New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
It's possible they see either you or your data as terrible, so they banned you.
What should I do now?
Swipe left and find a better match.
My account was banned.
Not responding to every single thread on this board that mentions Hetzner would be a good start.
Contact them, they will state the reason and probably ask you to provide more information and ID proof, if you pass their fraud checks they will activate your account, do not try to create multiple accounts
I now want them to restore my account; I need to get my data back.I don't understand why they deleted my account.
I'm sure they have some sort of appeal process, contact their support. All we can do here is make fun of your plight, sorry.
What an unlucky day!
You complain too much, i try for almost 2years untill it's success somehow and was after they add new verification method and again they didn't accept my application and review it then done
migrate to https://cloudblast.io/
Just one word: BACKUP
In another thread OP quote hetzner notice:
We have noticed irregularities on your account, so we unfortunately cannot have a contract with you at the present time. We have therefore had to close your account.
What is "irregularities" means?
If they told you, then they wouldn’t be useful filters anymore and they would have to move to using signals that they hadn’t told you about, which creates the same situation but with more blacklisted IPs in the short term.
So, this is something about abuse (spam, porn, torrents)?
I don't know. We'll never know. Could be statistical risk analysis based on any number of factors.
go with other provider
Unfortunate they aren't willing to at least send you a VM image or something.
That's called security through obscurity and does not stop bad actors.
The reality is that it's easier to defend an automated decision with a vague explanation than to defend precise reasoning which, being automated, has a decent likelihood of being weak. They can save money on support overhead that way. Hetzner is not unique in that regard, and this crappy practice is, unfortunately, quite normal.
I assume you've never dealt with abuse at scale. Telling people what you are looking for to proactively identify threats to your service does one of two things:
There is no sane argument for openly telling people how to get around abuse prevention mechanisms. It's exactly why open source spam filters suck in the days of AI: You can't tell people what you are looking for to define a bad actor if your goal is to reduce the number of bad actors.
So yes, "security through obscurity" when defined that way absolutely has its value. No matter how much it makes armchair security experts screech like banshees.
I have, and it only stops the low-hanging fruit. Maybe it's different in the hosting industry, but I've been working in infosec for nearly 20 years, and, while hiding information absolutely has its value, the value of hiding filter rules (whether it's Suricata or fraud signs in checkout) is very, very limited, at least when a threat actor is able to obtain feedback about the filter (which they are in this case). The most it will do is reduce noise and must not be thought of as a point of policy enforcement.
It is.
I am sure there is big difference between threat hunting and minimising abuse/fraud.
That's fair. My experience is almost exclusively with more "personal" threat actors (think corporate intelligence / "corporate espionage" rather than high-volume spam or fraud).
Wrong. He already lost access.
The correct response is: RESTORE FROM BACKUP.
Those are the ones who will find ways and continue until successful. Removing low hanging fruit is just common sense at scale.