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
Pushing KYC for refunds is the most stupid “idea” ever. Congrats who come up with that “idea”.
If you don’t want to keep a customer for whatever reason, give them the refund and move on. Else they will push for chargeback and one way or another get it after proving that they are not getting any service for their payment.
So you're punishing all of your customers in a witch hunt to find whoever is responsible for the portscanning and as an added bonus you get free money from anyone who doesn't care to be involved in the scheme. Nicely played!
@DartNode?
This is a scam; they force KYC (Know Your Customer) verification, but they haven't provided any instructions on how to do so.
Well. I got few servers terminated from them without any warnings whatsoever (They said they sent a warning mail for FUP violation but I neither received any mails nor I can see in the dashboard anything related to that warning at all). And no refunds either.
I am running a screenshot service and the fleet was managed by ai agent. Apparently they cancelled one server first due to continuous sustained cpu usage and because of that cancellation, the workload redistributed on other vps and the cpu usage increased on other vpses so they cancelled them too - a domino effect.
I was careless in not reading the FUP with a finetooth but then I was running these vps since an year or two (mostly idling) and the expectations was things would be informed incase any issues were there and not just terminated without any warnings (or even opportunity to take backups).
So read what you can into it before using them. Since that incident I am reading FUP more carefully for all providers here and even asking them before ordering anything but still sometimes things can go wrong and hopefully the providers will reach out for any such issues rather than assuming bad intentions.
I just received an email too.
This is robbery!
same for me, no received any message/email, as I know 1st someone found his vps can't work , then send worknote to c-server, and get it's reply, know server status, send these info to some forum, then I know my (vps run) service why not work.
Besides, relying on KYC to identify people who are up to no good—how is that even possible? If Dartnode had kept relevant records and handed them over, there might be a chance to track down those involved. What good is KYC? You get everyone’s face, ID number, and so on (or give them to anyone else)—does that let you tell which ones carried out the DDoS attacks?
It is your responsibility to have a valid contract with your sub-processor DartNode for them to help you with investigating such matters. Doing intrusive KYC checks with highly questionable effectiveness is not the right thing to do.
DartNode could be hacked. You could be hacked. The customer could be hacked. IP address can be spoofed. And KYC will not help with either of those.
It's not GDPR compliant to use data collected for a specific purpose like billing and perform additional processing for something else. You generally need to collect consent again to use the data for some other purpose.
Even their website is not GDPR compliant as it's placing unncessary cookies all over the place. Not to mention your website as well.
You're making a lot of assumptions out of thin air. Many people will not do KYC because of the risk of their data being leaked (you can buy plenty of those already on the black market). If a customer of yours was hacked even if he does KYC he will still be hacked. Assumption that the abuser will not want to complete KYC is funny as well as he can just claim he had no idea and he was hacked, so can you prove otherwise?
Pushing KYC for refunds> @barbaros said:
"and prior to any refund to account credit'
The wall of text mail did make it very clear it is not planned to refund at all but to give out storage vouchers instead.
Well, for this reason credit card charge back exists.
So glad I didn't go for C-Servers and waited around to find a better option elsewhere, you'll find similar threads for C-Servers on Reddit as well.
To be honest, I know asking for support on ultra-low-end NAT deals can feel a bit "offensive" given the price. That’s why I’ve never even opened a single ticket; whenever the server went down, I chose to wait patiently instead of complaining. I only use my 3-year NAT plans in Finland and Germany as probe nodes, nothing mission-critical. However, over time, I noticed the CPU and disk performance started to tank—eventually dropping by more than half compared to when I first signed up. I stayed quiet as long as the SLA remained stable.
But this recent incident has me worried. With NAT, it's inevitable that some bad actors might cause trouble, and it's unfair for others to be penalized. I paid for 3 years, but I'm afraid of a "forced exit" in less than one. If they just "refund to balance," I’ll be stuck with credit for expensive services I don't even want. It feels like a bait-and-switch. I really hope it doesn't come to that.
yes
And, like all "biometric providers", they get hacked.
Compliance protects them from lawsuits, not you from identity theft.
What the fuck? You're completely ignoring the sizable portion of non-abusive customers who are unwilling to do surprise KYC. Of course, you'll just assume that anyone refusing KYC is an abuser, so it's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
This reeks of "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear".¹
If the biometric provider doesn't have multimillion bounty pot (with different tier), I don't feel safe
from the link:
.
from eicar.org:
The best suspension reason ever!
That's a bullshit detection for another reason: The EICAR test file is required to only be detected if it exists alone in a 68-byte file. Thus it is not supposed to be detected as a substring or in networking traffic.
Just internet's magic
!topic Danger C-Servers Blatant Scam Theft of Funds Avoid Avoid
Kind of funny, 149.112.84.57 (same subnet) is also offline and was hosting my.moudler.com (behind Cloudflare), which browsers block for phishing, yet the IP is clean on AbuseIPDB.
Looks like DartNode might have done some spring cleaning.
Why is this provider not banned yet?
Why is KYC required for all accounts? KYC wasn't required at the time of purchase. Houston is willing to continue service if KYC is completed, if not, the remaining value should be refunded. Why is account ownership being forced in all regions, and why is there no refund upon failure? Is there a le
As I understand it, several of you abused the services, which led to an entire dedicated server being suspended by C-Servers’ upstream provider.
To avoid a whack-a-mole situation, where more servers are suspended, more innocent clients are affected, and C-Servers lose more money, they now require KYC from everyone.
For the moral standing, to not even have to account credits back, for all that don't comply.
Because this would have cost money, as less would have jumped over this hurdle.
There is still no refund planned for anybody, it's only store credits...
I missed that, this crook doesn't miss a trick.
If you want to abuse the system, go open new accounts or join new servers; involving existing users will ruin the user base's reputation, making new users afraidto purchase. Abuse is not limited to c-servers alone; please do not do this. KYC cannot prevent abuse; an account growth and reputation system should be
@alfatarsos 🚩 Host Rep Suspended
… for sudden KYC and refuse to refund on service failure.
@DartNode 🚩 Patron Provider Suspended
… for terminating server based on false evidence.
Note: we have DartNode VPS for hosting Freaky Fast Digital Coma artwork in honor of Daniel the data center tech and his 14-hour grind, but we cannot support DartNode business practice.
@angstrom please consider.
Maybe they can get more selling the KYC documentation on the black market than the refund amount costs them?
@DP @Arkas @jbiloh
I took a look at the abuse case we have opened about this. It seems you had one abuse case opened on Mar 26, 2026. You self-resolved it in our portal and affirmed that the issue was resolved and fixed. Case #A-23099-7918
We then got an additional abuse report from our upstream provider for the same abuse reason (port scanning), the system then suspended your service for Case #A-23104-7918 on that same day, but around an hour later.
Since the abusedb is showing a fair amount of abuse entries, our system did not allow you to self-resolve, but placed the case in admin review.
We have a special abuse tag for other hosts, but we were not aware, and I could not find in any tickets that you let us know that would allow us to handle this differently. I will say, as our upstream and IP owners tell us, you're ultimately responsible for what people do with the IP you give them.
I have released the admin hold on the service, and it is active now. You also have a past-due balance with us, so make sure to take care of that to keep the service online.
If you can open a ticket and we're happy to add the tag as a hosting provider, but we just need that in a ticket