New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Yes, lets trust the Indian government to say what domains are allowed and what domains aren't. /s
They use "work order", fyi.
So instead of working with ISP's to block the domains that are in fact nefarious, they've gone and blocked access to registrars?
Surely any old VPN connection will get around this?
That and the fact that there are 100's of other registrars out there?
to the guys suggesting DNS as a solution here, No. Indian ISP's AFAIK do not use dns to block stuff, instead they sniff http stuff and terminate the connections.
https://www.namecheap.com/status-updates/archives/75363
Does that mean they're also MITMing SSL connections to Namecheap to inject HTTP 500 Internal Server Error into the response? How stupid is that.
I'm using my own DNS resolvers
Not able to access Namecheap on Airtel 4g. Had to use dns over https.
WTF you are talking about?
Random court? One must comply with the land of the law. If you are doing business in India or any country you have to follow their law.
And yes any Indian company must follow court order of a country where they do business. Which is also apply to any foreign company who do business in India.
And TOS of a company doesn't matter in this case as users doing illegal things and namecheap not responding legitimate abuse report. It has nothing to do with TOS.
You are the provider so you are responsible for anything your client doing using your services.
100% agree. Few morons think USA court superior than all other country's court and they can simply ignore the law of the land just because they are registered in USA
So if Indian court block them then it's a right decision if the company thinks they can ignore the notice and can do whatever whey want no matter what the law says..
There are also resellers, probably. So yeah, didn't make much sense. Then again, Germany blocked TPB/Kinox and other similar sites on ISP DNS level which is just as "efficient".
You literally don't know what you're talking about. Part of that is correct, but you're missing some important details. And you didn't read what I wrote either.
Again, you don't understand the legal system in general. And no one is saying a USA court is superior here, maybe re-read my post, or just look up how legal jurisdictions work. And in this case, we're talking about Canada, Finland, Czech Republic too. You keep bringing up US courts. There are at least 5 court systems in this situation.
And certainly, if the Indian court wishes to block a service WITHIN INDIA, or WITHIN THEIR JURISDICTION, they have the right to do that. Go for it. I'm not saying they can't do that.
However, they can't force a foreign company to comply with an Indian court order unless that company has a legal presence in India. There are some limited cases where this has been done in extreme cases, such as terrorism, drug cartels, etc. And as I mentioned, there are several legal tools and ways they can exert pressure on foreign companies (feel free to look all that up), including filing a lawsuit in the country where the company has a legal presence and other international protocols.
But an Indian court order by itself will do nothing to a company in a situation like this in the US or Canada, Finland, Czech Republic, etc., OTHER than if they want to block those services INSIDE India in this case... inside their own jurisdiction, inside their own territory. But they can't directly force an entity in general outside their jurisdiction to comply with anything. They CAN force local ISPs to act to censor or block the outside party. Which is what they are doing.
You can debate the merits of it, and you can debate the nature of the illegal activity of the parties involved. That's not the issue here. No one is endorsing illegal content, domain squatting, etc., etc., all the things that are mentioned. Most people would agree that you shouldn't do that. But the primary question here is very simple, mainly about jurisdiction. Start there, and the rest works itself out.
If this is not clear to people, they really need to spend some time understanding the basics of jurisdictions and international law.
Even the first couple of paragraphs here might be a starting point:
https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law/Jurisdiction
But honestly, I can't help more than that. It's not rocket science. Good luck.
Seriously? In 2023?
What they meant is that they look at the ServerName field of TLS connections and then inject a RST on the TCP stream back to the client.
You're arguing with a guy who tried to insinuate I was a Chinese agent for having negative things to say about the VLC player (videolan.org) blocking incident in India. I'm not sure you'll manage to convince him.
Next target appears could be CloudFlare as their public dns still appears to be resolving namecheap
Spock cannot reach Daddy !
Some Indian bureaucrat reading this: Cloudflare allow? we ban it.
Another bureaucrat: Cloudflare?..kya flare? Ban cloud.
News next day: Indian government bans all cloud services.
They already did that in February.
https://www.outlookindia.com/national/hottest-february-in-india-this-year-since-1877-imd-news-266143
you probably have the most bengali name a bengali can have
and i thought i was the only bengali in here
anyways most of these blocks can be bypassed by just using a good DNS or just using something like PowerTunnel or GoodByeDPI.
real
No matter in which country your company registered, if you provide service in a country then either you should follow the law of that land or just don't serve there.
You can't just say that you will only follow your own country's law and fully ignore the countries where you are serving your services.
Bureaucrat shit show is real, and honestly i don't know why the peeps debating what could be done and what not, the simpler solutions could have been assigning a consultancy firm in the specific jurisdictions and ask them to follow up with the notices from their end but guess nah you gotta be the everything should be what i says so. Remember when i commented on the new TDS system that got heated up pretty quickly. And no we aren't that far away from banning CF, heck yeah i've even heard rumors about it cause of the massive dodgy stuff hosted on their network. Well so long for the "you mean the government should let them run those illegal website stuff" i mean it getting the shit together and educating the decision making crats or should i say brats about how things work is the only option there is no buts and ifs.
You forgot the warp, it works in most if not all use cases.
I’m simply waiting for the day when this logic gets used by, say, an Islamic country to say that every other religion is illegitimate, and therefore registrars should take down websites professing any other religion.
Same logic really.
They are already doing it with their blasphemous laws.
Anyways there's a difference between blasphemy and creating scam sites to scam thousands peoples.
USA also banning websites which violating DMCA. That doesn't mean USA doing something wrong.
Anyways, I think you have zero knowledge on what we are talking about, otherwise you shouldn't drag that absurd logic about Islamic countries.
DNS/HTTPS blocking at a ISP level within the country for the offending domains is fine. But asking the registrar to revoke domain ownership by this logic would give other countries the same power of revoking your domain entirely, preventing you from operating websites that are completely within the laws of your country. Which is different from ISP blocking within that country.
That is because of the Berne convention (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention) which means the basic elements of copyright takedowns are followed by every country.
“You think” I have zero knowledge, certainly an interesting choice of words.
Anyway, it’d be better if you can stop the name calling and actually respond based on the merits of the argument.
I am waiting when the Indian BureauBRATS decides the ban LET cause we literally have really every possible way for a scammer of spammer to get the job done and for really cheap at that too.
There is a lot of dodgy stuff hosted in the Internet. I am sure many countries would be way better off with a national version of Internet only. North Korea is doing fine without all that American shit and Putler will ban the Satanists too. Woke-ism ends here!
Oh, and shoot down the propaganda satellites as well!
I'm surprised they don't MITM DNS requests to other DNS servers and also apply the blocks to those. It's trivial to do as not many people are using encrypted DNS yet (DNS over HTTPS, DNS over TCP and DNS over QUIC).
AdGuard Home supports these protocols and can give you a local DNS server with encrypted upstream queries for all your devices... I'm running it in Docker on a Raspberry Pi and using it with Quad9's DNS over HTTPS. I don't actually use it for ad blocking, just malware/phishing blocking.
Every country has its own laws and cultural traditions. It would be better if information circulated on the Internet without any restrictions, but it is always a compromise between freedom of speech and a direct violation of local laws. For example, Facebook, Twitter and many other services have been blocked in China for years. Why? Because they refuse the Chinese government's request to block certain materials. In Russia, Facebook and Twitter have been blocked for the same reason for the last year. The world is becoming multipolar, so this trend will only increase. Obviously, each country will seek to control access to information based on its own interests.