8 ms·
Italy's Piracy Shield just blocked one of Google's CDN
- aquatica 2y agoIf you are connecting from an Italian ISP to https://mil04s43-in-f1.1e100.net https://mil04s43-in-f1.1e100.net you're going to be greeted by a message from AGCOM telling you the website has been used to spread copyrighted content. This already happened with a Cloudflare CDN before. https://community.cloudflare.com/t/blocking-of-my-website-via-the-piracy-shield-platform/631633 https://community.cloudflare.com/t/blocking-of-my-website-vi... https://imgur.com/a/EKFHROX https://imgur.com/a/EKFHROX
- dangsux 2y ago[dead]
- cdesai 2y agoHow can they do that with HTTPS though? HTTP sure they can happily MITM and redirect, but with HTTPS you need a valid cert.
- patchymcnoodles 2y agoI don't get that, and I'm connecting from the biggest italian provider TIM. I first get a warning from the browser because of the certificate. If I go forward I just get a 404. But maybe it changed in the last hours?
- aquatica 2y agoTIM and WindTre have overridden the block, don't know about the other ISPs.
- olliej 2y agoWow I can’t believe that no one thought this could happen /s
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- ranger_danger 2y agoIronically from not-Italy: Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead Firefox detected a potential security threat and did not continue to mil04s43-in-f1.1e100.net Error code: SSL_ERROR_BAD_CERT_DOMAIN
- VoidWhisperer 2y agoLikely having to do with the cert being for *.googleusercontent.com, and that is decidedly not *.googleusercontent.com
- xanth 2y agoLikewise, here in aus on a FireFox 131.0.3
- fulafel 2y agoThe link is bad from a web browser POV so that's correct - it's using the DNS name from the ip address reverse lookup, but the web server cert there identifies to a different Google DNS name which would point to the same address. (But the point was to point to this CDN node and you can't really link to it on HN in any other way)
- Psilocibin 2y agoI don't understand, can you explain?
- johnklos 2y agoCompanies like Google and Cloudflare just really don't care that they host malicious content and have stopped taking meaningful action to take down reported content. That they'd be blocked at some point is completely unsurprising. As it is, I have to explain to people regularly that clicking on "sponsored" links, or whatever Google calls them, doesn't work because we have to block "googleadservices.com" due to their hosting of malicious Javascript payloads. Certain very large companies that are very, very privacy and security focused insist on blocking known malicious Javascript hosting services, and Google is no exception.
- ruthmarx 2y ago> Companies like Google and Cloudflare just really don't care that they host malicious content and have stopped taking meaningful action to take down reported content. Honestly I find it incredibly silly companies are still sending out notices to take down copyrighted content. Give up already. The battle is lost and now it's purely a waste of time and money.
- dr_kiszonka 2y agoMalicious doesn't mean copyrighted.
- ruthmarx 2y agoTrue, but the submission refers to something called 'Piracy Shield', so copyrighted material seems pretty relevant.
- johnnyanmac 2y agoAs long as the potential impact exists (and that impact can be huge), they have the time and money to do those takedowns
- ruthmarx 2y agoI don't think the impact has ever truly been huge, although it is almost always overstated.
- PhasmaFelis 2y agoLink's not working for me.
- LAC-Tech 2y agoLink not working. Though the term "Piracy Shield" is very editorialised. Shouldn't we just call it the Firewall? Eg what we call China's system.
- lormayna 2y agoThe problem exists in Italy: criminal organizations sell a box (called "pezzotto") that connect to illegal streams (mainly sport events). But the law to block it was written in a very terrible way and this tool is even worst.
- cynicalsecurity 2y agoWhy would Italy have anything called Piracy Shield? Is it located in the West or in China?
- devjab 2y agoTo combat illegal sports streaming and betting. On a deeper level it is to combat major crime organisations on a financial level. Italy actually has a lot of initiatives to do these things, though some obviously work better than others. One of the better is how every budget has to has through a government service, to tack illegal activities both internally and across borders. Many EU countries have various things like this, though in Italy is far more focused on the financial aspects because Italy obviously has a big past of organised crime to the point where these organisations rivalled the nation station. The piracy shield is terribly implemented of course and does a lot of harm to things it wasn’t necessarily meant to target. Part of this is because the law itself is rather terrible and has already undergone multiple changes and amendments, but part of it is also that Italy has a rather tough “no fucks” policy toward major tech companies.
- sadbutttrue 2y agoAll European countries censor the Internet to some extent. OpenDNS is not operating in France and Portugal, for example. There are many other cases. Sometimes it's because of piracy, sometimes it's because of terrorism, sometimes it's because it allows voters to post comments about immigration or vaccine policy, or criticism about certain Western allies committing war crimes and ethnic cleansing, etc.
- BLKNSLVR 2y agoMy 'uninvited activity'[0] system picks up quite a bit from googleusercontent, but also gets a bit from 1e100 network ranges, which is a bit surprising / disappointing. I have to add exclusions for some google-owned network ranges just so my auto-blocking setup doesn't break some basics critical to just web browsing. [0]:https://github.com/UninvitedActivity/UninvitedActivity https://github.com/UninvitedActivity/UninvitedActivity
- raffraffraff 2y agoTbh, screw Google. They think that their monopoly makes them untouchable, so they abuse their position. Eg: yesterday my wife's friend group received an email from one member of the group. It contained 10 links. Other Gmail users replied-to-all. But my wife (not a Gmail user) had her reply blocked because the email contained 10 links. She was replying to the person who sent the email. Pardon my language, but fuck you Google. If you want to implement mail filtering rules, do it fairly and equally.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- nerder92 2y agoHere a thread with some tests to confirm this: https://x.com/g_bonfiglio/status/1847728976933904453 https://x.com/g_bonfiglio/status/1847728976933904453
- Elizabeth0147 2y ago[dead]