Google flags Immich sites as dangerous • Hacker News Board

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#171

Post by pkulak » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 5:28 AM UTC

callc wrote: post #159

Us nerds *really* need to come together in creating a publicly owned browser (non chromium) Surely among us devs, as we realize app stores increasingly hostile, that the open web is worth fighting for, and that we have the numbers to build solutions?

Uh… we are. Servo and Ladybird. It’s a shit tonne of work.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#172

Post by pharrington » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 5:29 AM UTC

They have to fix their SSL certs. "Kubernetes Ingress Controller Fake Certificate" aint gonna cut it.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#173

Post by jrochkind1 » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 5:29 AM UTC

I am confused if the term "self-hosted" means the same thing to them as it means to me, not sure if I'm following.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#174

Post by Jackson__ » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 5:30 AM UTC

If there are any googlers here, I'd like to report an even more dangerous website. As much as 30-50% of the traffic to it relates to malware or scams, and it has gone unpunished for a very long time.

The address appears to be adsense.google.com.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#175

Post by trenchpilgrim » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 5:32 AM UTC

altairprime wrote: post #114

pasteldream wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The one thing I never understood about these warnings is how they don't run afoul of libel laws. I’m not a lawyer, but this hasn’t ever been taken to court, has it? It might qualify as libel.

I know of no such cases, and would love to know if someone finds one.

I worked for a company who had this happen to an internal development domain, not exposed to the public internet. (We were doing security research on our own software, so we had a pentest payload hosted on one of those domains as part of a reproduction case for a vulnerability we were developing a fix for.)

Our lawyers spoke to Google's lawyers privately, and our domains got added to a whitelist at Google.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#176

Post by MonaroVXR » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 5:34 AM UTC

vincnetas wrote: post #170

modeless wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Show me a platform not made out of duct tape and I'll show you a platform nobody uses.

regular cars?

The Honda issue where setting a certain radio station, would brick the infotainment? That good enough?

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#177

Post by pkulak » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 5:35 AM UTC

Can I use this space to comment on how amazing Immich is? I self host lots of stuff, and there’s this one tier above everything else that’s currently, and exclusively, held by Home Assistant and Immich. It is actually _better_ than Google photos (if you keep your db and thumbs on ssd, and run the top model for image search). You give up nothing, and own all your data.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#178

Post by pkulak » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 5:35 AM UTC

Jackson__ wrote: post #174

If there are any googlers here, I'd like to report an even more dangerous website. As much as 30-50% of the traffic to it relates to malware or scams, and it has gone unpunished for a very long time. The address appears to be adsense.google.com.

sites.google.com

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#179

Post by nicce » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 5:36 AM UTC

jrowen wrote: post #146

liquid_thyme wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't know how they got nerds to think scummy advertising is cool. If you think about it, the thing they make money on - no user actually wants ads or wants to see them, ever. Somehow Google has some sort of nerd cult that people think its cool to join such an unethical company.

[flagged]

On this day, only Google Maps does not have real competitor on Android. Otherwise, it is possible to drop Google and even get better services. Brands are difficult to compete.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#180

Post by TheDong » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 5:42 AM UTC

akerl_ wrote: post #63

TheDong wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's open source, you can find this trivially yourself in less than a minute. https://github.com/immich-app/devtools/tree/a9257b33b5fb2d30...

Wow. What a rude way to answer.

I think we might have hit the inflection point where being rude is more polite. It's not that I want people to be rude to me, it's that I don't want to talk to AI when I intend to be talking to a person, and anyone engaging with me via AI is infinitely more disrespectful than any curse word or rudeness.

These days, when I get a capitalized, grammatically correct sentence — and proper punctuation to boot, there is an unfortunate chance it was written using an AI and I am not engaging fully with a human.

its when my covnersation partner makes human mistakes, like not capitalizing things, or when they tell me i'm a bonehead, that i know i'm talking to a real human not a bot. it makes me feel happier and more respected. i want to interact with humans dammit, and at this point rude people are more likely to be human than polite ones on the internet.

i know you can prompt AIs to make releaistic mistakes too, the arms race truly never ends