3 recommendations |
Anon2bbca
Anon
2020-Jan-10 11:27 am
Canadian Site Blocking and ALT DNS providersHi, Have a question for some of the more techie people here to test. Bell, Rogers, Telus, Shaw, Cogeco, Eastlink, Videotron etc updated their site blocking list. It can be viewed on Torrent Freak, here: » torrentfreak.com/canadia ··· -200109/Sample of the blocked web portal domains are as follows: 1) » gold.myiptvplanet.com2) » live4k.online3) » tulip.pctvhd.net4) » 256.beex.meMulti-part question for the techies here. A) Are you block as is on the links above? If you wish to share your who your ISP is, can you state if you are blocked or not and what ISP you use, and if its mobile or landline? (NOTE: The new blocking order comes into effect on Jan 21, so if you are not blocked yet you may be soon). B) The Test. If you are blocked, can you try an alternate DNS provider such as 1.1.1.1 (CloudeFlare DoH), 8.8.8.8 (Google), or open DNS. If you are newish to trying an alt DNS provider, sample instructions can be found here: Router settings: » developers.cloudflare.co ··· /router/Windows settings: » developers.cloudflare.co ··· windows/Mac settings: » developers.cloudflare.co ··· 1.1/mac/Android app: » play.google.com/store/ap ··· nedotoneApple Store: » apps.apple.com/us/app/1- ··· 23538627I am curious to know if you are still blocked using alternate DNS providers. Thanks for testing and posting any results. Appreciate. |
|
Fraoch join:2003-08-01 Cambridge, ON SmartRG SR808ac TP-Link EAP225 Grandstream HT502
1 recommendation |
Fraoch
Member
2020-Jan-10 11:39 am
said by Anon2bbca :A) Are you block as is on the links above? If you wish to share your who your ISP is, can you state if you are blocked or not and what ISP you use, and if its mobile or landline? (NOTE: The new blocking order comes into effect on Jan 21, so if you are not blocked yet you may be soon). Clicking on these links, in order, brings up the very scary-named: » zxtc.ddns.net/stalker_portal/c/» sx.kpax.cc/stalker_portal/c/» tulip.pctvhd.net/stalker ··· ortal/c/» 256.beex.me/stalker_portal/c/"Stalker portal" gives me the willies. Thank goodness my NoScript kicked in and blocked the script each page was trying to run. Nothing gets displayed. Just a warning to others. I wonder what those scripts would run... I'm on TekSavvy. B) The Test. If you are blocked, can you try an alternate DNS provider such as 1.1.1.1 (CloudeFlare DoH), 8.8.8.8 (Google), or open DNS. I have a complicated DNS setup here (using both PiHole and Untangle) so I'd rather not change it but given the strange DNS resolution above I would rather not even if it was simple to change, sorry. |
|
|
4 recommendations |
ahuj99
Member
2020-Jan-10 12:41 pm
STALKER itself is a well known IPTV middleware from a European company, nothing nefarious on its own: » wiki.infomir.eu/eng/mini ··· re-5-2-0But for sure always click at your own risk |
|
Fraoch join:2003-08-01 Cambridge, ON SmartRG SR808ac TP-Link EAP225 Grandstream HT502
|
Fraoch
Member
2020-Jan-10 12:45 pm
Ah, OK. Whew, thanks. So it looks like it does resolve and is not blocked here. |
|
zadigre Premium Member join:2006-10-02 Montreal, QC
1 recommendation |
to Anon2bbca
Bell at home. maskatel (owned by Bell) at work.
Bell is blocked... most addresses go to 67.43.226.22
maskatel is not blocked.
if I change to lets say 8.8.8.8 at home, nothing is blocked apparently. |
|
3 recommendations |
Anon2bbca to Fraoch
Anon
2020-Jan-10 1:39 pm
to Fraoch
Hi Fraoch Yes, all links above will/should bring you to the "Stalker Portal".
"Stalker Portal" is the most used media portal in the world, it is free and downloadable from github. It's a login portal. One can search for it. I suppose the name can scare people (if names scare you), but there is nothing more than that to it.
I don't think Teksavvy is blocking the above, at least not yet, but should be by Jan 21.
I'm only aware of the following ISP's currently blocking: Bell, Rogers & I heard Telus is (and all sub-brands/Flanker brands). I am unsure about the other ISP's so far.
But the first site blocking list all ISP's were blocking (they had to, court ordered), and it was all similar "Stalker Portals".
