Charityhost.org Review - Provider or Dominator!!!

itachikonoha

Is it safe to assume that, this issue became so big that it tainted the name of the provider?

letstayfree

Oh things are getting worse?

bdspice

@jure12 said:

@bdspice said:

@jure12 said:

@Finisher said:

@jure12 said:

@TimboJones said:

@CharityHost_org said:

@hyperblast said: the relationship was first and lastingly disturbed by your snooping. that is beyond question and above all!

You are wrong. Seeing public domain data is not snooping.

Holy shit, he still doesn't get it.

It doesn't matter what the directory name was, it's irrelevant. The action undertook to see public_html was the crime committed. Full. Stop.

If something is PUBLIC then it is PUBLIC, everyone can see it because it is PUBLIC.

If you are sitting in a park on a bench, I walk by and see you sitting in a park on a bench ... have I done something wrong because I saw you?

WTF DUDE !

you can't take this guy seriously

That's exactly right. Read the whole story, don't just extract a small part of the story I told/wrote.
Post a link to my entire story that I wrote buddy !

Why you sound exactly like Charityhost? Also you are here to just justify and promote CH as much as seen in activity.

You ask me why? Why did you upload prohibited content to the server when you knew it was prohibited. I even suspect that this was all set up on your part to happen, that you calculated everything beforehand.

You intentionally uploaded this type of content to see what would happen.

Now you are talking exactly like CH. I am not suspecting but i am almost 99% sure you are the CH. Such a disgrace man. Before asking why i uploaded prohibited content, just read again and again my old comments, ticket recordings. You ignored several time my points as the CH.

DrNutella

@bdspice said:
Can anyone able to create a poll to suspend CH provider tag?

I think we can do this for fun. But it won’t be enforced. And language has to be softened like “do you think hosts like @CharityHost_org should be banned?”

nghialele

@DrNutella said:

@bdspice said:
Can anyone able to create a poll to suspend CH provider tag?

I think we can do this for fun. But it won’t be enforced. And language has to be softened like “do you think hosts like @CharityHost_org should be banned?”

Stop it you trolls

DrNutella

@nghialele said:

@DrNutella said:

@bdspice said:
Can anyone able to create a poll to suspend CH provider tag?

I think we can do this for fun. But it won’t be enforced. And language has to be softened like “do you think hosts like @CharityHost_org should be banned?”

Stop it you trolls

Not trolling bro. Public shaming of not caring about privacy is protected by my first amendment rights. And I can easily enforce it too.

nghialele

@DrNutella said:

@nghialele said:

@DrNutella said:

@bdspice said:
Can anyone able to create a poll to suspend CH provider tag?

I think we can do this for fun. But it won’t be enforced. And language has to be softened like “do you think hosts like @CharityHost_org should be banned?”

Stop it you trolls

Not trolling bro. Public shaming of not caring about privacy is protected by my first amendment rights. And I can easily enforce it too.

Oh you guys have that in your country? Dang.

DrNutella

@nghialele said:

@DrNutella said:

@nghialele said:

@DrNutella said:

@bdspice said:
Can anyone able to create a poll to suspend CH provider tag?

I think we can do this for fun. But it won’t be enforced. And language has to be softened like “do you think hosts like @CharityHost_org should be banned?”

Stop it you trolls

Not trolling bro. Public shaming of not caring about privacy is protected by my first amendment rights. And I can easily enforce it too.

Oh you guys have that in your country? Dang.

Well I think many countries have this right. There are exceptions. This isn’t one of them scenarios.

I also don’t need to enforce it. I don’t think admins will get in the way over a few bucks from a host getting bashed on the forum.

JasonM

@bdspice said: CharityHost-org website anymore. but my experience with them is that much terrible that i wonder how a provider can be that much childish

From CharityHost.org's first thread itself I sensed they are to be avoided at all cost.
then came the "peeping into clients files" drama and it was confirmed they do not belong to this web-hosting ecosystem anymore.
and now this new drama which strongly conclude they are a nightmare to deal with.

CharityHost.org should rename themselves as "GreedyHost" that name suits them more perfect, ain't it?

ServerBachelor

@JasonM said:

@bdspice said: CharityHost-org website anymore. but my experience with them is that much terrible that i wonder how a provider can be that much childish

**From CharityHost.org's first thread itself I sensed they are to be avoided at all cost.

I agree with you, but what gave it away?

then came the "peeping into clients files" drama and it was confirmed they do not belong to this web-hosting ecosystem anymore.
and now this new drama which strongly conclude they are a nightmare to deal with.**

CharityHost.org should rename themselves as "GreedyHost" that name suits them more perfect, ain't it?

