That crossed my mind, but it'd mean they'd be willing to lock out large networks... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		TomSawyer on July 31, 2017 \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: LinkedIn: It’s illegal to scrape our website witho... That crossed my mind, but it'd mean they'd be willing to lock out large networks behind a NAT. I was wondering if there's something more sophisticated available.

dylz on July 31, 2017 | [–]

100% they are willing to lock out NAT networks, have been subject to this more than once browsing normally.

JoblessWonder on July 31, 2017 | [–]

Also, they are just locking out users that aren't signed in. If a user has a login, they are probably much more likely to err on the side of caution before locking down access in some way.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact