[HN Gopher] Tell HN: docker pull fails in spain due to football ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Tell HN: docker pull fails in spain due to football cloudflare
       block
        
       I just spent 1h+ debugging why my locally-hosted gitlab runner
       would fail to create pipelines. The gitlab job output would just
       display weird TLS errors when trying to pull a docker images. After
       debugging gitlab and the runner, I realized after a while I could
       not even run "docker pull <image>" on my machine as root:  > error
       pulling image configuration: download failed after attempts=6: tls:
       failed to verify certificate: x509: certificate is not valid for
       any names, but wanted to match docker-images-
       prod.6aa30f8b08e16409b46e0173d6de2f56.r2.cloudflarestorage.com
       First blaming tailscale, dns configuration and all other stuff.
       Until I just copied that above URL into my browser on my laptop,
       and received a website banner:  > El acceso a la presente direccion
       IP ha sido bloqueado en cumplimiento de lo dispuesto en la
       Sentencia de 18 de diciembre de 2024, dictada por el Juzgado de lo
       Mercantil no 6 de Barcelona en el marco del procedimiento ordinario
       (Materia mercantil art. 249.1.4)-1005/2024-H instado por la Liga
       Nacional de Futbol Profesional y por Telefonica Audiovisual
       Digital, S.L.U. https://www.laliga.com/noticias/nota-informativa-
       en-relacion-con-el-bloqueo-de-ips-durante-las-ultimas-jornadas-de-
       laliga-ea-sports-vinculadas-a-las-practicas-ilegales-de-cloudflare
       For those non-spanish speakers: It means there is football match
       on, and during that time that specific host is blocked. This is
       just plain madness. I guess that means my gitlab pipelines will not
       run when football is on. Thank you, Spain.
        
       Author : littlecranky67
       Score  : 602 points
       Date   : 2026-04-12 12:28 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
       | sigio wrote:
       | Time to use a VPN in your docker pipelines ;) Or run your systems
       | outside of Spain.
       | 
       | Or can this be avoided by using an alternate DNS?
        
         | darkwater wrote:
         | They are planning to also block VPN providers during football
         | matches, see https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-
         | security/la-liga-w...
        
           | Mordisquitos wrote:
           | They are not "planning" to block VPNs. A technologically
           | illiterate judge has ordered it, but there are no plans nor
           | mechanisms to enforce it.
        
             | chrismustcode wrote:
             | If they can block IPs of cloudflare what extra mechanisms
             | would be needed to block VPN IPs?
        
               | chmod775 wrote:
               | The only viable way to even get most of them is to shut
               | down internet access entirely. It's not a realistic
               | solution, unlike blocking a few well known IP ranges
               | belonging to a large corp like Cloudflare.
               | 
               | And even if you managed to get them all beforehand, some
               | VPN providers will adapt and keep some servers in
               | reserve, putting them online just as you managed to block
               | the previous ones. Getting around internet censorship is
               | a large chunk of their business, and some are _really_
               | good at it.
        
               | echoangle wrote:
               | You don't really need to block all, you just need to
               | annoy the users enough that paying is easier. And I think
               | there are enough games to use up the IP reserve pretty
               | quickly and getting new ones every time is pretty
               | annoying.
        
               | chmod775 wrote:
               | I can provision a new VPS in about 5s of active work. I'd
               | probably fully automate spinning up new servers and
               | failing over because automatically detecting which got
               | blocked is trivial. Bonus points if you use providers
               | that let you attach multiple IPs to each VPS for cheap.
               | Use some censorship resistant decentralized protocols to
               | provide the next couple IPs to your client software and
               | you're good.
               | 
               | And then they still need to monitor hundreds of VPN
               | providers for whether they have new IPs, which is not
               | neccssarily as easy as just grabbing a list of them. Once
               | they have some, they then need to forward them to the
               | ISPs and ask for them to be blocked. Their process is
               | significantly less friendly to automation.
               | 
               | No country ever won this fight short of total
               | shutdown/disconnects.
        
               | mr-wendel wrote:
               | It's a game. The VPN marketplace is huge so it's wack-a-
               | mole.
               | 
               | Big companies don't hide their VPN ASNs. Obscure, for
               | sure, but getting a good list isn't hard. Usually they
               | get blocked.
               | 
               | Smaller companies may pass under the radar, and have
               | higher tolerance for risky strategies.
               | 
               | The fringe providers are the problem. They aggressively
               | change IP ranges, front-vs-obscure ownership, and play
               | dirty. Shady folks will resell residential ranges. End-
               | users often get tainted goods.
               | 
               | ... and you still have the collateral damage game when
               | VPNs host infra with big cloud providers vs colofarms vs
               | self-host, etc.
        
