Providers and court decisions
Good day, dear readers of Habr!
I want to share a story that may be of interest to owners and administrators of web resources using shared hosting, or to those who are going.
The site of the project ttools.ru is located on the server of virtual hosting, which at this stage is quite consistent with its requirements for resources and current load. Some time ago I began to observe a noticeable outflow of the audience for unknown reasons. I didn’t see anything disturbing in this, sometimes, seasonality, not very profitable updates of search engines, and so on, in general, did not attach much importance.
')
After some time, I accidentally discovered that the site is not accessible to users of a large provider of wired Beeline. No ping, no trace, no connections to the http port do not pass. When using other providers everything is normal.
I wrote a letter to those. support, to which I was promptly answered (I quote the correspondence):
IP address 81.222.215.86 - the address of one of the virtual servers
hosting hosting provider beget.ru, on which there are many
sites that have nothing to do with. Why are you blocking the ip-address, not the dns name
illegal site?
Please clarify whether the “higher authorities” are law enforcement agencies, subdivisions of your organization or any other authorities?
If law enforcement, then why the ban does not apply to all providers?
If this is a division of the organization, then please tell me how to contact those responsible for this question.
This story ended with a happy ending, I am grateful to the Beeline staff who helped me solve the problem. But the conclusions that follow from it are puzzling:
1) The court decision can block access to the ip address of the illegal site (not the domain name, do not order the hosting provider to terminate hosting services for this site, namely the ip address, and it doesn’t matter that it can be a virtual hosting address for other sites)
2) Such a judgment is executed at the provider level, and somehow selectively: one is executed, others are not
3) The most depressing: if I see that the site is working, it does not mean that the others see it too. And the reasons for this may be the most unexpected, and determine the existence of the problem is not easy.
I want to share a story that may be of interest to owners and administrators of web resources using shared hosting, or to those who are going.
The site of the project ttools.ru is located on the server of virtual hosting, which at this stage is quite consistent with its requirements for resources and current load. Some time ago I began to observe a noticeable outflow of the audience for unknown reasons. I didn’t see anything disturbing in this, sometimes, seasonality, not very profitable updates of search engines, and so on, in general, did not attach much importance.
')
After some time, I accidentally discovered that the site is not accessible to users of a large provider of wired Beeline. No ping, no trace, no connections to the http port do not pass. When using other providers everything is normal.
I wrote a letter to those. support, to which I was promptly answered (I quote the correspondence):
Access to the IP address 81.222.215.86, where the specified resource is located, was blocked, because at this address is azart-online.ru, containing
illegal content.
IP address 81.222.215.86 - the address of one of the virtual servers
hosting hosting provider beget.ru, on which there are many
sites that have nothing to do with. Why are you blocking the ip-address, not the dns name
illegal site?
The prescriptions from the higher authorities indicate that the ip address must be blocked.
Please clarify whether the “higher authorities” are law enforcement agencies, subdivisions of your organization or any other authorities?
If law enforcement, then why the ban does not apply to all providers?
If this is a division of the organization, then please tell me how to contact those responsible for this question.
Request for change 230619/11 from 11/08/2011
Leninsky District Court. Kirov Cases No. 2-3926 / 2011 and 2-3925 / 2011
azart-online.ru - 81.222.215.86
Because This site is already on a different IP, the rule on the border router will be fixed in the coming days.
This story ended with a happy ending, I am grateful to the Beeline staff who helped me solve the problem. But the conclusions that follow from it are puzzling:
1) The court decision can block access to the ip address of the illegal site (not the domain name, do not order the hosting provider to terminate hosting services for this site, namely the ip address, and it doesn’t matter that it can be a virtual hosting address for other sites)
2) Such a judgment is executed at the provider level, and somehow selectively: one is executed, others are not
3) The most depressing: if I see that the site is working, it does not mean that the others see it too. And the reasons for this may be the most unexpected, and determine the existence of the problem is not easy.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/133847/
All Articles