Roskomnadzor white list: conclusions and losses
You probably already read about the "white list" (the next white, more precisely) Roskomnadzor . In addition to Roskomsvoboda, the vc . In it - more than 2000 positions .
I studied this document and here are some conclusions, disappointing, which I want to share:
Another detail that immediately catches the eye is the domains with www and without it: for example, as in Figure 1.
Fig. one
Perhaps for a moment you thought that the details mentioned above are not essential , but this is not so: for the devil and the salt of the questions is always in them, in nuances.
I will explain.
The fact is that all three points prove the following:
But for now - about the loss.
Not so long ago Habrozhitel turned to me - nelsh . Here is his post on how TTK blocks websites that should not be blocked - https://habrahabr.ru/post/328768/ .
From the comments on this publication, as well as the correspondence with nelsh, I came to the conclusion that illegal and unreasonable blocking occurs for the following reasons :
The problem described above belongs to TTK (in particular, Irkutsk, the Far East, Krasnodar, Rostov-on-Don : either more , as well as here , here , or here - in general, I hope that there is enough proof). How it looks technically - you can see here .
Fig. 2
At the same time, I quote: “TTC at the trunk level blocks random IPs that are not listed in the registry (seen just because they detect other IPs for blocked domains, and someone trolls / or CDN). As a result, random sites do not open. Of the last major ones that have been noticed - the Uniquiti sites, the service domains of EVE Online, Ingress - though they all sit on the CDN. Recently, a couple of IP Github.com was blocked, with all the consequences - the github stupidly did not open for several hours, but it was not massively ... It’s not blocked by everyone who walks through the TTC, apparently depending on the features of the provider-TTC.
As a lawyer, I am very worried about this question : after all, sooner or later, considering how the Runet is developing, this may concern everyone. Moreover, there are now a lot of prerequisites for the “unrighteous struggle”:
For objectivity, I will say that there are cases when locks, on the contrary, help business, even if indirectly .
Of course, to sue the state. the authorities are a thankless task: long, expensive, but it ends not like Lebedev’s, but without “o”. But to sue providers is possible and necessary. And not only to sue, but also to fight in all other legal ways. Otherwise, all this will resemble a circus tent.
Of course, law No. 1102471-6 on amendments to the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation in terms of establishing the responsibility of telecom operators plays a significant role in this. It sounds as follows (art. 13.34 in the sense): “failure of the telecom operator providing services to provide access to the information and telecommunications network“ Internet ”,“ duties ”to restrict or resume access to information, access to which should be limited or resumed on the basis of information received from the federal executive body exercising control and supervision functions in the field of communications, information technology and mass communications. ”
I note that there are already indicative cases for fines, for example:
What can and should be used to protect your rights?
First, there is Art. 15 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation - damages: real damage + loss of profits. The formula is simple, but you can still prove the real damage (for example, if your clients write to you that the site was unavailable at such and such time and you prove that it was due to the provider / RKN error), but the loss of profit - already much harder. Let's say a person wanted to buy a phone for 20,000 rubles. You lost them. In addition, they lost another purchase for 18,000 and a possible profit for 2000 for the next. And yes, if one of the lawyers tells you the opposite (that to prove it “is easier than a fresh turnip) - do not believe :). In addition, you can look for losses:
Secondly, stt. 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation - protection of business reputation. Here, with the Russian courts is still more complicated than with Art. 15 and her attendant. But nevertheless, when the provider illegally blocks you, it thereby spreads information that your site (a resource on the Internet in principle) is included in the “black list” and thus potential buyers, as well as regular customers, are misinformed, and, as a result, word of mouth, especially if you have a local spill or regional scale project, it may be even more detrimental than just the lack of purchases due to a pseudo-block. So that you understand the seriousness of this - the list with the VKN offsite by blocking:
Third, Art. 1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation - you should never forget about it. For example, in the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of Arbitration of the Russian Federation No. 6763/10 dated November 23, 2010 in case N A53-6358 / 08 (VAC Bulletin of the Russian Federation. 2011. N 3), it was stated: “Arbitrary interference of anyone in private affairs is not allowed "In addition, arbitration courts often refer to this (common example is the decision of the CA of the Krasnoyarsk Territory of November 3, 2010 in case No. A33-12455 / 2010):" In the content of the principle of the inadmissibility of arbitrary interference of anyone in private affairs, the notion of private business as a citizen or a legal entity (as a private person) , based on private interest in the application of private law. ” It will be even more difficult than paragraph 1 and paragraph 2.