             | darkwater wrote:
             | The exact same stupid mechanism they are already using.
             | Forcing ISPs to blackhole whole subnets if they belong to
             | the VPN provider ASN(s).
        
           | ufocia wrote:
           | "A _Sanish_ Court has ordered NordVPN and Proton VPN to block
           | IPs transmitting illegal football streams" [emphasis added],
           | that is inspain.
        
           | prmoustache wrote:
           | When talking about VPNs, it doesn't have to mean "third party
           | VPN". You can host your own on any VPN service outside of
           | Spain.
        
             | darkwater wrote:
             | Yes, but that's not something many can do easily. Also
             | already having to use a VPN is not the "right" solution.
             | The right so solution is to beat some sense inside some
             | politician's head, and force them to write and approve laws
             | that don't let stupid (or conniving) judges pass orders
             | like this one we are talking about.
        
               | prmoustache wrote:
               | I agree it is not the right solution.
               | 
               | But anyone who is pulling docker images in a sunday
               | afternoon while the rest of the country is glued to their
               | screen to watch a football game or enjoying a sunny
               | sunday outside having beers and tapas and what not should
               | be capable of setting up wireguard.
        
               | marginalia_nu wrote:
               | Given the context of the HN audience, it's probably
               | something you can do.
        
               | msh wrote:
               | It takes very light technical skills to deploy algo
        
         | skgsergio wrote:
         | Alternate DNS doesn't help, they block at IP level.
         | 
         | Yes, they block IPs belonging to CDNs (CF including R2,
         | BunnyCDN, CDN77, Fastly, Alibaba, Akamai even)...
        
         | littlecranky67 wrote:
         | It is not a DNS based block, but on the IP level. Once I knew
         | what caused the issue, I figured I use one of my Hetzner
         | vServers as an exit node in tailscale.
         | 
         | But come on, this can't be true. I wonder how many other people
         | in IT wasted hours on issues and tickets to find out it is due
         | to a football match taking place. Admittedly, chances are low,
         | as football matches are usually outside of office hours.
        
         | gred wrote:
         | > run your systems outside of Spain
         | 
         | So much for digital sovereignty :-)
        
       | vaylian wrote:
       | This is a know issue and it is completely fucked up:
       | https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/cloudflar...
       | 
       | What Spain does is basically censorship and it's very poorly
       | executed. The docker image registry is only one out of the many
       | collateral victims of this stupid law.
        
         | embedding-shape wrote:
         | > What Spain does is basically censorship and it's very poorly
         | executed
         | 
         | Basically? It is censorship, with huge collateral damage and
         | regardless of how much we complain or share evidence that the
         | blocks are actually financially harming us, no one seems to
         | care as long as La Liga gets to freely block whatever hoster of
         | websites as they wish.
        
           | ryandrake wrote:
           | It's just like the Great Firewall of China, except in service
           | of _football profits_ instead of political ideology. I don 't
           | know which one is dumber and more disgraceful.
        
             | embedding-shape wrote:
             | I wouldn't say "instead of", just "also", these "football
             | blocks" are not the first cases of censorship of the
             | internet in Spain.
             | 
             | womenonweb.org for example was inaccessible for years, just
             | unblocked some years ago. During the latest Catalan
             | independence referendum, the Spanish government blocked a
             | bunch of websites, not the very least the official website
             | of the referendum itself.
             | 
             | This is just one of the most recent cases, and so far the
             | one with widest regular impact.
        
       | utrack wrote:
       | They block the whole of Cloudflare R2, I believe the Docker hub
       | is just (heh) a collateral.
       | 
       | When the La Liga match starts, everything that's proxied via CF
       | (including zero access reverse tunnels) stops working.
       | 
       | There's even a website made for checking if the match is on:
       | https://hayahora.futbol/
       | 
       | You can check if your host is affected:
       | https://hayahora.futbol/#comprobador&domain=docker-images-pr...
        
         | mr_mitm wrote:
         | Why do they do that? Sorry, I don't speak Spanish.
        
           | ShowalkKama wrote:
           | to """"""""""prevent piracy""""""""""
        
           | quadrifoliate wrote:
           | Here's a good English-language article about it, with a
           | timeline: https://daniel.es/blog/cloudflare-vs-la-liga/
           | 
           | Looks like same old regulatory capture.
        
