Google flags Immich sites as dangerous | Immich Blog
immich.app
How Google actively breaks Immich deployments, an open-source Google Photos alternative
  • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    0·
    7 days ago

    Was also flagged recently.
    In my case it was the root domain which is

    1. Geofiltered to only my own Country in Cloudflare
    2. Geofiltered to only my country in my firewall
    3. Protected by Authelia (except the root domain which says 404 when accessing)

    So…IDK what they want from me :p My domain doesnt serve public websites (like a blog) destined for public consumption…

  • lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    0·
    8 days ago

    Google flags F-Droid updates…

    Why would people have Google security going on if they have set up F-Droid as their appstore? Doesn’t that defeat the entire purpose?

    • Mika@piefed.caEnglish
      0·
      7 days ago

      Like I understand that if I buy a phone from Apple, and they control everything on the phone and what I can install - well I mean I bought it from Apple, what else did I expect?

      But I didn’t buy my phone from Google. They should have no say in what I could or couldn’t install.

      • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.auEnglish
        0·
        7 days ago

        But I didn’t buy my phone from Google. They should have no say in what I could or couldn’t install.

        You bought a phone running a Google operating system, knowingly so. This one is on you buddy.

      • ripcord@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        7 days ago

        I mean, I don’t think it matters if you bought the phone from Google or not (and you could have). Samsung or Motorola or whoever shouldn’t have any say either.

  • Darkcoffee@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    0·
    8 days ago

    They’ve also started warning against android apps from outside repos. Basically they want to force people to use their ai-filled bullshit apps.

    • artyom@piefed.socialEnglish
      0·
      8 days ago

      From the OP:

      Google Safe Browsing looks to be have been built without consideration for open-source or self-hosted software. Many popular projects have run into similar issues, such as:

      • Jellyfin

      • YunoHost

      • n8n

      • NextCloud

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.caEnglish
        0·
        8 days ago

        I’m sure it’s all accidental and coincidental that open source project that rival Google just weirdly got flagged as being dangerous. Google also doesn’t know how this happened, it just did! Magic!

        • exu@feditown.comEnglish
          0·
          7 days ago

          It probably is accidental, but they don’t care enough to fix the root problem

        • artyom@piefed.socialEnglish
          0·
          8 days ago

          Clearly their run-in with the DOJ and subsequent wrist-slap has emboldened them to new heights of anticompetitiveness.

  • 𝘋𝘪𝘳𝘬@lemmy.mlEnglish
    0·
    8 days ago

    The URLs mentioned in their blog article all have a wrong certificate (different host name).

    I am sure if they fix it Google’s system would reclassify the sites as safe.

    • RheumatoidArthritis@mander.xyzEnglish
      0·
      7 days ago

      Yeah, sure, 5 years after google flagged one of the sites i hosted, some firewalls (including isp-level blocks) mark the domain as unsafe. Google removed the block after more than a week but the stink continues until today.

      It was also a development domain and we were forced to change it.

    • porcoesphino@mander.xyzEnglish
      0·
      8 days ago

      I think that marking things as “safe” could have more complications than this depending on their definition but I think you’re right that’s probably all this issue is. This is almost the only sane comment here. Everyone else seems to be frothing at the mouth and I’m guessing its a decent mix of not understanding much of how these systems work (and blindly running tutorials for those that do self host) and blind ideology (big companies are bad / any practice that restricts my personal freedom in any way is bad)

      • Rooty@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        6 days ago

        any practice that restricts my personal freedom in any way is bad

        Yes? I don’t want to live in a world where giant companies decide what I can and cannot see. And big companies are bad, they act as pseudo governments that aren’t accountable to anyone, we used to break them apart before they started buying up politicians and political power.

    • mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      0·
      7 days ago

      Easier said than done, if your end users run Chrome. Because Chrome will automatically block your site if you’re on double secret probation.

      The phishing flag usually happens because you have the Username, Password, Log In, and SSO button all on the same screen. Google wants you to have the Username field, the Log In button, and any SSO stuff on one page. Then if you input a username and go to start a password login, Google expects the SSO to disappear and be replaced by the vanilla Log In button. If you simply have all of the fields and buttons on one page, Google flags it as a phishing attempt. Like I guess they expect you to try and steal users’ Google passwords if you have a password field on the same page as a “Sign in with Google” button.

      • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        0·
        7 days ago

        Firefox ingests Google SafeBrowsing lists.
        If you are falsely flagged as phishing (like I was), then you are fucked regardless of what you use (except you use curl).

        I couldnt even bypass the safebrowse warning on my Android phone in Firefox.

    • Vex_Detrause@lemmy.caEnglish
      0·
      6 days ago

      I knew it was too good to be true when they give away free pic storage for their pixel phones. I just didn’t listen to my gut.

  • spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    0·
    8 days ago

    Google Safe Browsing looks to be have been built without consideration for open-source or self-hosted software.

    IMO Google Save Browsing was built with consideration for open-source and self-hosted software, but it has nothing to do with user safety, just like blocking Android apps from 3rd party sites has nothing to do with user safety. The harder they make it to move away from their products by making using alternatives difficult, the more money they make and money is now the only objective. Even if this only adds a fraction of a fraction of a percent to their profit it’s something Google will implement.

    The old social contract of businesses being of benefit to the community as a whole in addition to making a profit is long gone.

  • A_norny_mousse@feddit.orgEnglish
    0·
    8 days ago

    Same when you try to deviate from the approved path of email providers or, dog forbid, even self-host email.

    This is why I always switch off that “block potentially dangerous sites” setting in my browser - it always means Google’s blacklists. This is how Google influences the web beyond its own products.

    edit: it’s much more complex than simple blocklists with email