolved and I can get my domain back.)

>>7182
I'm pretty sure that a DHT (what Tor uses to store hidden service descriptors) isn't the same thing as a web of trust. Based on my understanding of how Tor uses its DHT you'd need a collision attack and some manipulation of which nodes are online when to purge an existing descriptor and replace it with your own, especially since descriptors are signed by the originating service. That's not to say that the ICANN system isn't a crock and Namecoin isn't a good idea, but I don't think you're 100% on the ball here.

>>7181
He is at least half right, if the Tor project wanted to block onion addresses they could in one update. They just choose not to until they are forced to. That is a trust issue.

>>7184
>He is at least half right,
No, he is not. He clearly does not understand how hidden services work.

>if the Tor project wanted to block onion addresses they could in one update.
And if the providers of a blockchain-based name system (which he's shilling) wanted to block or manipulate blockchain-based adresses, they could in one update.

>>7183 >>7184 >>7187
It's fine to misunderstand, allow me to clarify:
-Group A of HDirs approve s6424n4x4bsmqs27.onion is endchan's true address
-Group B believes s6424n4x4bsmqs27 actually belongs to FBI's endchan mirrors
-Group C Series batan 4x4 site
How does a client verify with no knowledge of the public key belonging to endchan is indeed accessing enchan's server when querying s6424n4x4bsmqs27.onion?
Trust is being applied at the HDir level: still centralized, even if Groups are being trusted to keep the correct keys.
Nothing in the technical level >>7184 implies, since the assumption I'm maintaining is that everyone here reads code.
Therefore >>7187 's comment dismisses the notion people cannot or will not read how their blockchain address will be formed.
Note I did bring up Freenet and GNUNet's addressing, which does not use blockchain technology.
I do welcome better suggestions if you have other takes.

>>7188
>Group A of HDirs
There is no such thing as an "HDir" in the Tor network.
>Group B believes
HSDirs do not "believe" anything.

You continue to make it clear that you have no idea what you're talking about.

>I do welcome better suggestions
Honestly? I suggest you stop posting illiterate explanations of things you don't understand. But since you probably won't do that, you could at least learn English better, so I don't have to decipher your misunderstandings before laughing at them.

The domain is back up. If you link to endchan (mostly altchan operators who want to crosslink and sportschan.org bro) you may want to change your links back so users don't have to set their preferences again, but it isn't mandatory. Also OdiliTime's quick fix for HTTPS on endchan.net stopped endchan.xyz's cert from being served, so HTTPS currently returns a bad domain warning for endchan.xyz; hopefully we'll get that fixed soon so that we have HTTPS on both domains, but if you have your heart set you can click through the warning if you're getting the endchan.net cert.

What board had the CP that was causing a problem anyway? Would like to know which areas are dangerous for safety reasons.

>>7193
What I have done as a percaution is to stop browsing or even sadly clicking the overboard. That was how I lurked I just refreshed the overboard. the second one sees this pathetic shit immediatly its a problem and there is a flight reflex to quickly get off the page. Having seen it on the overboard I can tell by the post numbers that it is being posted on /b/ a lot. Even /pol/.

I now use the home page to see the latest posts. a lot of it is on /draw/ I think.

You can tell its like the spam raids that its a guided botnet and or manually posted as an attack on the site. Just from having seen the overboard I think /sp/ is somehow tied to the int* goons and they have names for the people that spam the site. Out of those spammers I think one of them is a pedo and that might be the person doing it. If its one person.

>>7194
The problem isn't so much it gets posted, when a mod deletes it they can delete the file and it's gone. A user however deletes the post but it leaves the file in the cache. Lynx really needs a cache browser/manager for this.

Odilitime, I'm wondering if you're familiar enough with the file naming structure of the CP that was advertised across multiple boards. I'm saying this because we know who this was. Such left-side middle random keyboard mashed file names are the same as the /pol/ and /sp/ spammer. We are familiar with this asshole.

>>7193
>>7194
amazing FUD my dude

>>7195
Yeah, this was the wakeup call we needed to finally turn on autopurging of orphaned files so whoever or whatever did this can't do it again. For the record Lynx added a file lookup feature to the media manager (so you can look up files by md5sum instead of paging through every file in the cache or going straight to mongo and deleting the file from gridfs) to 1.9, which is currently in beta.

>>7196
pic related, the only CP posts I've ever seen are the same spam posts every imageboard gets

>>7206
I dont know what you think is FUD I am just staying off the overboard because you see it a couple times and dont want to have to keep seeing it randomly.The easiest way for me was to not be on the overboard.