Other rules do not specify, because cases need to be considered individually (if there is - send, consider together).
For lawyers, especially practitioners, all three points are obvious, but for most, a priori they are losing. For entrepreneurs - not obvious, but even more losing. But still, my life position is that our interests are important and must be defended: the more often and better everyone will do it, the faster we will get a working system at the end. The choice is definitely yours .
For my part, I continue to insist that every law should go through a long stage of discussion: whether it is online cash registers , instant messengers , electronic money , online trading or something else. Otherwise, after the rapid adoption of “top”, we have a lot of technical, organizational, legal and other holes that do not allow the functioning of these laws to function normally.
Again, this truth will seem to someone capitalized, but, judging by the latest trends, unfortunately, it is not.
So far, everything - in the second part I will try to make out the example of the TTC and those promised above - separately and in a different perspective.
PS Mini-selection of materials on illegal blocking of RKN and / or providers:
UPD - for those who do not know:
Roskomnadzor has sent recommendations to telecom operators on some technical aspects of blocking illegal information on the Internet. An incorrect DNS rezolving, which is carried out by individual telecoms when blocking web pages with illegal information, occurs when the telecom operator independently determines the IP address of a banned Internet resource.
In this case, as a result of the actions of intruders, excessive providers can get respectable sites, data about which are not available in the unloading of Roskomnadzor to telecom operators. Recommendations of Roskomnadzor are dictated by the interests of users and are aimed at eliminating excessive blocking of decent resources.
In particular, when an operator determines the IP address of a prohibited Internet resource by itself, it is recommended for providers to check whether popular and socially significant sites and their IP addresses fall under blocking.
Recommendations to operators to implement the blocking of prohibited information.
The systemic solution of the problem consists in the normative consolidation of the right to Roskomnadzor to determine the method of blocking the communication operator.
UPD. Well, the irrepressible RKN continued this epic ... by blocking Google (however, the TTC is again in place: more precisely, not on that).
I studied this document and here are some conclusions, disappointing, which I want to share:
- Yandex, Vkontakte, ivi , Telegram - not a complete list of resources that suffer because of ill-conceived locking system. Of course, I especially want to highlight the Wiki, because with her problems will clearly be more than once. By the way, on vc and Roskomsvoboda have already joked about * .google. * - and this again confirms this fear.
') - The list is very long, but there is one obvious pattern in it: the absence of patterns. Russia is not the largest country (if you take exactly the Runet, and not the area of ​​geography), but at the same time the domains of the state and municipal bodies and institutions are so different in format - you wonder: here and the distant domains in the zone.RF. (for example, indigestible - http: //mkra.rf/ ); and the domains of the http://mcx-ra.ru/ format (in Adygea, mysterious domains are generally loved, aren’t they?) or here is http://szn24.ru/ . Guessing from the first time - what is it about, to put it mildly, is difficult. However - more on that below.
Another detail that immediately catches the eye is the domains with www and without it: for example, as in Figure 1.
Fig. one
Perhaps for a moment you thought that the details mentioned above are not essential , but this is not so: for the devil and the salt of the questions is always in them, in nuances.
I will explain.
