archive.today is directing a DDOS attack against my blog

Summary

The author claims archive.today launched a DDOS attack against their blog after they published an investigative piece. The author presents a timeline of events, including GDPR complaints and threatening emails. The author speculates on the motives behind the alleged attack.

Key Takeaways

1. archive.today allegedly used its users as proxies to conduct a DDOS attack against the author's blog, Gyrovague, starting around January 11, 2026.
2. The author's investigation into archive.today's history, tech stack, and funding, published in August 2023, is suggested as a potential motive for the alleged attack.
3. The author received a GDPR complaint and threatening emails, allegedly from individuals associated with archive.today, further escalating the conflict.

Statement Breakdown

• Claimed Facts: 60% of statements the article presents as facts
• Opinions: 25% of statements classified as editorial or subjective
• Claims: 15% of statements surfaced for additional reader evaluation

Credibility & Bias Reasoning

Credibility assessment: The article relies heavily on the author's personal experiences and communications, which are presented with supporting evidence like screenshots and code snippets. External sources like Heise Online and ArsTechnica are mentioned, adding credibility. However, some claims are based on speculation and interpretation of events, lowering the overall score.

Bias assessment: Personal Grievance & Tech Critique. The author clearly presents their perspective as someone targeted by archive.today, framing the events in a negative light. While providing evidence, the narrative focuses on the author's experience and interpretation of the situation. The author also critiques the technical aspects of archive.today's actions.

Note: While the author provides evidence, some claims rely on personal interpretation. Verify details independently.

Claimed Facts (7)

• This is presented as a factual event observed by the author.
• This describes the technical mechanism of the alleged DDOS attack.
• This references a report from a third-party source.
• This recounts a specific notification received by the author.
• This describes a technical change affecting access to the author's blog.
• This is a statement of fact about the author's own publication.
• This is a statement of fact about the reception of the author's blog post.

Opinions (6)

• This expresses the author's subjective experience.
• This reflects the author's assessment of the GDPR complaint.
• This is the author's interpretation of the impact of the blocklist.
• This is the author's subjective assessment of the email exchange.
• This is the author's subjective interpretation of archive.today's actions.
• This is the author's personal opinion on the webmaster's claimed motive.

Claims (6)

• This is an emotional appeal based on a perceived threat.
• This is a threat with unsubstantiated claims.
• This is a sarcastic remark with no factual basis.
• This is a summary of a private communication, difficult to verify independently.
• This relies on second-hand information from unverified sources.
• This is a statement of uncertainty, lacking concrete information.

Key Sources

• Author — Blogger
• Heise Online — News Publication
• Nora Puchreiner — Alleged archive.today representative
• @[email protected], @[email protected] — Mastodon Users