Yep. And then we cancel everything from them.

fluffernutter

@Finisher said:

@jure12 said:

@TimboJones said:

@CharityHost_org said:

@hyperblast said: the relationship was first and lastingly disturbed by your snooping. that is beyond question and above all!

You are wrong. Seeing public domain data is not snooping.

Holy shit, he still doesn't get it.

It doesn't matter what the directory name was, it's irrelevant. The action undertook to see public_html was the crime committed. Full. Stop.

If something is PUBLIC then it is PUBLIC, everyone can see it because it is PUBLIC.

If you are sitting in a park on a bench, I walk by and see you sitting in a park on a bench ... have I done something wrong because I saw you?

WTF DUDE !

you can't take this guy seriously

I know it's called charityhost but I really hope you're being paid for all this shilling, otherwise it's just sad.

bdspice

@DrNutella said:

@bdspice said:
Can anyone able to create a poll to suspend CH provider tag?

I think we can do this for fun. But it won’t be enforced. And language has to be softened like “do you think hosts like @CharityHost_org should be banned?”

I hope this type of fun will be caution to such greedy-shadow minded provider. Also it will help Let owner to think such provider should be allow here or not

jmgcaguicla

@ShadowLurker said:
host needs to learn the art of letting go

The... host... art?

TimboJones

@jure12 said:

@TimboJones said:

@jure12 said:

@TimboJones said:

@CharityHost_org said:

@hyperblast said: the relationship was first and lastingly disturbed by your snooping. that is beyond question and above all!

You are wrong. Seeing public domain data is not snooping.

Holy shit, he still doesn't get it.

It doesn't matter what the directory name was, it's irrelevant. The action undertook to see public_html was the crime committed. Full. Stop.

If something is PUBLIC then it is PUBLIC, everyone can see it because it is PUBLIC.

If you are sitting in a park on a bench, I walk by and see you sitting in a park on a bench ... have I done something wrong because I saw you?

WTF DUDE !

It's just a name, it's nothing special WITHOUT a webserver. A webserver doesn't run on an FTP service.

Just renaming a directory to Public doesn't suddenly make it public. If the provider allows anonymous access, HE FUCKED UP, not OP.

You're dumb, but I suspect you're trying to be this obtuse.

I'm convinced you're dumb!
You don't know the difference between public and private, you don't know what the public_html folder is and what it's for.

The clue in public_html is HTML. The clue to you, McFly, is that this was an FTP account.

But why would it be public? It's an FTP server, so only anonymous FTP access would find this.

Also, let me know what browser browses FTP without having to make advanced configuration change. Most popular browsers disabled that by default years ago.

Francisco

@TimboJones said: The clue in public_html is HTML. The clue to you, McFly, is that this was an FTP account.

But why would it be public? It's an FTP server, so only anonymous FTP access would find this.

Also, let me know what browser browses FTP without having to make advanced configuration change. Most popular browsers disabled that by default years ago.

FTP is getting used 'fast and loose' with this.

What Charity sold was effectively a very very very large shared hosting account (directadmin? whatever panel). It isn' intended for hosting a public website, rather as just backup storage/masterbatorium.

Maybe the op had his content in public_html to make it easier to browse and lotion up.

The smart idea would've been for Charity to break/disable/etc the webserver on the servers to force it to always be over FTP. Then again, if he had done that, he wouldn't able to say 'his stuff was public'.

The product should be 'fixed' in this regard. Disable the webserver, local firewall at 80/443, whatever.

Francisco

PineappleM

But if there is no domain pointed to that public_html folder then does it even matter if it’s stored there? Only way to find out is if you manually set the Host header to whatever random domain was set on that FTP account and then access the server, but you’d need to know what domain the account was set to in the first place.

(Unless I understand this all wrong)

jure12

@PineappleM said:
But if there is no domain pointed to that public_html folder then does it even matter if it’s stored there? Only way to find out is if you manually set the Host header to whatever random domain was set on that FTP account and then access the server, but you’d need to know what domain the account was set to in the first place.

(Unless I understand this all wrong)

Doesn't have to be a domain, can be a pure IP address.