             | maest wrote:
             | Also, a classic tweet from the Cloudflare CEO re their
             | fight with Italians authorities re censorship:
             | 
             | https://xcancel.com/eastdakota/status/2009654937303896492
             | 
             | Everyone looks bad in this conflict.
        
               | post-it wrote:
               | How does this make Matthew look bad?
        
               | encom wrote:
               | Matt acting like he's a free speech absolutist.
               | Hilarious.
        
               | petcat wrote:
               | Italy and Spain are the bad actors here. Not cloudflare.
        
               | bethekidyouwant wrote:
               | On a scale of oppression he certainly leans towards free.
        
               | nslsm wrote:
               | HN in 2026: free speech is hilarious.
        
               | encom wrote:
               | You have it backwards. I'm the free speech absolutist.
               | Cloudflare is not.
        
           | prmoustache wrote:
           | Because LaLiga and football in general is what is governing
           | Spain really.
        
           | bakugo wrote:
           | The website has a language selector on the right just below
           | the initial screen, just FYI.
        
           | lentil_soup wrote:
           | to stop people pirating football streams while matches are
           | on. Insanity
        
           | michaelt wrote:
           | The football league would rather not have pirates livestream
           | their ~90 minute games.
           | 
           | Pirates would rather not be blocked, so they create a new,
           | disposable website for every game. Any blocking must happen
           | fast.
           | 
           | Cloudflare would rather not block websites without a court
           | order specifying the sites to be blocked.
           | 
           | The courts would rather not create a special fast lane
           | through the courts, just to resolve a squabble between two
           | huge corporations.
        
             | n6242 wrote:
             | > The football league would rather not have pirates
             | livestream their ~90 minute games.
             | 
             | Funny enough, I work in IT and I've had to use a VPN to be
             | able to do my job when soccer is on, but my two non-tech-
             | savy family members that do watch soccer using pirate
             | livestreams say that they've never had any issues with
             | blocked streams.
        
               | spwa4 wrote:
               | But you must realize, the alternative to this is that
               | some very wealthy Spanish companies ... lose a small
               | amount of money.
               | 
               | Surely you understand now. Go about your business, poor
               | person.
        
               | ryandrake wrote:
               | They don't even "lose a small amount of money." They
               | simply gain less money than usual for a short period of
               | time. Think of how rough that is for them.
        
               | necovek wrote:
               | I think it's even that they "gain less money than they
               | could if everyone watching illegally _would pay_ for it
               | when they could not watch illegally " (that's usually how
               | companies crying "piracy" calculate "losses" -- "let's
               | assume everyone watching illegally would certainly still
               | watch it and pay the full price").
        
               | joquarky wrote:
               | I once remember reading an article about shareholders
               | selling off a stock because the rate of increase in
               | profit had slowed.
        
               | KAMSPioneer wrote:
               | I work in IT and have found that the issue impacts my
               | work but not my ability to stream sports from sites of
               | questionable legality. Of course, I don't pirate La Liga
               | matches but that's primarily because I don't give a shit
               | about soccer.
               | 
               | But the point is that the measure does more to block
               | legitimate use than illegitimate (in my experience). And
               | next they want to go after VPNs. Wonderful.
        
               | fc417fc802 wrote:
               | But think of the children ... and futbol!
        
             | lentil_soup wrote:
             | > Cloudflare would rather not block websites without a
             | court order specifying the sites to be blocked.
             | 
             | why would they?
             | 
             | > squabble between two huge corporations
             | 
             | I think this is just LaLiga using it's cultural and
             | economical power, don't think Cloudflare or the courts
             | should be making exceptions just so they can control how
             | people watch football
        
               | gruez wrote:
               | >why would they?
               | 
               | Plenty of companies proactively take action against shady
               | users, even if not 100% required under law. Youtube has
               | content id, social media companies have "community
               | guidelines", and ISPs have AUPs.
        
               | mlyle wrote:
               | > why would they?
               | 
               | Well, in this case, the alternative is all of Spain
               | intermittently blocking lots of Cloudflare.
               | 
               | But if Cloudflare bows to Spain in this case, every
               | jurisdiction will want to pile up lots of special case
               | rules for Cloudflare to try and implement.
        
             | teaearlgraycold wrote:
             | The US is captured by the Israeli lobby. Spain is captured
             | by the football lobby.
        
             | Pay08 wrote:
             | So what, do they just block a range of IP addresses and are
             | then done with it?
        
