Obviously there's good reasons NOT to, but I am surprised they haven't started offering it (as an "on-by-default" option, naturally) yet.
Doing it on demand still utilizes their cached version, so it saves a trip to the origin, but doesn’t require doubling the cache size. They can still cache the results if the same site is scraped multiple times, but this saves having to cache things that are never going to be requested.
Cache footprint management is a huge factor in the cost and performance for a CDN, you want to get the most out of your storage and you want to serve as many pages from cache as possible.
I know in my experience working for a CDN, we were doing all sorts of things to try to maximize the hit rate for our cache.. in fact, one of the easiest and most effective techniques for increasing cache hit rate is to do the OPPOSITE of what you are suggesting; instead of pre-caching content, you do ‘second hit caching’, where you only store a copy in the cache if a piece of content is requested a second time. The idea is that a lot of content is requested only once by one user, and then never again, so it is a waste to store it in the cache. If you wait until it is requested a second time before you cache it, you avoid those single use pages going into your cache, and don’t hurt overall performance that much, because the content that is most useful to cache is requested a lot, and you only have to make one extra origin request.
> Cloudflare's network now supports real-time content conversion at the source, for enabled zones using content negotiation headers. Now when AI systems request pages from any website that uses Cloudflare and has Markdown for Agents enabled, they can express the preference for text/markdown in the request. Our network will automatically and efficiently convert the HTML to markdown, when possible, on the fly.
It's entirely possible that they're doing this under the hood for cases where they can clearly identify the content they have cached is public.
(Which, on Akamai, are by default ignored!)
You could try to gate this behind access controls but at that point you have reinvented a clunky bespoke CDN API that no site owner asked for, plus a fresh legal mess. Static file caches work because they only ever respond to the original request, not because they claim to own or index your content.
It is a short path from "helpful pre-scraped JSON" to handing an entire site to an AI scraper-for-hire with zero friction. The incentives do not line up unless you think every domain on Cloudflare wants their content wholesale exported by default.
And they can pull it off because of their reach over the internet with the free DNS.
The fact that 30%+ of the web relies on their caching services, routablility services and DDoS protection services is the main pull.
Their DNS is only really for data collection and to front as "good will"
30% of the web might use their caching services. 'Relies on' implies that it wouldn't work without them, which I doubt is the case.
It might be the case for the biggest 1% of that 30%. But not the whole lot.
Last time Cloudflare went down, their dashboard was also unavailable, so you couldn't turn off their proxy service anyway.
And forget about crawling. If you have a less reputable IP (basically every IP in third world countries are less reputable, for instance), you can be CAPTCHA'ed to no end by Cloudflare even as a human user, on the default setting, so plenty of site owners with more reputable home/office IPs don't even know what they subject a subset of their users to.
[1] E.g. https://www.wired.com/robots.txt to pick an example high up on HN front page.
> The /crawl endpoint respects the directives of robots.txt files, including crawl-delay. All URLs that /crawl is directed not to crawl are listed in the response with "status": "disallowed".
You don't need any scraping countermeasures for crawlers like those.
Given that malicious bots are allegedly spoofing real user agents, "another user agent you have to add to your list" seems like the least of your problems.
They also use their dominant position to apply political pressure when they don’t like how a country chooses to run things.
So yeah, we’ve created another mega corp monster that will hurt for years to come.
Like there's a difference between dozens of drunk teenagers thrashing the city streets in the illegal street race vs a taxi driver.
https://robindev.substack.com/p/cloudflare-took-down-our-web...
HN Discussion:
Because I'm pretty sure they are not in fact wrong.
On the other hand when a page is small and static enough that it's basically just a flyer, I also care a lot less about who hosts it.
"Biggest betrayal in tech."
"Protection racket."
These hot takes sound smart but they're not.
The web was built to be open and available to everyone. Serving static HTML from disk back in the day, nobody could hurt you because there was nothing to hurt.
We need bot protection now because everything is dynamic, straight from the database with some light caching for hot content. When Facebook decides to recrawl your one million pages in the same instant, you're very much up shit creek without a paddle. A bot that crawls the full site doesn't steal anything, but it does take down the origin server. My clients never call me upset that a bot read their blog posts. They call because the bot knocked the site offline for paying customers.
Bot protection protects availability, not secrecy.
And the real bot problem isn't even crawling. It's automated signups. Fake accounts messaging your users. Bots buying out limited drops before a human can load the page. Like-farming. Credential stuffing. That's what bot protection is actually for: preventing fraud, not preventing someone from reading your public website.
Cloudflare's `/crawl` respects robots.txt. Don't want your content crawled, opt out. But if you want it indexed and can't handle the traffic spike, this gets your content out without hammering production.