EDIT:
It would be good if it looked like this.
https://ftp-us.imperva.com/Web/Account/Login.htm

.. but as far as I understood in his specific case it looked like this (example):
http://185.179.105.210/

mw

if i shoot someone and later find out they deserved it, wou> @jure12 said:

@PineappleM said:
But if there is no domain pointed to that public_html folder then does it even matter if it’s stored there? Only way to find out is if you manually set the Host header to whatever random domain was set on that FTP account and then access the server, but you’d need to know what domain the account was set to in the first place.

(Unless I understand this all wrong)

Doesn't have to be a domain, can be a pure IP address.

EDIT:
It would be good if it looked like this.
https://ftp-us.imperva.com/Web/Account/Login.htm

.. but as far as I understood in his specific case it looked like this (example):
http://185.179.105.210/

you just outed yourself lol

ailice

"public_html" was folder name convention using by control panel to store their file, it doesnt mean any public at all, i just naming which using by apache/old webserver for long time and control panel tend to use it for unknown reason. (For long time it was using not only store HTML static, probably some perl script and PHP).
Also @bdspice was tell not domain pointed and I afraid he got dedicated IP to expose HTTP on network, even "somehow" HTTP was expose on FTP package, Its for sure misconfiguration from provider to make it expose to public.

itachikonoha

@jure12 said:

@PineappleM said:
But if there is no domain pointed to that public_html folder then does it even matter if it’s stored there? Only way to find out is if you manually set the Host header to whatever random domain was set on that FTP account and then access the server, but you’d need to know what domain the account was set to in the first place.

(Unless I understand this all wrong)

Doesn't have to be a domain, can be a pure IP address.

EDIT:
It would be good if it looked like this.
https://ftp-us.imperva.com/Web/Account/Login.htm

.. but as far as I understood in his specific case it looked like this (example):
http://185.179.105.210/

I have said this earlier. @CharityHost_org could have just disabled the webserver (It should have since they advertised it as ftp storage and not shared hosting storage).

If no webserver, then no such drama would have had happened.

@CharityHost_org made error after error as provider.

With all things aside, this is what should have had done.

1. AUP was broken by OP. hence Serve the notice of 48 hours to suspend.
2. Let OP copy the files he needs within that time frame.
3. Suspend the account after 48 hours.

The whole drama began when @CharityHost_org enforced the AUP yet they themselves didn't follow the AUP in the first place.

bdspice

CharityHost.org
PLEASE READ THIS EMAIL IN FULL AND PRINT IT FOR YOUR RECORDS

Dear abdul gofur,

Your FTP Storage account has now been setup and this email contains all the information you will need in order to begin using your account.

New Account Information

=============================

FTP Package: FTP 500GB
FTP account server IPv4 addresses: 23.128.116.100
Domain: ftp.abdulgofur.com
First Payment Amount: $44.00 USD
Recurring Amount: $44.00 USD
Billing Cycle: Annually
Next Due Date: Monday, February 16th, 2026

If you have requested a domain name during sign up, please keep in mind that your domain name will not be visible on the internet instantly. This process is called dns cache propagation and can take a few minutes but up to 48 hours depending on your registrar.

==================

Username: ftpabdul
Password: 5zv5JCjE2lK3

Cyberpanel FTP Control Panel URL: https://ftp01-htx.spectroweb.com:8998

Note: You must accept the SSL warning in your browser for the server SSL cert to login into Cyberpanel control panel.

Uploading Your Data

=============================

You will need a FTP client such as FileZilla or alike. You will also need to create at least 1 FTP user in the Cyberpanel account to login with FTP.

You can upload your files via FTPS.

FTPS Hostname: ftp01-htx.spectroweb.com

Support

=============================

You can find easy tutorials in our knowledgebase: https://charityhost.org/account/knowledgbase

For any support needs, please open a ticket at https://charityhost.org/account

Thank you for choosing CharityHost.org

Reach out anytime with any questions or concerns.

Thank you!

CharityHost.org
https://charityhost.org

visit our website | log in to your account | get support
Copyright © CharityHost.org, All rights reserved.

bdspice

This is the email when i got the server. I have not requested for a domain. Should i worried about public_html or not?

lirrr

new vid idea "crazy hosting provider crashing out"

hyperblast

@bdspice said: You will need a FTP client such as FileZilla or alike

‼

PineappleM

@bdspice said:
This is the email when i got the server. I have not requested for a domain. Should i worried about public_html or not?

