Italy’s ‘Piracy Shield’ Misfires, Blocks Google Drive In Anti-Piracy Blunder

from the no-cloud-for-you dept

In a stunning display of technological and regulatory ineptitude, Italy’s ‘Piracy Shield’ law has managed to block access to Google Drive, apparently confusing the popular cloud storage service with a hotbed of illegal activity. Bravo, Italy, bravo.

Earlier this year, we wrote about Italy’s new “Piracy Shield” nonsense, in which the country’s telecom regulator, AGCOM, could designate certain IP addresses as “piracy” and require all internet providers and VPNs to block access to those sites. As we noted in our original article, this was already causing problems, such as when a dynamic IP address from Cloudflare was blocked, taking out legitimate sites in the process.

The structure of the Piracy Shield means that it’s almost impossible to appeal bad blocks. The focus seems to be on blocking first and dealing with the fallout later.

Earlier this month, Italy made the Privacy Shield even worse, amending the regulations to increase criminal sanctions for failing to block IP addresses AGCOM designates and expanding even further the list of VPNs and DNS services covered. It also put in place rules demanding that ISPs proactively alert AGCOM of suspected piracy or face criminal charges with potential prison sentences.

Just last week, our own Glyn Moody sent over an article he had written on Walled Culture about just how bad all of this was. I was all set to republish it here this week. But fate intervened. Over the weekend, someone alerted us to the news that AGCOM had designated Google Drive as a piracy service, and pretty much all of it was blocked in Italy for a few hours.

Italian Wired has the details (auto-translated):

On the evening of Saturday 19 October, a ticket uploaded to the system adopted by the Communications Authority (Agcom) to stamp out illegal streaming blocked a critical domain of Drive, the Big G web service used to archive and share data in the cloud, and one of the YouTube caches. Two resources that, obviously, have nothing to do with the pirate broadcasting of football matches and other sports, which is what Piracy Shield should be dealing with, but which demonstrates for the umpteenth time how the technology gifted by Serie A to Agcom ends up paving over harmless sites. Even stepping on Google’s toes.

Let’s reconstruct the facts. At least since 6:56 PM on Saturday afternoon, as demonstrated by a source to Wired through some analysis, Piracy shield has been blocking the address drive.usercontent.google.com . As Google itself explains , it is one of the critical domains for Drive. The blackout implemented by the national anti-piracy platform prevents it from being reached and, in fact, from being able to download files stored on Drive . Wired was able to verify on Piracy shield search , a project for public sharing of blacked-out domains provided by Infotech srl, the effective blocking of the domain.

The same report notes that some YouTube URLs were also listed, so part (but not all) of YouTube was blocked across Italy.

Really making a dent in piracy there, AGCOM. Great work. Bang-up job, everyone.

As Wired explains, part of the issue is that the Piracy Shield law is so stupidly written. Rights holders can file complaints with huge lists of domains they want blocked, and ISPs are then given 30 minutes to block those domains. So, you know, mistakes are made. Like blocking all of Google Drive.

There is an “allowlist” that is supposed to protect against taking down big trusted sites like Google, but apparently a key Google Drive domain wasn’t on there.

The article also notes that while a few ISPs have chosen to unblock Google Drive, many had not at the time of writing. They have strong incentives not to unblock, as ISPs are subject to costly sanctions if they unblock domains designated under the Piracy Shield.

Of course, this kind of overblocking always happens. We’ve talked about examples in the past where similarly stupid blocking demands have removed tens of thousands of sites from the internet. You would think that someone in the Italian government might recognize the problems of this approach by now?

Filed Under: , , , , ,
Companies: google

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Italy’s ‘Piracy Shield’ Misfires, Blocks Google Drive In Anti-Piracy Blunder”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
26 Comments
Anonymous Coward says:

Italian ISPs are also on record talking about how much strain they’re under both economically and work-wise even just trying to develop a system that can handle AGCOM’s demands. At the rate Piracy Shield is going and what the ISPs are saying, it genuinely sounds like Italians might not have access to ISPs anymore because of the laws’ demands sooner than later.

…I mean, that’d technically stop piracy, I guess.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Although our Great Nation is truly #blessed by God, baby Jesus wasn’t conceived miraculously in the U.S.A., dummy. “Republicans” are members of the GOP, one of the two major contemporary political parties in the United States. The GOP emerged as the main political rival of the then-dominant Democratic Party in the mid-1850s.

You’re stupid.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

So, Prime Minister Meloni. It’d be a shame if anything happened to various government web domains. I mean, if someone were to incidentally flag them as infringing, it’d be a real mess to sort out, wouldn’t it?