               | swiftcoder wrote:
               | technically, LaLiga themselves doesn't even do the
               | blocking. They have a court order from some years ago
               | that allows them to compel all the individual ISPs to
               | block any IP addresses they specify, with no oversight or
               | review
        
               | bartread wrote:
               | This must negatively impact a huge number of businesses.
               | Is there no move for them to all get together to take
               | legal action against LaLiga to stop them doing this?
        
         | sva_ wrote:
         | Ah man, that shader in the background is like a rite of passage
         | for people including a shader on their website.
         | 
         | https://www.shadertoy.com/view/lscczl
        
           | aftbit wrote:
           | Ah the irony, I'm blocked from viewing that page by
           | Cloudflare
           | 
           | Performing security verification
           | 
           | This website uses a security service to protect against
           | malicious bots. This page is displayed while the website
           | verifies you are not a bot. Incompatible browser extension or
           | network configuration
        
       | jimaek wrote:
       | Off topic but I wonder when Cloudflare is going to launch their
       | own Docker registry as a product.
        
         | vaylian wrote:
         | What would the business case be?
        
           | jimaek wrote:
           | Capture developers and funnel them to the Workers platform
        
         | ImJasonH wrote:
         | It's pretty easy to write your own. I made this one a while
         | ago: https://github.com/chainguard-dev/crow-registry
        
         | wqtz wrote:
         | Well, Cloudflare does not launch anything. They acquire to
         | build products. Look into all their recent product launches.
         | They acquired a relatively small company and converted the
         | founding team to a product team.
         | 
         | So, if you want them to build stuff, ask yourself, are there
         | any "Docker Registry" startups out there. If
         | jsdelivr/globalping is not keeping you busy enough... there is
         | an idea
        
           | jimaek wrote:
           | Honestly I would build it if I knew how to properly market it
           | to quickly get users.
           | 
           | Globalping and jsDelivr took years to gain a meaningful user
           | base
        
             | wqtz wrote:
             | I do not think that is the issue. The recent acquisitions
             | from all these big tech companies did not have any
             | "meaningful" user base to begin with.
             | 
             | I think your name alone carries significant weight in the
             | industry and you have built a very large community.
             | 
             | If you even vibe code something with, you will get a stupid
             | amount of money thrown at you and a contract that bounds
             | your existing projects and the next 3-5 years to a
             | particular company as project lead.
             | 
             | Here is a list of acquisitions Cloudflare made recently:
             | https://blog.cloudflare.com/tag/acquisitions/
             | 
             | Most of these companies did not have a half dozen paying
             | customer or even a fully fleshed-out product before they
             | were acquired.
        
               | jimaek wrote:
               | I wish I had as much faith in myself as you have in me :)
        
         | ai_slop_hater wrote:
         | https://github.com/cloudflare/serverless-registry
        
           | jimaek wrote:
           | I've seen it but it's buggy and lacking in features. Feels
           | like an afterthought instead of a real product
        
       | ahachete wrote:
       | Yeah, I know. Welcome to the club :(
       | 
       | https://x.com/ahachete/status/2035783292549755228
        
       | mathfailure wrote:
       | Cloudflare is cancer. And the tumor is now too big.
        
         | Cpoll wrote:
         | You've got it backwards. Spain's ISPs are blocking Cloudflare
         | and other CDNs because of LaLiga/football piracy. CloudFlare
         | isn't doing anything here.
        
           | sph wrote:
           | You are correct, but Cloudflare is still a cancer on the
           | Internet.
        
             | petcat wrote:
             | Rampant bot traffic and scrapers are the real cancer. Until
             | that goes away everyone is going to need cloudflare or some
             | other bot firewall service.
        
               | Duwensatzaj wrote:
               | It won't. Some people are perfectly happy to destroy and
               | destroy as long as they get some small portion as profit
               | for themselves.
        
               | sph wrote:
               | That, ironically, includes Cloudflare. Without rampant
               | bots making the internet worse for everybody, they
               | wouldn't have as much work. And their portion of profit
               | is anything but small.
        
               | adrian_b wrote:
               | Perhaps that is true, but the Cloudflare anti-bot
               | protection is too stupid and annoying.
               | 
               | They should have used a cookie or something else that
               | does not require asking me every few minutes to prove
               | once more that I am not a bot.
               | 
               | There was a time when Cloudflare had become less
               | intrusive, but for the last months it has begun again to
               | intervene almost each time when opening some pages.
               | 
               | There is no doubt that anti-bot protection can be
               | implemented in a better way than Cloudflare does, but
               | presumably the alternatives would consume more resources
               | on their servers, so probably they choose whatever
               | minimizes their costs, regardless if that ensures maximum
               | discomfort for Internet users.
        