The fact is that all three points prove the following:
- For many years, the state (aka public authorities) was violet on how exactly the Runet is filled, how it functions, and most importantly - how it develops in general from the point of view of interaction between the authorities and citizens themselves. There was a need - all websites became “kepat”: ministries, departments and other structures of the organization of officials. At the same time, the unsystematic nature of such an approach ultimately led to the fact that for ordinary citizens it is still not clear - for sure this is a state (municipal) site or still a scam. Wouldn't it have been easier to introduce one gov.ru zone and, say, region.ru or something like that for everyone? Are there any cases of phishing and other types of fraud in this vein? Yes. But about it - next time.
- Further, because of this confused approach, many commercial sites very often suffer losses a lot without noticing. An example is below.
- Finally, whitelists are a storehouse of information for those who love to search:
- affiliated companies (with whom and why - I will not explain);
- sites that can be used as doorways with the understanding that they will not be blocked precisely;
- and much more for that.
But for now - about the loss.
Not so long ago Habrozhitel turned to me - nelsh . Here is his post on how TTK blocks websites that should not be blocked - https://habrahabr.ru/post/328768/ .
From the comments on this publication, as well as the correspondence with nelsh, I came to the conclusion that illegal and unreasonable blocking occurs for the following reasons :
- Incorrect software configuration at the provider
- The system "Revizor" , which in principle does not work properly, is not 100% accustomed (so that you understand what I mean - read this post : it makes no sense to repeat it).
- “Roskomnadzor does not have adequate methods of countering the“ attack on the DNS of a blocked Internet resource ”: the RKN has already written that the approach will change, but now it’s all on the same wheel.
The problem described above belongs to TTK (in particular, Irkutsk, the Far East, Krasnodar, Rostov-on-Don : either more , as well as here , here , or here - in general, I hope that there is enough proof). How it looks technically - you can see here .
Fig. 2
At the same time, I quote: “TTC at the trunk level blocks random IPs that are not listed in the registry (seen just because they detect other IPs for blocked domains, and someone trolls / or CDN). As a result, random sites do not open. Of the last major ones that have been noticed - the Uniquiti sites, the service domains of EVE Online, Ingress - though they all sit on the CDN. Recently, a couple of IP Github.com was blocked, with all the consequences - the github stupidly did not open for several hours, but it was not massively ... It’s not blocked by everyone who walks through the TTC, apparently depending on the features of the provider-TTC.
As a lawyer, I am very worried about this question : after all, sooner or later, considering how the Runet is developing, this may concern everyone. Moreover, there are now a lot of prerequisites for the “unrighteous struggle”:
- China squeezes AKIT and their ilk, which means that ACIT will hit harder and harder ... no, not in China, but in the IP and LLC in RuNet.
- By itself, the lock and its mechanism - just a storehouse for abuse.
- In addition, more or less large players (Internet providers, mobile operators, etc.) are happy to try to please, and this, as we see, only spoils everything.
For objectivity, I will say that there are cases when locks, on the contrary, help business, even if indirectly .
Of course, to sue the state. the authorities are a thankless task: long, expensive, but it ends not like Lebedev’s, but without “o”. But to sue providers is possible and necessary. And not only to sue, but also to fight in all other legal ways. Otherwise, all this will resemble a circus tent.
Of course, law No. 1102471-6 on amendments to the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation in terms of establishing the responsibility of telecom operators plays a significant role in this. It sounds as follows (art. 13.34 in the sense): “failure of the telecom operator providing services to provide access to the information and telecommunications network“ Internet ”,“ duties ”to restrict or resume access to information, access to which should be limited or resumed on the basis of information received from the federal executive body exercising control and supervision functions in the field of communications, information technology and mass communications. ”
I note that there are already indicative cases for fines, for example:
- Resolution of April 20, 2017 on case No. 5-206 / 2017
- Definition of May 17, 2017
- Resolution of May 19, 2017 N 06-2217/2017
What can and should be used to protect your rights?
First, there is Art. 15 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation - damages: real damage + loss of profits. The formula is simple, but you can still prove the real damage (for example, if your clients write to you that the site was unavailable at such and such time and you prove that it was due to the provider / RKN error), but the loss of profit - already much harder. Let's say a person wanted to buy a phone for 20,000 rubles. You lost them. In addition, they lost another purchase for 18,000 and a possible profit for 2000 for the next. And yes, if one of the lawyers tells you the opposite (that to prove it “is easier than a fresh turnip) - do not believe :). In addition, you can look for losses:
- if the transitions were on the advertising campaign;
- by affiliate links;
- according to other paid sources.