No, unless the host hilariously misconfigured the FTP server like @ailice and @itachikonoha were mentioning. That would be a funny twist of events, the host blaming you for their own bad configuration.

So either one of two things happened, both of which are scandalous:

• The host in fact went out of their way to snoop on your files
• They assigned a unique IP address to the HTTP server on your FTP account and made it wholly public (either by accident or by deliberate design to more easily snoop on you)

With HostBrr's storageboxes (which use DirectAdmin), I need both a domain name pointed to the storagebox server, and the files must be in public_html. If no domain name is pointed to the server by a DNS zone, then I can only access the public_html files by overriding the "Host:" header to whatever domain was set on the account (which requires the visitor to know the exact domain name to specify in the "Host" header; it's almost like a password to that end).

Since you didn't request a domain name, either a random publicly-viewable domain name was assigned (gibberish123-characters.domain.tld) or the host assigned a whole public IP to your server. The latter makes little sense from a cost perspective, since that IP assignment is better used on a VPS or an actual server, but then again nothing about this host makes sense. Pick your poison.

(Again this is all assuming my understanding is correct, which could be hilariously wrong... anyone is free to correct me.)

JabJab

@bdspice said: You will need a FTP client such as FileZilla or alike. You will also need to create at least 1 FTP user in the Cyberpanel account to login with FTP.

but hey don't worry, you can browse your data without any account via HTTP!
/s

@bdspice said: You can find easy tutorials in our knowledgebase: https://charityhost.org/account/knowledgbase

404 :-D

Also do you really people believe @CharityHost_org is so rich that hey assigned "public IP" per free FTP service and he gave away hundreds of those? Stahp, it wasn't "per IP" - I am pretty sure he claimed it was some internal domain thing, but I am too lazy to search for it. Also he probably lied.

CloudHopper

So, if I understand this correctly....

@CharityHost_org sold an FTP storage box where any random internet user could access content stored in the public_html folder, regardless of whether the client had explicitly setup a domain to share their content or not?

That sounds more like a giant security hole than an excuse for peeking into a client's private data 😬

mw

my only question is what would have happened if OP wasn't storing porn, and CH snooped on actually private data just because OP was using the storage they were entitled to

everyone has to assume CH snoops on everything if their policy is to look at your data when they see you using your product

techdragon

@JabJab said:

@bdspice said: You will need a FTP client such as FileZilla or alike. You will also need to create at least 1 FTP user in the Cyberpanel account to login with FTP.

but hey don't worry, you can browse your data without any account via HTTP!
/s

@bdspice said: You can find easy tutorials in our knowledgebase: https://charityhost.org/account/knowledgbase

404 :-D

Also do you really people believe @CharityHost_org is so rich that hey assigned "public IP" per free FTP service and he gave away hundreds of those? Stahp, it wasn't "per IP" - I am pretty sure he claimed it was some internal domain thing, but I am too lazy to search for it. Also he probably lied.

Definitely not.

They can't even afford modern servers.

JabJab

@CloudHopper said:
So, if I understand this correctly....

@CharityHost_org sold an FTP storage box where any random internet user could access content stored in the public_html folder, regardless of whether the client had explicitly setup a domain to share their content or not?

That sounds more like a giant security hole than an excuse for peeking into a client's private data 😬

Okey, I did some digging.

@CharityHost_org gave away "FTP Storage" services. People put data in public_html directory via FTP.

@CharityHost_org claims it's publicly accessibility data because of the cyberpanel he is using and client needed to type/provide (any) domain name while registering - no need to configure it, no need to set any DNS records. It uses it internally.
aka: you can find the IP address for panel/host, you can talk with that IP and craft the domain name client provided and you would get a listing of public_html content despite client not configuring anything and/or even being aware. He will also claim you don't understand the product as you, as client that (got) bought a FTP Storage service is supposed to understand cyberpanel.

but hey at least now he added public_html to product description.
https://charityhost.org/ftp-storage/
https://web.archive.org/web/20250000000000*/https://charityhost.org/ftp-storage/

Control and Flexibility
Using FTP gives you a high degree of control over your backup process. You can backup any nix or windows files and directories alike.

vs

Control & Flexibility
You can backup any nix or windows files and directories alike. Free litespeed public asset hosting bonus for data in the public_html directory. Use the domain on the account to host html and assets with free ssl.