Anyhow, If anyone is blocked and can try alternate DNS servers as listed in the first post as a test and the results of your test it would be appreciated. TY |
|
|
said by Anon2bbca :Anyhow, If anyone is blocked and can try alternate DNS servers as listed in the first post as a test and the results of your test it would be appreciated. You already got your confirmation from zadigre, above. He confirmed it works with 8.8.8.8. If it worked for one person with 8.8.8.8, it'll work for everyone. Not even Bell and Rogers are dumb enough to start fucking with third party DNS requests. Also... you can just use dig to quickly confirm whether the site is blocked from any DNS server: » droptips.com/using-dig-t ··· -bsd-osx |
|
zadigre Premium Member join:2006-10-02 Montreal, QC |
to Anon2bbca
ok more testing... I can resolve the IP proper when using 8.8.8.8... but Safari and Firefox still can't load these website. if I use the IP address directly, it somewhat load the website... but with a 404 error since the (virtual) hostname is not recognized by the server.
so I'm not 100% sure it will work with third party DNS... |
|
2 recommendations |
Anon2bbca
Anon
2020-Jan-10 7:43 pm
zadigre, thanks for taking the time to check it out. I sincerely hope other people test their ISP(s) as well. Would like to see results of more tests from more ISP's.
Of note, if your browser has any type of "script blocking" addon it will have to be white-listed (allowed) to test. That Stalker Portal requires scripts to view/function.
zadigre also raised an interesting point about "maskatel (owned by Bell) not being blocked". I'd be interested in other small ISP's owned by Bell and the block performed or not performed. Good & interesting catch.
Anyone happen to be on any other small Bell owned network (Cablevision or other) and able to test?
ohzopants, you said, "f it worked for one person with 8.8.8.8, it'll work for everyone." No. Not necessarily, not at all. This is the reason why I created this topic.
TY again, appreciate the time & effort. |
|
Anon2bbca
4 recommendations |
Anon2bbca
Anon
2020-Jan-10 9:57 pm
In case it interests anyone to learn more about the Canadian site blocking going on, The Wire Report has a free article out on it that can be found here: » thewirereport.ca/2020/01 ··· g-order/Just to touch base on this "free article". It isn't often (couple of times a year) that The Wire Report puts out something the public can access freely. Take that as a hint that this is of public importance & of public interest. Previous happenings on Canadian Site Blocking from 2019 to the present can be found by going to Torrent Freak and searching for GoldTV. Example: » torrentfreak.com/?s=GoldTVI've had contact with researchers, academics, regular folk (like you and me), and they all say it will expand to more. Plus there are players with tech out that will block what I have asked in this thread (from what researchers had said and it gets more involved with influential entities pushing it on all ISPs). So, to be honest with everyone, the above is what I heard w/o getting into the nitty-gritty and naming names/entities and it doesn't look good, and this is why I said to "ohzopants", "no". Take the 10-min and test if you can. ty again. Paste a link to this thread in the other forums asking people to test. I have been told: Videotron not blocking yet Shaw not blocking yet Bell Blocking Major flanker brands of Bell (Aliant, MTS, Virgin, Lucky) are blocking Appears small Bell owned flanker brands are not blocking (per test above) Telus blocking (koodo, unsure) Rogers Blocking Major Flanker brands of Rogers blocking. SaskTel was fast to block the first list, I heard nothing on SaskTel with this new list to date pls test. Paste anonymously if u wish to protect your "handle" and what ISP you have. pls post in other forums to point here. I do not know if DSLReports has a news person to bring this to (as they did in the past). If they do, bring it to them and ask them to put out a news piece in all Canadians forums & point to this thread. Need to know the technological methods being used to block. TY & Cheers. |
|
1 recommendation |
alpovs
Member
2020-Jan-11 2:31 am
Is this blocking legal/constitutional? Did I wake up in North Korea? |
|
zadigre Premium Member join:2006-10-02 Montreal, QC
1 recommendation |
to Anon2bbca
I’m getting this beautiful message on videotron Mobile this morning. |
|
HiVolt Premium Member join:2000-12-28 Toronto, ON
1 recommendation |
to Anon2bbca
The 4 links appear to be blocked for me on Bell. However I am not getting any message that it was blocked by an order from federal government, just "Connection was reset" in browser. |
|
jpaik join:2002-01-09 Hamilton, ON
1 recommendation |
to alpovs
|
|
3 recommendations |
alpovs
Member
2020-Jan-11 3:54 pm
If there was a single court order it doesn't mean it's legal or constitutional. Many court orders are overturned. From the article you linked: "The order is unique in North America and relies heavily on UK jurisprudence..." UK? And "TekSavvy also pointed out that site-blocking measures violate net neutrality and freedom of expression." Why don't they get those people instead? It's like hunting for guns and knives instead of the killers. Is there an equivalent of ACLU in Canada? I guess not, because of the notwithstanding clause in the Constitution. |
|
jdrom join:2008-03-02 East York, ON
1 recommendation |
to HiVolt
said by HiVolt:The 4 links appear to be blocked for me on Bell. However I am not getting any message that it was blocked by an order from federal government, just "Connection was reset" in browser. Adding HTTPS to them seems to let them open for me, just clicking them as-is from the post here results in "connection was reset". I still use ECS-enabled resolvers (Google, OpenDNS and Quad9) but no Bell ones other than on my FibeTV VLAN. |
|
jpaik join:2002-01-09 Hamilton, ON
1 recommendation |
to alpovs
No, it's legal. It will remain so *unless* the ruling is challenged, ultimately taken to the highest court in the country (Supreme Court) and overturned there. Or our Parliament enacts new legislation or modifies existing acts.
