> Project Shield is a free service that uses Google technology to protect news sites and free expression from DDoS attacks on the web.

So CloudFlare is a service you pay for, and they seem to be hosting every despicable backwater of the internet so presumably they take no stance of the 'goodness' of the site they protect.

Whereas Shield is a free service, but only extended to those who Google deem righteous enough to protect?

I think there's room for both. There could also be room for Google extending it to a paying service, although I'd be surprised if Google would take the brand risk of extending their protection to porn sites etc irregardless of fees.

And of course every time Google stand up and protect sites like KrebsOnSecurity for free, the tech world loves them that little bit more and its a massive PR opportunity miss for CloudFlare.

Of course, every time Google stand up and protect sites like KrebsOnSecurity for free, its a massive PR loss for Akamai who wouldn't/couldn't.

Only to CloudFlare Project Galileo: https://www.cloudflare.com/galileo/