Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

immich.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 713 posts

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#291

Post by shaky-carrousel »

donmcronald wrote: post #238
david_van_loon wrote: post #85

I'm fighting this right now on my own domain. Google marked my family Immich instance as dangerous, essentially blocking access from Chrome to all services hosted on the same domain. I know that I can bypass the warning, but the photo album I sent to my mother-in-law is now effectively inaccessible.

Just in case you're not sure how to deal with it, you need to request a review via the Google Search Console. You'll need a Google account and you have to verify ownership of the domain via DNS (if you want to appeal the whole domain). After that, you can log into the Google Search Console and you can find "Security Issues" under the "Security & Manual Actions" section. That area will show you the exact URLs that got…

It's a bit ironic that a user installing immich to escape Google's grip ends up having to create again a Google account to be able to remove their Google account.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#292

Post by jacquesm »

shevy-java wrote: post #287
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.

Yeah - that website keeps on spamming me down with useless stuff. I was able to block most of this via ublock origin but Google disabled this - can not download it from here anymore: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/ublock-origin/cjpal... Funniest nonsense "explanation": "This extension is no longer available because it doesn't follow best practices for Chrome extensions." In reality Google killed it because…

You know what? I don't even mind them killing it, because of course there are a whole pile of items under the anti-trust label that google is doing so why not one more. But what I do take issue with is the gaslighting, their attempt to make the users believe that this is in the users interests, rather than in google's interests.

If we had functional anti-trust laws then this company would have been broken up long ago, Alphabet or not. But they keep doing these things because we - collectively - let them.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#293

Post by shaky-carrousel »

pkulak wrote: post #177

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.

What model do you recommend for image search?

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#294

Post by liquid_thyme »

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]

They created the largest spying instrument in the world that creates hidden profiles (that can never be deleted) documenting web activity, psychological state, medications, etc, etc for billions of people - and have been caught multiple times sharing data with governments (they're probably compromised internally anyway). I would categorize that as unethical. But yeah, you can cheer for the scraps they throw out.

>about things that barely even register to most people.

News flash: This whole website is about things that don't register to most people. It's called hacker news FFS.

In any case, I think a trillion dollar company probably doesn't need defending. They can easily tweak their algorithm to bury this type of stuff; after all this opinion is probably not "relevant" or "useful" to most people.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#295

Post by jacquesm »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #65
arccy wrote: post #8

If you're going to host user content on subdomains, then you should probably have your site on the Public Suffix List https://publicsuffix.org/list/ . That should eventually make its way into various services so they know that a tainted subdomain doesn't taint the entire site....

In the past, browsers used an algorithm which only denied setting wide-ranging cookies for top-level domains with no dots (e.g. com or org). However, this did not work for top-level domains where only third-level registrations are allowed (e.g. co.uk). In these cases, websites could set a cookie for .co.uk which would be passed onto every website registered under co.uk. Since there was and remains no algorithmic meth…

I think we lost the web somewhere between PageRank and JavaScript. Up to there it was just linked documents and it was mostly fine.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#296

Post by skatsubo »

jeroenhd wrote: post #222
david_van_loon wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, my family Immich instance is blocked from indexing both via headers and robots.txt, yet it's still flagged by Google as dangerous.

I'm kind of curious, do you have your own domain for immich or is this part of a malware-flagged subdomain issue? It's kind of wild to me that Google would flag all instances of a particular piece of self-hosted software as malicious.

G would flag _some_ instances.

Possible scenario:

- A self-hosted project has a demo instance with a default login page (demo.immich.app, demo.jellyfin.org, demo1.nextcloud.com) that is classified as "primary" by google's algorithms

- Any self-hosted instance with the same login page (branding, title, logo, meta html) becomes a candidate for deceptive/phishing by their algorithm. And immich.cloud has a lot of preview envs falling in that category.

BUT in Immich case its _demo_ login page has its own big banner, so it is already quite different from others. Maybe there's no "original" at all. The algorithm/AI just got lost among thousands of identically looking login pages and now considers every other instance as deceptive...

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#297

Post by lucideer »

mads_quist wrote: post #212

Never host your test environments as Subdomains of your actual production domain. You'll also run into email reputation as well as cookie hell. You can get a lot of cookies from the production env if not managed well.

This. I cannot believe the rest of the comments on this are seemingly completely missing the problem here & kneejerk-blaming Google for being an evil corp. This is a real issue & I don't feel like the article from the Immich team acknowledges it. Far too much passing the buck, not enough taking ownership.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#298

Post by maltris »

This is crazy, it happened to the SoGO webmailer, standalone or bundled with the mailcow: dockerized stack as well. They implemented a slight workaround where URLs are being encrypted to avoid pattern detection to flag it as "deceiving".

There is no responses from Google about this. I had my instance flagged 3 times on 2 different domains including all subdomains, displaying a nice red banner on a representative business website. Cool stuff!

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#299

Post by computerthings »

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]

[dead]

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#300

Post by kossTKR »

dmoreno wrote: post #288

Happened to me last week. One morning we wake up and the whole company website does not work. Not advice with some time to fix any possible problem, just blocked. We gave very bad image to our clients and users, and had to give explanations of a false positive from google detection. The culprit, according to google search console, was a double redirect on our web email domain (/ -> inbox -> login). After just moving…

I'm beginning to seriously think we need a new internet, another protocol, other browsers just to break up the insane monopolies that has been formed, because the way things are going soon all discourse will be censored, and competitors will be blocked soon.

We need something that's good for small and medium businesses again, local news and get an actual marketplace going - you know what the internet actually promised.

Anyone working on something like this?

Post reply on HN