Secondly, stt. 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation - protection of business reputation. Here, with the Russian courts is still more complicated than with Art. 15 and her attendant. But nevertheless, when the provider illegally blocks you, it thereby spreads information that your site (a resource on the Internet in principle) is included in the “black list” and thus potential buyers, as well as regular customers, are misinformed, and, as a result, word of mouth, especially if you have a local spill or regional scale project, it may be even more detrimental than just the lack of purchases due to a pseudo-block. So that you understand the seriousness of this - the list with the VKN offsite by blocking:
- Child pornography, drugs, and suicide information
- Extremist Information
- Information of a pornographic nature (except child pornography)
- Slander on the Internet
Third, Art. 1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation - you should never forget about it. For example, in the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of Arbitration of the Russian Federation No. 6763/10 dated November 23, 2010 in case N A53-6358 / 08 (VAC Bulletin of the Russian Federation. 2011. N 3), it was stated: “Arbitrary interference of anyone in private affairs is not allowed "In addition, arbitration courts often refer to this (common example is the decision of the CA of the Krasnoyarsk Territory of November 3, 2010 in case No. A33-12455 / 2010):" In the content of the principle of the inadmissibility of arbitrary interference of anyone in private affairs, the notion of private business as a citizen or a legal entity (as a private person) , based on private interest in the application of private law. ” It will be even more difficult than paragraph 1 and paragraph 2.
Other rules do not specify, because cases need to be considered individually (if there is - send, consider together).
For lawyers, especially practitioners, all three points are obvious, but for most, a priori they are losing. For entrepreneurs - not obvious, but even more losing. But still, my life position is that our interests are important and must be defended: the more often and better everyone will do it, the faster we will get a working system at the end. The choice is definitely yours .
For my part, I continue to insist that every law should go through a long stage of discussion: whether it is online cash registers , instant messengers , electronic money , online trading or something else. Otherwise, after the rapid adoption of “top”, we have a lot of technical, organizational, legal and other holes that do not allow the functioning of these laws to function normally.
Again, this truth will seem to someone capitalized, but, judging by the latest trends, unfortunately, it is not.
So far, everything - in the second part I will try to make out the example of the TTC and those promised above - separately and in a different perspective.
PS Mini-selection of materials on illegal blocking of RKN and / or providers:
- https://geektimes.ru/post/287714/ - EVE Online
- https://rublacklist.net/29059/ - how to try to deal with it
- Of course - the best selection of those who specialize in this: my personal thanks to them for this work
- Breakthrough material format “insanity strong”
- And this is not (at all, but still on) the topic, but beautiful statistics .
UPD - for those who do not know:
Roskomnadzor has sent recommendations to telecom operators on some technical aspects of blocking illegal information on the Internet. An incorrect DNS rezolving, which is carried out by individual telecoms when blocking web pages with illegal information, occurs when the telecom operator independently determines the IP address of a banned Internet resource.
In this case, as a result of the actions of intruders, excessive providers can get respectable sites, data about which are not available in the unloading of Roskomnadzor to telecom operators. Recommendations of Roskomnadzor are dictated by the interests of users and are aimed at eliminating excessive blocking of decent resources.
In particular, when an operator determines the IP address of a prohibited Internet resource by itself, it is recommended for providers to check whether popular and socially significant sites and their IP addresses fall under blocking.
Recommendations to operators to implement the blocking of prohibited information.
The systemic solution of the problem consists in the normative consolidation of the right to Roskomnadzor to determine the method of blocking the communication operator.
UPD. Well, the irrepressible RKN continued this epic ... by blocking Google (however, the TTC is again in place: more precisely, not on that).
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/330458/
All Articles