Polyfill.io owner punches back at 'malicious defamation' amid domain shutdown After having its website shut down, the polyfill.io owner is fighting back against claims it smuggled suspicious code onto websites all across the internet. In a series of angry Xeets over the past three days, what's likely the CDN operator that owns the Polyfill service accused Cloudflare, the media, and others of "malicious …
Um, buddy, since you claim a number of things that are already demonstrably fake, you can go claim as much money as you wish, nobody cares.
You are lying all over the place. You claim to be based in the UK, so where's your office ? What's your VAT number ? Why is your phone number not a UK number ?
You can talk about slander all you want. If that were true, all you'd need to do is file a complaint from your UK office. Right ?
I don't know if you're Chinese or not and I don't care. You've been found out and shut down and that's a good thing. Go ahead and try to create an empire, I will never trust you or your products.
Inland Revenue's not looking at it, because for many years it has held a strong belief that 2000+ companies at a single address is merely a local manifestation of Dr Who-time-space-travel-compression-diplacement phenomenon which requires no further investigation.
Alternatively, this specific address has never surfaced in their thorough investigations, which is not a surprising given that practically nobody in the UK has ever heard of it...
Having so many companies at a single address like that is fairly normal. I had a legit company registered to a similar service - it allows a single owner limited company to put down an address which isn't their home address. Mail gets redirected etc... They're called "Registered Office Services". Some offer other services such as drop in office space and meeting rooms as well.
However, its also a way of running a company mill for nefarious purposes for company mills.
HMRC won't investigate as its a pretty normal way to operate for small LTDs, and telling that apart from the company mills isn't just a case of having lots of companies at one address.
As others have pointed out, it's a common practice in the UK. It's the company "registered address", not the address of the actual corporate entity. It's a terrible system though, as I found out when I took a (fairly well known) web based vendor to the small claims court. The summons was sent to their registered address and they failed to attend court, so the claim was therefore automatically ruled in my favour. Actually tracking down the real address of the company in order to get the court bailiffs to them was a bloody nightmare. I eventually found out where their administrative offices are, but the court bailiffs were hopeless - they couldn't get past the security at the reception (it was a building with a number of companies in it) and gave up. So I then had to go back to the small claims court and pay a further sum to be able to instruct a private firm of bailiffs. At least they didn't muck about, and I finally got my money back plus compound interest. My advice if you find yourself in a similar situation is to not give up, expect to have to pay the extra to get the right to instruct private bailiffs and use the option to add compound interest in order to cover the time it took you to deal with the matter.
From what I was told by the court bailif's office, they went to the building and asked at reception to see someone from the company in question. The response was that no one suitable was available, and at that point they just left. It seems court bailifs aren't particularly well motivated, whereas the private ones are motivated by the need to get their fee and will get a court order to force entry if necessary.
You are lying all over the place. You claim to be based in the UK, so where's your office ? What's your VAT number ? Why is your phone number not a UK number ?
Oh come on, anyone who's ever done DIY knows it's legit...
Everything about this reincarnation of polyfill.io is suspect.
As has been asked, if you are based in the UK, where is your registered office, company Number, VAT number etc etc etc.
Oh wait, this is a shell company run out of some sweatshop in China. Please prove me wrong.
Avoid at all costs.
You're going... to build... a Content Delivery Network... that surpasses CloudFlare... with $50M in funding? Even with the USD to yuan conversion rate you're not even going to beat Mega with that little cash.
Of course the whole thing is a lie, like everything else these guys are saying, but you could at least make even lies plausible.
With io domain being bought by funnull, and shenanigans about where they are based, is it polyfill.io who's doing something nefarious or funnull? Certainly if the io domain is running amok, polyfill.io might be blameless.
Also, at 0136 UTC, polyfill.com does not resolve. The article implies it should.
When you hear a claim like "We have no supply chain risks," you know you're not going to hear anything true from this outfit.
Given that modern web design is founded on essentially ignoring supply chain risks, problems like this are inevitable. Even my bank's online banking portal wants to load javascript from 5 different domains that are not their own. No doubt it would be even more if I permitted those first 5 to load. This does not seem to be a safe way to design web sites. I bet for every example of malicious code on a 3rd-party CDN that becomes public like this one, there are a dozen more that no-one notices because the perpetrators were smarter about it.
> When I see Xeets my first mental image (censored)
Good, that is the perfect image to apply to messages sent via a certain platform.
I also champion the use of "Xits", in both cases with the X pronounced in English as a Z, as in Xavier.
And with either spelling, remember that you don't "post" a Xeet, you "pop it up" or "squeeze out a quick Xit", that celebrity got covered in Xeets, his Xits are really inflamed etc.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
