BT / NTL /b/ Block - Stuff we know.

What follows has been posted in various other threads and has been repeated in IRC - but I thought it was probably an OK idea to post it all together in one place if only so I could point them to it - anyway:

As far as we have been able to work out someone has informed and organisation in the UK called the Internet Watch Foundation http://www.iwf.org.uk/ of our little place on the net and they have deemed it to be unacceptable due to either race hate OR childporn... probably both. They have place ONE SPECIFIC URL on a block list.

Seemingly NTL and BT subscribe to this block list to different degrees (although oddly some people are still getting through from at least NTL not sure about BT). The URL they are blocking is the main /b/ http://img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html one which is why you are seeing a 404/403 on that one, but are still capable of seeing links within /b/.

There are quite a few ways to get around this, the two that I employ when Im on my work BT line is by using the IP address of the of the /b/ server, so then the URL would be: http://66.207.165.178/b/imgboard.html - this also works for NTL users. NTL users can also just add a '?' mark to the end of the normal URL to get around it thus: http://img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html?
You can also use proxies and tunnelling an other crap, such as http//securebar.secure/...
or installing your own copy of squid maybe.

BT users only are currently finding them selves banned completely from the img.4chan servers, I have no idea what that is about as I dont think anyones said.

Are BT/NTL logging failed connects to the boards? No idea. How long is this gonna last? No idea. Is there anyway to ge the block lifted? Having read the IWFs complaints procedure... only if you want the police at your door if its still found to be CPy.

I think thats it, be brave /b/tards. You can get through this.

D.

>>200
please explain...

>>200

This is why i'm getting the fuck out of here as soon as possible.

you all should google for public proxy servers.
not all of them are slow.
 i found a reasonably fast one in finland, i can hardly notice the difference.

>>200

Enjoy ur american police state which is vastly more problematic than the UK one.

Unless you live in some different country, in which case enjoy ur inferior economy.

But yeah, BT sucks IF they are censoring /b/.

>>204
So what makes America into police state? Patriot Act? Guess what, Patriot Act is mild compared to what rights UK police and goverment have.

>>205
>>204

This thread is not for arguing about government afforded rights. Please GTFO both of you.

PS: BT here, can't access /b/. =(

Also BT, also no longer able to see /b/ :(

SORRY to go off-topic and fuel that idiot but what police state you crazy non-British person? It isn't actually like 1984 or V for Vendetta here you know! You'd be very hard pressed to find anyone who is a BRITISH CITIZEN who thinks they're being genuinely persecuted beyond the increasing cost of council tax, it's merely those who have delusional designs on us becoming an Islamic state...

Looking at the dates of the posts, it seems that the other day there was a massive /b/ ban.  I had NEVER had any problems with /b/ (i'm on BT yahoo) but then yesterday, i refreshed the page, and BAM, i got a banned notice. 

At first I thought sum mod was angry at me, cause I posted a link to download the new Transformers movie script, and had major spoilers in my post (caps locked for cruise control and massive damage).  Then i refreshed again and got the 404 error.

I'm very interested to see how this is gonna turn out.  VIVA LA /B/!

>>207

Me too, it's gone again now. Been able to access it for months now but it's gone. R.I.P. /b/. My pool has been closed due to governaids.

>>208

This is exactly what happened to me.

Had the problem initially a few months ago, manipulated the webcache to allow me in again, worked fine for some time, then a couple of days ago I got the ban followed by a wall of 404s.

I'm >>193

I will definitely talk to BT Tech support again, if you guys can give me some kind of proof that this is not a 4chan-side problem. Next time I talk to them, I will try to get this problem escalated (Beating in mind their tech support is in India - I'M NOT RACIST - but yeah, it's difficult talking to those indians. =( . . )

Apparently they ban sites which could potentially be used for illegal stuff.  ANY site you post pictures and videos on can be used to post illegal stuff on.  And like /b/, them sites delete the images and videos quickly.

>>211
We should messagebomb their online tech support shit.
unfortunately i uninstalled it, but if it gives me a chance to spam the shit out of them, i'll reinstall BT's aids-infected software.
On another note, BT don't allow xbox live, yet another reason NOT TO USE BT YAHOO.

After spending 1.5 hours + on the phone with their tech support, I have had this issue escalated to level 1 - their 'backend' people are working on it and will report back to me by tuesday.

I clearly explained what /b/ was and that it was a message board, and they repeatedly told me that BT was not blocking any websites.

It seems to have been a problem for me since my ip (and all my routing stuff on BT's end) went from 81.*.*.* to 217.*.*.* (What it used to be ages ago). Possibly they've done some kind of big changeover, and so it's back to an old list of blocked sites?

My IP is still 81.154.72.234 and has been all along, and I'm still blocked. =(

i renewed my ip back to the 86.129 range, still banned.(turn your router off for a while, then back on again)
all the bt webcache proxies are giving 404s too.

THANKS!

fucking ntl are at it again, now i have to make another toolbar shrtcut to http://img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html?
fags of gay.

Yep I was also blocked on the 6th October from /b/ and I'm using BTInternet.  I was gonna email them but, if they've blocked /b/ because THEY think it has CP, they might start tracing my activies online because I mention that I like to visit /b/.  Stupid I know, but it's something that BT would do. 

