Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

Post by account42 » Fri, Oct 24, 2025, 11:27 AM UTC

marcosdumay wrote: post #566

nemothekid wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of these seem less cursed, and more just security design? > Some phones will silently strip GPS data from images when apps without location permission try to access them. That strikes me as the right thing to do?

IMO, the problem is that it fails silently. Every kind of permission should fail the same way, informing the user about the failure, and asking if the user wants to give the permission, deny the access, or use dummy values. If there's more than one permission needed for an operation, you should be able to deny them all, or use any combination of allowing or using dummy values.

Post by account42 » Fri, Oct 24, 2025, 11:37 AM UTC

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…

Post by account42 » Fri, Oct 24, 2025, 11:46 AM UTC

sofixa wrote: post #403

dwedge wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funded to the tune of a half billion dollars a year by Google to pretend there's no monopoly, and multiple announcements of them trying to reimagine themselves as an ad-company. They're the best of a bad bunch but they are definitely still part of a bad bunch

Your second point, as well as their so much criticised, especially on HN, attempts at diversification, are trying to fight your first point. Because they're so reliable on Google funding, they're trying to do whatever they can to find alternative revenue streams. Damned if you do, damned if you don't, especially for the HN crowd.

Post by account42 » Fri, Oct 24, 2025, 12:04 PM UTC

rw_grim wrote: post #592

0_____0 wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Force interoperability. In 2009 I could run Pidgin and load messages from AIM, FB Messages, Yahoo... Where did that go? I suspect the EU will be the first region to push the big tech companies on this.

The project is still alive and we're trying to finish our next major version to be able to better support modern protocols and features. We do monthly updates on the status of the project that we call State of the Bird and they can be found here https://discourse.imfreedom.org/tag/state-of-the-bird .

Post by account42 » Fri, Oct 24, 2025, 12:16 PM UTC

asimpleusecase wrote: post #336

I see a lot of comments here about using some browser that will allow ME to see sites I want to see, but I did not see a lot about how do I protect my site or sites of clients from being subjected to this. Is there anything proactive that can be done? A set of checks almost like regression testing? I understand it can be a bit like virus builders using anti virus to test their next virus. But is there a set of best p…