You keep using the term "WAF". I do not think it means what you think @CloudFlare. http://bit.ly/1c4MJft
-
-
Replying to @attritionorg
@attritionorg@CloudFlare blocking "Rolex". Win!1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @WeldPond
@WeldPond@CloudFlare I think they have a WACBS, not a WAF. (web application content blocking system)#notthesame1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @attritionorg
@attritionorg@WeldPond@CloudFlare email me (matthew at cloudflare) and we'll set you up on our traditional rules-based WAF.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @eastdakota
@eastdakota@WeldPond@CloudFlare wait, you have to opt-in to an actual WAF? the default is content blocking only?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @attritionorg
@attritionorg@WeldPond@CloudFlare but the rules-based WAF is pretty sweet. <500µ to do full OWASP ruleset. Fully customizable.#staytuned2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @eastdakota
@eastdakota@WeldPond@CloudFlare yeah, that is great. EXCEPT, it is opt-in, private, not for plebeian users. NOT A WAF1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @attritionorg
@attritionorg@WeldPond@CloudFlare it's in beta. It'll get released widely as soon as testing is done. Which will be soon.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@eastdakota @WeldPond @CloudFlare uh, "beta"? Then remove the term "WAF" from the page. It isn't one, at all. #falseadvertising
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.