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

311–320 of 713 posts

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#311

Post by simultsop »

kossTKR wrote: post #300
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 promise…

It will take the same or less amount of time, to get where we are with current Web.

What we have is the best sim env to see how stuff shape up. So fixing it should be the aim, avoiding will get us on similar spirals. We'll just go on circles.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#312

Post by jacquesm »

6LLvveMx2koXfwn wrote: post #310
jacquesm wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Why would a monopoly care about users interests?

I know they won't. But we have all the tools to force them to care. We just don't use the tools effectively, and between that and lobbying they get a free pass to pretty much do as they please.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#313

Post by petepete »

I write a couple of libraries for creating GOV.UK services and Google has flagged one of them as dangerous. I've appealed the decision several times but it's like screaming into a void.

https://govuk-components.netlify.app/

I use Google Workspace for my company email, so that's the only way for me to get in contact with a human, but they refuse to go off script and won't help me contact the actual department responsible in any way.

It's now on a proper domain, https://govuk-components.x-govuk.org/ - but other than moving, there's still not much anyone can do if they're incorrectly targeted.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#314

Post by wartywhoa23 »

kossTKR wrote: post #300
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 promise…

I'm afraid this can't be built on the current net topology which is owned by the Stupid Money Govporation and inherently allows for roadblocks in the flow of information. Only a mesh could solve that.

But the Stupid Money Govporation must be dethroned first, and I honestly don't see how that could happen without the help of an ELE like a good asteroid impact.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#315

Post by Timwi »

kossTKR wrote: post #300
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 promise…

It won't get anywhere unless it addresses the issue of spam, scammers, phishing etc. The whole purpose of Google Safe Browsing is to make life harder for scammers.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#316

Post by botverse »

simultsop wrote: post #311
kossTKR wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 promise…

It will take the same or less amount of time, to get where we are with current Web. What we have is the best sim env to see how stuff shape up. So fixing it should be the aim, avoiding will get us on similar spirals. We'll just go on circles.

Having a decade of fresh air is also a good incentive regardless of how it ends

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#317

Post by Kbelicius »

immibis wrote: post #304
whatsupdog wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Use one of the forks. librewolf, waterfox, zen. Firefox itself lost trust when Mozilla tried to push the new Terms of Use earlier this year. That was so aggressively user-hostile that nobody should trust Mozilla ever again. Using a fork puts an insulation layer between you and Mozilla. Librewolf is just a directly de-mozillaed and privacy-enhanced Firefox, similar to Ungoogled Chromium. I've been trying to get in the…

> Firefox itself lost trust when Mozilla tried to push the new Terms of Use earlier this year.

Those terms of use aren't in place any longer. I'm surprised that listening to the users is viewed as something bad.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#318

Post by [deleted] »

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....

[deleted]

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#319

Post by archargelod »

jeroenhd wrote: post #213
skrebbel wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is that and why is his reaction relevant?

He's a right-to-repair activist Youtuber who is quite involved in GrayJay, another app made by this company, which is a video player client for other platforms like YouTube. I'm not sure why his reaction would be relevant, though. It'll just be another rant about how Google has too much control like he's done in the past. He may be right, but there's nothing new to say.

He wasn't just involved with GrayJay, he's actually a member of FUTO - the company behind Immich and GrayJay. Now read grandparent comment one more time:

> Wouldn't be surprised if this leads to a lawsuit over monopolistic behavior

His reaction also matters because he's basically the public face for the company on YouTube and has a huge following. You've probably seen a bunch of social media accounts with the "clippy" character as their avatar. That's a movement started by Louis Rossman.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#320

Post by asddubs »

thayne wrote: post #96
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....

Looking through some of the links in this post, I there are actually two separate issues here: 1. Immich hosts user content on their domain. And should thus be on the public suffic list. 2. When users host an open source self hosted project like immich, jellyfin, etc. on their own domain it gets flagged as phishing because it looks an awful lot like the publicly hosted version, but it's on a different domain, and pos…

Even the first one only works if there's no need to have site-wide user authentication on the domain, because you can't have a domain cookie accessible from subdomains anymore otherwise.
Post reply on HN