But then, I’m sure you respect us, that we would never do something like that. I’m sure you can see your way to making this law more … reasonable.

Before any innocent web sites get hurt.

Capiche?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

“Do you think that people in the government actually use the internet?”

Ummmmmmmmm ………

Donald? — you ok???

Have you ever seen, online, links to comments made upon the website Truth Social or XTwitter or even visit the site directly – posts made by any of the present office holders running for president, the election is in a few weeks ya know.

You live under a rock?

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
GHB (profile) says:

Such a bad idea.

This is a conscription:

It also put in place rules demanding that ISPs proactively alert AGCOM of suspected piracy or face criminal charges with potential prison sentences.

So if some people are walking in town and spots a shoplifter running from the police, those people are held liable for being a bystander instead of trying to stop that shoplifter.

Once again, Piracy Shield have launched a missile without prior checking what content are being targeted to ensure that only illegal content are targeted. It just guess and assume it is illegal and block immidiately.

It is like in an airport, a women left her purse on the table. One person attempted to grab her purse to return it to her. That person got stopped by the cops assuming that the person is a thief for allegedly stealing her perse.

It’s just as bad as predictive policing if it targets a benign person.

Anonymous Coward says:

Not obvious

Two resources that, obviously, have nothing to do with the pirate broadcasting of football matches and other sports

Why is either of these “obvious”? It’s not obvious to me. People put stuff on Youtube all the time that they’re not allowed to, and I don’t see what would stop people sharing stuff over Google Drive.

CJ says:

Re: Yeah, kinda obvious actually.

The examples given “obviously have nothing to do with piracy” in the same manner that – as joked about by the AC immediately above you – public roadways are obviously not specifically intended to enable crime, despite the fact that they are sometimes used for that purpose.

If you follow the “but it could be used for piracy, so the IP blocks are legit” line of thinking to its logical conclusion, you might as well just shut down the web in its entirety right? I mean, who knows how many Naughty packets are mixed in with all the Nice packets? Better just shut it all down to be safe.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

The examples given “obviously have nothing to do with piracy” in the same manner that – as joked about by the AC immediately above you – public roadways are obviously not specifically intended to enable crime

Saying they’re not meant for it is quite different from saying they have nothing to do with it. Roads are not intended to enable crime, but it’s completely false that they have nothing to do with crime. For roads, we’ve come to accept that; for internet sites, the copyright maximalists are still in denial, to the extent that I don’t think we can even be sure this is a “mis”fire.

Anonymous Coward says:

Of course you can be all but sure that the brains behind Piracy Shield have absolved themselves of all responsibility when things go wrong – and go wrong they did. From insisting that the existence of an appeals channel means that nothing is wrong with Piracy Shield, to claiming that anyone who disagrees with their methods must be criminals, AGCOM and IP fanatics have basically shielded (pun not intended themselves from the consequences of their collateral damage.

Meanwhile you bet your ass that across the Atlantic, the RIAA/MPA are slavering at the chops to see how much they can port from across the pond.

Samus Aran says:

Re:

The RIAA/MPA almost got their wish in 2022 in the Sdarot case, but these orders were suspended at the last minute: https://www.techdirt.com/2022/05/04/who-needs-sopa-judge-orders-every-us-isp-to-block-entire-websites-accused-of-enabling-piracy/
However, this would raise issues under Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which doesn’t allow injunctions against unrelated third parties that aren’t in active concert or participation.

Note how the block page has a header that appears to have been screenshotted directly from the MPA domain seizure page. Compare these.
Sdarot: https://zira-usa-11026.org
MPA: https://alliance4creativity.com/watch-it-legally

Anonymous Coward says:

So according to Torrentfreak’s update on the topic, Piracy Shield has unsurprisingly doubled down on the claim that it’s not their fault that a rightsholder blocking request was erroneous – and if only, if only Google and Cloudflare had cooperated like obedient little drones this wouldn’t have happened.

I’m just going to quote the last few paragraphs as another indictment as to how messed up this whole debacle is.

Quintarelli says that if the Piracy Shield platform were to be infiltrated and maliciously exploited, essential services like hospitals, transportation systems, government functions, and critical infrastructure would be exposed to catastrophic blocking. Stefano Zanero and host Matteo Flora both expressed concern that lives could be at risk if blocking targeted life-supporting services.

That wouldn’t necessarily require a state actor with malicious intent, just someone with access to the current system untrained enough to consider the most popular domain in the world a legitimate target.

None of the rightsholders mentioned by Capitanio took part in the discussion. If any had attended, they could’ve explained why the commissioner’s enjoyment of an entirely legal stream provided by DAZN also faced interruption Saturday night due to the same blocking blunder.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the Techdirt Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...