As for the folks saying Cloudflare should keep blocking all crawlers forever: AI agents already drive real browsers. They click, scroll, render JavaScript. Go look at what browser automation frameworks can do today and then explain to me how you tell a bot from a person. That distinction is already gone. The hot takes are about a version of the internet that doesn't exist anymore.
If more sites provided explicit machine-readable entry points for crawlers, indexing could become a lot less wasteful. Right now crawlers spend a lot of effort rediscovering the same structure over and over.
It also raises interesting questions about whether sites will eventually provide different views for humans vs. automated agents in a more formalized way.
I've found myself falling pretty hard on the side of making APIs work for humans and expecting LLM providers to optimize around that. I don't need an MCP for a CLI tool, for example, I just need a good man page or `--help` documentation.
But semantic HTML is exactly that explicit machine-readable entrypoint. I am firmly entrenched in the opinion that HTML, and the DOM is only for machines to read, it just happens to be also somewhat understandable to some humans. Take an average webpage, have a look at all characters(bytes) in there: often two third won't ever be shown to humans.
Point being: we don't need to invent something new. We just need to realize we already have it and use it correctly. Other than this requiring better understanding of web tech, it has no downsides. The low hanging fruit being the frameworks out there that should really do a better job of leveraging semantics in their output.
Makes you think, right?
This question raises an interesting question about if this would exacerbate supply chain injection attacks. Show the innocuous page to the human, another to the bot.
A lot of known crawlers will get a crawler-optimized version of the page
Workers-originated requests include a CF-Worker header identifying the workers subdomain, which distinguishes them from regular CDN proxying. You can match on this in a WAF rule or origin middleware.
The trickier issue: rendered requests originate from Cloudflare ASN 13335 with a low bot score, so if you rely on CF bot scores for content protection, requests through their own crawl product will bypass that check. The practical defense is application-layer rate limiting and behavioral analysis rather than network-level scores -- which is better practice regardless.
The structural conflict is real but similar to search engines offering webmaster tools while running the index. The incentives are misaligned, but the individual products have independent utility. The harder question is whether the combination makes it meaningfully harder to build effective bot protection on top of their platform.
Sounds pretty useless for any serious AI company
If your delay is 1s and you publish less than 60 updates a minute on average I can still get 100%. Most crawls are not that latency sensitive, certainly not the ai ones.
HFT bots, now that is an entirely different ballgame.
They certainly behave like they are. We constantly see crawlers trying to do cache busting, for pages that hasn't change in days, if not weeks. It's hard to tell where the bots are coming from theses days, as most have taken to just lie and say that they are Chrome.
I'd agree that the respecting robots.txt makes this a non-starter for the problematic scrapers. These are bots that that will hammer a site into the ground, they don't respect robots.txt, especially if it tells them to go away.
All of this would be much less of a problem if the authors of the scrapers actually knew how to code, understood how the Internet works and had just the slightest bit of respect for others, but they don't so now all scrapers are labeled as hostile, meaning that only the very largest companies, like Google, get special access.
``` write a custom crawler that will crawl every page on a site (internal links to the original domain only, scroll down to mimic a human, and save the output as a WebP screenshot, HTML, Markdown, and structured JSON. Make it designed to run locally in a terminal on a linux machine using headless Google Chrome and take advantage of multiple cores to run multiple pages simultaneously while keeping in mind that it might have to throttle if the server gets hit too fast from the same IP. ```
Might use available open source software such as python, playwright, beautifulsoup4, pillow, aiofiles, trafilatura
You'll still be hand-rolling it if you want to disrespect crawling requirements though.
From the behaviour of our peers, this seems to be the real headline news.
That said, I'm not fan of letting users forge whatever user agents they please. Instead, AIUI to opt-out of getting crawled I have to look for the existence of certain request headers[1].
[1]: https://developers.cloudflare.com/browser-rendering/referenc...
I'll need to test it out, especially with the labyrinth.
Further down they also mention that the requests come from CFs ASN and are branded with identifying headers, so third party filters could easily block them too if they're so inclined. Seems reasonable enough.
We're creating an internet that is becoming self-reinforcing for those who already have power and harder for anyone else. As crawling becomes difficult and expensive, only those with previously collected datasets get to play. I certainly understand individual sites wanting to limit access, but it seems unlikely that they're limiting access to the big players - and maybe even helping them since others won't be able to compete as well.
I'm split between: Yes! At last something to get CF protected sites! And: Uh! Now the internet is successfully centralized.
First, the Cloudflare Crawl endpoint does not require the target site to use Cloudflare. It spins up a headless Chrome instance (via the Browser Rendering API) that fetches and renders any publicly accessible URL. You could crawl a site hosted on Hetzner or a bare VPS with the same call.
Second on pricing: Browser Rendering is only available on the Workers Paid plan ($5/month). It is not part of the free tier. Usage is billed per invocation beyond the included quota - the exact limits are in the Cloudflare docs under Browser Rendering pricing, but for archival use cases with moderate crawl rates you are very unlikely to run into meaningful costs.