If your talking about assuming /sp/ knows the spammer then Who is pedbro? I assumed that was one of the spammers along with another spammer named flamesbro?

I never open up the threads to see the context but I guess it is memes that I am unfamiliar with.

>>7207
also its not like its unsafe to go on the overboard. I just go on it a lot because I find its the best way along with EOS to see posts. However the spammer may be posting that shit after controversial subjects like how /pol/ had to sticky like 10 threads because they really want to discredit or shut it down.

You guys are on it with deleting it but the shitheads posting it is FUD because it is trying to paint us as pedos. Me wanting to not see that is not FUD

>>7194
broseph, we at /sp/ bully /int*/feriors every time they show up and I've reported every babekids.tk spampost I've seen. Flamesbro russian spammer is a gud boy who wants us all to achieve financial independence and sexual ecstasy via metro prostitutki.

To insinuate /sp/ tolerates pedos rustles my jimmies.

>>7209
I will also add that the only place here I've seen an actual pedo/hebe doing actual posting (as opposed to spamming) was in /tech/ a couple weeks ago and I called his bitch ass out on it. He was doing the typical pedo dogwhistle of
>post "le random" photos of 12 year old girls with on-topic posts then play innocent when called out

>>7209
my bad

>>7211
no worries mate

>>7210
Holy shit, anon, you're still on about that? How anally annihilated can you get?

Get a life, dude.

Also, I'd hardly call your normie-tier sniveling "calling my bitch ass out".

As I said before, if you see a photograph of an adolescent human female, clothed, engaged in everyday activities, and your mind immediately jumps to sexual thoughts, you should seek help immediately as you are a danger to the community. Pervert.

>>7206
Sure I'll screenshot next time, censor the shit, and hope the FBI doesn't kick down my door.

>>7213
you're not fooling anyone faggot. Honestly if this site continues to tolerate your obvious hebe shit then y'all look suspect. Anyone can't see what's going on is a retard or a hebe themself and deserves a slow death.

>>7222
>you're not fooling anyone faggot.
>faggot
>but wants to make an accusation of attraction to adolescent females
You poor, confused cunt. You're just lashing out without thinking. As usual.

Tell anon, buddy. Why are you so worked up about this? Where did your uncle touch you? Was it in your peepee place? Or your bumbum? Poor guy. It wasn't your fault. Now calm down.

>Honestly if this site continues to tolerate your obvious hebe shit then y'all look suspect.
If you seriously have a problem with legal photographs that aren't even in the ballpark of being DOST concerns being posted, you don't even need to go back to 8chan. You need to go waaaaaaay back to 4chan and fellate Hiroshima Nagasaki's 3 inch Nip wang in gratitude for the hugbox he has created that doesn't even acknowledge the existence of human females under the age of 18. How cucked can you get, buddy? Sad!

>>7206
Here's some sufficient evidence:
>>>/AM/22656
Same file naming tactic as the nigger spammer, and I'm sure I read you saying once that you were familiar with him from observing /pol/. Globally reported first. That's why the report will say, "SHOW THIS TO BALROG".

>>7228
I'm not familiar with the nigger spammer, but that kind of spam has been around for a while though on many sites.
It could just be a switch to a different tactic though. Or it's a coincidence.
>>7206
I don't think it's FUD. It just stays up on /draw/ much longer, maybe because it's a spammed board that gets less traffic compared to others.

>>7224
you're such a pathetic faggot. everyone knows why you post pictures of 10 year old girls, it's a pedo dogwhistle and I've seen you and your friend do it on imageboards for years. I already explained it, I know you saw it so the only reason I'm responded is so the other motherfuckers here can pull their heads out of their goddamned ass and ban your fucking sick ass. My conversation with you is done. Quit acting fucking stupid mods and board owners and tolerating this shit, like you dont know what this motherfucker's MO is. Its a goddamned disgrace and you oughta fucking quit being tolerant of it.

>>7256
>I already explained it,
And I already pointed out why everything you wrote is laughable and wrong. This most recent hyperventilation of yours is just a repetition of your ridiculous whining. I'm only responding because, holy shit, you really did suck dick every night growing up, didn't you? I was just kidding about that, but there's no way you'd be this triggered if you weren't your uncle's or stepdad's fucktoy growing up. Shit sux, man, but you can't have a mental breakdown like this every time you see a child. See a therapist. I wish you luck on the road back to mental health.