BT user here. The webcache fix doesn't work for me. This is perplexing.

JESUS WTF DO I DO GUYZ?

Just wait till it becomes nation wide for all internet providers :(

in firefox, go to tools/options/connection settings
internet explorer go to tools/internet options/connections/Lan settings
copypasta proxy from one of those links.(remember to change the port too)
it might take a while to find a working one, but there are some
reasonably fast proxies on there.

sorry, forgot the links
http://www.proxy4free.com/page1.html
http://www.publicproxyservers.com/page1.html
(dumbass)

86.133.*.* is also gone. I don't know what the hell's happened here. I thought BT had overrided the original decision to block /b/?

>>221
As far as I know it doesn't work for anyone now, unlike a few months ago. So we're stuck with public proxies and tor.

Can you buy a subscription to a proxy?  I'd certainly pay yearly for a fast proxy.

The thing I don't understand is this - why would BT's proxy redirect to the 4chan banned page?

Browser sends this:

  GET /b/ HTTP/1.1
  Host: img.4chan.org

Web server responds with this:

  HTTP/1.x 302 Found
  Transfer-Encoding: chunked
  Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 18:09:38 GMT
  Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
  Server: Apache/1.3.34 (Unix)
  Location: http://www.4chan.org/banned.php

which is a redirect to the ban page. Browser then asks for this:

  GET /banned.php HTTP/1.1
  Host: www.4chan.org

And server responds with:

  HTTP/1.x 302 Found
  Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 18:09:56 GMT
  Server: Apache/1.3.34 (Unix) PHP/5.1.1
  X-Powered-By: PHP/5.1.1
  Cache-Control: no-cache, must-revalidate
  Pragma: no-cache
  Expires: Mon, 04 Apr 1994 04:04:04 GMT
  Location: http://www.4chan.org
  Connection: close
  Transfer-Encoding: chunked
  Content-Type: text/html

which is a redirect back to the main page. WTF?

If you ask for /b/imgboard.html, this is what happens:

  GET /b/imgboard.html HTTP/1.1
  Host: img.4chan.org

  HTTP/1.x 403 Forbidden
  Transfer-Encoding: chunked
  Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 18:14:07 GMT
  Content-Type: text/html
  Connection: close
  Pragma: no-cache

Entirely forbidden, and a quite different sort of response from the others in that there is no "Server: Apache/1.3.34" header listed.

I'm on BT - can anyone using NTL share their browser headers please?

This is really starting to piss me off.

I joined BT back in may, and there was a 404 redirection then.  i was fine till now and it hits me again. I'm sure somewhere in the Human Rights Act of 2000 theres a means for us to fuck them (wiki:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Act_%28UK%29), but  just gotta find it and throw it at them.

If we were american, we'd be throwing the constitution at them

mgggi4

Still blocked.

This is getting re-fucking-diculous.

I'm sad :-(

Again, you can blame the pedos for knacking up our /b/. I emailled the head of the IWF asking what the deal was:

--

Hello Peter,

Could you please tell me if the above URL has been re-entered into your
blocking database, and for what reasons? It looks like BT Internet has
blocked it using their CleanFeed service again.

Regards
Richard C Mongler

--

Hi Richard

Yes it was re-entered because it was displaying an indecent image of
child abuse. That image has now been removed and so the url has been
reinstated.

Peter

>>234

Whoa...

When I read your post I honestly thought you were a troll. Then I check /b/ and it's working!

Thank you Anonymous. I indeed blame the pedos.

What frustrated me most was not knowing why /b/ was blocked, so I thank you most of all for revealing the cause of the blockage. Good work anonymous, I will drink in your name tonight.

>>235
No problem, I'm glad you found it helpful. Here's a followup email I sent:

--

Thanks for the information, and I appreciate the work that you guys do in preventing illegal images from being viewed.

Would it be possible, on sites such as 4chan where the aim of the site has nothing to do with glorifying child abuse (indeed, images of such are explicity banned) but that rely on user-submitted content, to just block the url of the offending image rather than larger sections of the site? It can be frustrating having the site blocked for days at a time because some paedophile decided to spam it with images, and no moderators being available at that time to remove it.

I hope you don't mind me making this suggestion.

Regards
Richard C Mongler

4CHAN IS BACK TO US BT USERS!

>>236

Sounds like a great idea, if they can do it - after all, it's impossible to PREVENT CP being posted without destroying what 4chan is all about (i.e. posting images). I'd be greatful to know of any response to this email. Additionally, if the email address you're communicating with isn't already general knowledge, can we keep it on the 'down-low'? Just to stop any sort of /b/ invasion which could risk chances of getting /b/ unbanned in the future? Maybe I'm just being paranoid. =D

That's what the serious side of me is saying. The /b/ side of me is giggling like a little girl because the president of the IWF is having a conversation with Richard C. Mongler.

>>238

He responded saying that they're trying to find a "satisfactory and practical solution" to this. I think he's trying to get in contact with the admins to talk about their policies, so I passed on the contacts I know.

So it looks like good news. With luck, the pedos will be stopped without collateral damage to /b/.

>>239
Acceptable policies = retarded unnecessary rules and that won't happen