The practical gotcha for forum archival is pagination and authentication-gated content. If the forum requires a login to see older posts, a headless browser session with saved cookies would help, but that is more complex to orchestrate than a single-shot fetch.
Crawl jobs per day 5 per day
Maximum pages per crawl 100 pages
The post says it's available for both free and paid plans. According to the pricing page of the Browser Rendering, the free plan will have 10 minutes/day browsing time.
Is it possible to ignore robot.txt in the case the crawl was triggered by a human?
And once that is well setup, and they have their walled garden, then they can present their own API to scrape websites. All well done to be used by your LLM. But as you know, they are the gate keeper so that the Mafia boss decide what will be the "intermediary" fee that is proper for itself to let you do what you were doing without intermediary before.
Refer to Will Browser Rendering bypass Cloudflare's Bot Protection? for instructions on creating a WAF skip rule.
Is it because it was removed (/hidden) or because it is not yet available until everyone forget the "we are no evil, we are here to protect the internet"?
It's hard to see how this isn't extorting folks by offering a working solution that, oh, cloudflare doesn't block. As long as you pay Cloudflare.
Perhaps I'm overly cynical, but I'd be quite surprised if cloudflare subjected their own headless browsing to the same rules the rest of the internet gets.
The docs are pretty equivocal though:
>If you use Cloudflare products that control or restrict bot traffic such as Bot Management, Web Application Firewall (WAF), or Turnstile, the same rules will apply to the Browser Rendering crawler.
It's not just robots.txt. Most (all?) restrictions that apply to outside bots apply to cloudflare's bot as well, at least that's what they're claiming. If they're being this explicit about it, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt until there's evidence to the contrary, rather than being a cynic and assuming the worst.
I had the idea after buying https://mirror.forum recently (which I talked in discord and archiveteam irc servers) that I wanted to preserve/mirror forums (especially tech) related [Think TinyCoreLinux] since Archive.org is really really great but I would prefer some other efforts as well within this space.
I didn't want to scrape/crawl it myself because I felt like it would feel like yet another scraping effort for AI and strain resources of developers.
And even when you want to crawl, the issue is that you can't crawl cloudflare and sometimes for good measure.
So in my understanding, can I use Cloudflare Crawl to essentially crawl the whole website of a forum and does this only work for forums which use cloudflare ?
Also what is the pricing of this? Is it just a standard cloudflare worker so would I get free 100k requests and 1 Million per the few cents (IIRC) offer for crawling. Considering that Cloudflare is very scalable, It might even make sense more than buying a group of cheap VPS's
Also another point but I was previously thinking that the best way was probably if maintainers of these forums could give me a backup archive of the forum in a periodic manner as my heart believes it to be most cleanest way and discussing it on Linux discord servers and archivers within that community and in general, I couldn't find anyone who maintains such tech forums who can subscribe to the idea of sharing the forum's public data as a quick backup for preservation purposes. So if anyone knows or maintains any forums myself. Feel free to message here in this thread about that too.
You feel better paying someone to do the same thimg?
Also, I am genuinely open to feedback (Like a lot) so just let me know if you know of any other alternative too for the particular thing that I wish to create and I would love to have a discussion about that too! I genuinely wish that there can be other ways and part of the reason why I wrote that comment was wishing that someone who manages forums or knows people who do can comment back and we can have a discussion/something-meaningful!
I am also happy with you also suggesting me any good use cases of the domain in general if there can be made anything useful with it. In fact, I am happy with transferring this domain to you if this is something which is useful to ya or anyone here (Just donate some money preferably 50-100$ to any great charity in date after this comment is made and mail me details and I am absolutely willing to transfer the domain, or if you work in any charity currently and if it could help the charity in any meaningful manner!)
I had actually asked archive team if I could donate the domain to them if it would help archive.org in any meaningful way and they essentially politely declined.
I just bought this domain because someone on HN said mirror.org when they wanted to show someone else mirror and saw the price of the .org domain being so high (150k$ or similar)and I have habit of finding random nice TLD and I found mirror.forum so I bought it
And I was just thinking of hmm what can be a decent idea now that I have bought it and had thought of that. Obviously I have my flaws (many actually) but I genuinely don't wish any harm to anybody especially those people who are passionate about running independent forums in this centralized-web. I'd rather have this domain be expired if its activation meant harm to anybody.
looking forward to discussion with ya.
All of a sudden, about 1/3 of all traffic to our website is being routed via EWR (New York) - me included -, even tough all our users and our origin servers are in Brazil.
We pay for the Pro plan but support has been of no help: after 20 days of 'debugging' and asking for MTRs and traceroutes, they told us to contact Claro (which is the same as telling me to contact Verizon) because 'it's their fault'.
They are not super helpful fixing it either.