4 ms·
I hope this is not frowned upon here but I believe the domain in question is canna[dot]sx. You can confirm this by taking some of the URLs in the report and sub
by progbits 5y ago
I hope this is not frowned upon here but I believe the domain in question is canna[dot]sx. You can confirm this by taking some of the URLs in the report and substituting the blacked out domain with it and it indeed shows the Evanescence album that the document points to.
(I got this by doing reverse dns lookups on some of the IPs they list without censoring)
Edit: I have tried resolving using 9.9.9.9 and get the same answer as other DNS servers, even running from a VPS in Germany. It appears they have not blocked it yet?
- zinekeller 5y agoHave you tried the .to domain? The .sx domain is recently registered (probably because SME also obtained an injunction against 1&1 and Telekom to block it), and I can confirm that the .to domain is blocked inside Germany.
- progbits 5y agoGood point, it might be a replacement domain that just has the same content so my URL check doesn't mean that is what they requested. As for .to, it does resolve fine for me via 9.9.9.9 from multiple locations including Germany but maybe my VPS IP just doesn't resolve to the right geolocation.
- zinekeller 5y agoEither that Quad9 (unintentionally) haven't included the IP range in the scope or Quad9 is intentionally only applying the filter in residential connections (because business won't engage in piracy, right?) Edit: Resolves in Versatel (which is a business-grade connection). The offending domain is blocked by 1&1's (Versatel's parent) DNS resolvers though.