Also, the influence of UK, or other foreign jurisprudence on domestic law is nothing new and is common around the world.
Our ACLU is the CCLA. |
|
Sk00k join:2020-01-12 North Bay, ON |
to Anon2bbca
I tried those 4 sites. First 3 got me to a login page, last one gave me a blank page, with some JS errors. l'm with TekSavvy on a Mac running Safari & Firefox. |
|
Fraoch join:2003-08-01 Cambridge, ON SmartRG SR808ac TP-Link EAP225 Grandstream HT502
1 recommendation |
to alpovs
said by alpovs:Is this blocking legal/constitutional? Did I wake up in North Korea? It was granted by court order and is legal. Much better than the blanket site blocking list the incumbents wanted and wanted to self-administer though. » mobilesyrup.com/2018/10/ ··· es-next/ |
|
|
said by Fraoch:said by alpovs:Is this blocking legal/constitutional? Did I wake up in North Korea? It was granted by court order and is legal. Much better than the blanket site blocking list the incumbents wanted and wanted to self-administer though. » mobilesyrup.com/2018/10/ ··· es-next/ He doesn't understand because of the statutes at play. Neither does the public. The press puts it out there but that's it. |
|
|
Anonc1947
Anon
2020-Jan-13 1:53 pm
said by BACONATOR26:said by Fraoch:said by alpovs:Is this blocking legal/constitutional? Did I wake up in North Korea? It was granted by court order and is legal. Much better than the blanket site blocking list the incumbents wanted and wanted to self-administer though. » mobilesyrup.com/2018/10/ ··· es-next/ doesn't understand because of the statutes at play. Neither does the public. The press puts it out there but that's it. The problems in the legal system to do with copyright enforcement in Canada, is: -Are Canadian companies claiming ownership of the content for enforcement actions against? -Any 'licensed content' from outside sources, Bell and Canadian others can not claim ownership and technically will not have a strong standing in court for enforcement of sources outside of Canada. Those that actually own the content should be responsible for going to court for enforcement, but the courts do not always appreciate foreigners trying to tell other countries how to enforce things. Various U.S. TV network direct streams should be available to the people of Canada, but backroom deals have been made to block access to those direct streams. The courts of Canada haven't, nor the CRTC, have blocked access to the U.S. networks streams. The Internet is meant to open globally, but when it comes to streaming, old TV companies refuse to compete with outside sources and will make backroom deals to censor access to globally available content. Did Rogers Bell Shaw yet manage to get the corrupt Heritage Minister to impose a per-household internet usage tax, payable to Canadian media companies, because corporations need free money for added profits........ |
|
jpaik join:2002-01-09 Hamilton, ON |
jpaik
Member
2020-Jan-13 2:28 pm
Anonc1947:
If Bell, for example, has a license to "cast" original content from a content copyright owner, they will take steps to protect their exclusive benefits of that license in their territory. Including court action.
They don't claim ownership, and don't need to, unless they also created the content. |
|
|
Copyright enforcement is far different from transparency. |
|
jpaik join:2002-01-09 Hamilton, ON |
jpaik
Member
2020-Jan-13 2:38 pm
Agreed. But we're talking about the roots of the current situation: copyright. |
|
|
Copyright entails the rights holder to protect their content. You got that part. The medium only matters in this case if it is attached to the rights holder. |
|
jpaik join:2002-01-09 Hamilton, ON |
jpaik
Member
2020-Jan-13 3:02 pm
I've been working in media for many years. I understand and work with copyright matters. The medium is irrelevant, as you noted. Only the content matters, and what entity has the license to it. |
|
|
If the content is licensed then there is a level of control. |
|
|
to Anon2bbca
Is Start blocking any of these?
A neighbor that I helped move from Bell to Start+voip.ms had started using Gold on his smart TV quite a while ago but then it stopped working and it seemed that Gold had disappeared. Is this the same Gold mentioned in these DNS blocks that was operating 1, 2 years ago? |
|
|
said by nomen:Is Start blocking any of these?
A neighbor that I helped move from Bell to Start+voip.ms had started using Gold on his smart TV quite a while ago but then it stopped working and it seemed that Gold had disappeared. Is this the same Gold mentioned in these DNS blocks that was operating 1, 2 years ago? If any ISPs in the area are blocking sites like Gold then it's a good probability. Most of them have firewalls in place to comply with the court order. Aside from legalities, even the CRTC and their lawyers had a difficult challenge determining the provider(s) and their respective service offerings. But Gold respective to grey area IPTV offerings would be this case and the legal block. |
|
|
nomen
Member
2020-Jan-14 9:32 pm
So it's an easy fix then to just set the STB to manual IP config and set the DNS to 4.2.2.2 or equivalent. ? |
|