               | post-it wrote:
               | You're getting frequent verification requests because
               | you're behaving like a bot. Are you modifying your user
               | agent string or using a VPN?
        
               | encom wrote:
               | Who knows what upsets ClownFlare? I'm using Vivaldi on
               | Linux on IPv6 in Denmark with every uBlock filter enabled
               | and Cookie Auto-delete. That seems to confuse and anger
               | CloudFlare and I get CAPTCHA tarpitted constantly.
        
               | bethekidyouwant wrote:
               | So you know why.
        
               | encom wrote:
               | No, it could be any, or other, totally normal and
               | reasonable factors. Or maybe I posted too much Cloudflare
               | hate on HN and they singled me out.
               | 
               |  _They 're in the walls!_                 NO CARRIER
               | +CREG: 0,0
        
               | post-it wrote:
               | > They should have used a cookie or something else that
               | does not require asking me every few minutes to prove
               | once more that I am not a bot.
               | 
               | > every uBlock filter enabled and Cookie Auto-delete
               | 
               | Hmm
        
               | fc417fc802 wrote:
               | Those are easy enough to dissuade with readily available
               | PoW solutions. People use CF & co. out of convenience,
               | the exact same reason that most websites load resources
               | from _at least_ half a dozen third parties instead of
               | self hosting.
        
           | jbxntuehineoh wrote:
           | cf is failing to comply with Spanish law and as a result is
           | being blocked in Spain
        
           | otterley wrote:
           | I know this is an unpopular opinion among freedom
           | maximalists, but:
           | 
           | It's precisely because CloudFlare isn't responding like other
           | CDNs to reasonable demands to cut off pirate origin sites
           | that this mess exists. If they reacted quickly to remove
           | configurations that are obviously facilitating copyright
           | infringement, Spain wouldn't resort to full scale ASN
           | blocking.
           | 
           | How do we know it's CloudFlare? Because other CDNs like
           | CloudFront, Akamai, Fastly, etc. respond to takedown demands
           | and aren't being blocked. (Those also cost money and require
           | customer identification.)
           | 
           | In an escalating war between the state and a corporation, the
           | state will always prevail if they have the public's backing.
           | In Spain it's clear that most people are happy to watch the
           | match through legitimate channels even at the cost of
           | blocking CloudFlare.
        
             | FireBeyond wrote:
             | > It's precisely because CloudFlare isn't responding like
             | other CDNs to reasonable demands to cut off pirate origin
             | sites that this mess exists. If they reacted quickly to
             | remove configurations that are obviously facilitating
             | copyright infringement, Spain wouldn't resort to full scale
             | ASN blocking.
             | 
             | Apropos of anything else, CF is (reasonably) requiring a
             | court order to remove offending material rather than just
             | "well, company said so, so eh, just do as they say". La
             | Liga complains that "oh, that's too slow for what we want"
             | and just got a blanket ruling.
             | 
             | I am not a fan of CF but your argument seems to be "CF
             | should just roll over any time someone says "hey, delete
             | this", because, obviously, everyone _knows_ it 's
             | problematic, right? Right?".
        
               | otterley wrote:
               | At least the DMCA in the U.S. has guardrails: not just
               | anyone can send a takedown demand for everything. The
               | requester has identify the works and declare under
               | penalty of perjury that they are operating on the behalf
               | of the owner. I imagine the equivalent EU law has similar
               | requirements.
               | 
               | CloudFlare uses legal chicanery to try to subvert the
               | DMCA by claiming that because they're not the origin
               | server, they're not subject to takedown demands. So far
               | no court has told them to knock it off. I expect that day
               | will eventually come. Every lawsuit against them to date
               | has ended in a settlement because CloudFlare would rather
               | pay up than get an unfavorable ruling on the books.
               | 
               | CloudFlare has consistently treated loss of DMCA safe
               | harbor protection as a material business risk; it's been
               | cited in every SEC filing from the 2019 IPO S-1 through
               | the FY2025 10-K.
        
               | FireBeyond wrote:
               | > At least the DMCA in the U.S. has guardrails: not just
               | anyone can send a takedown demand for everything. The
               | requester has identify the works and declare under
               | penalty of perjury that they are operating on the behalf
               | of the owner.
               | 
               | You'd think so, but no.
               | 
               | DMCA came into effect 28 years ago. All those decades,
               | all those billions of takedowns, and you don't even need
               | the fingers of one hand to count those who've been hit
               | with perjury for a false takedown request, because the
               | number is ... zero.
        
               | willdr wrote:
               | Nobody cares about the DMCA guardrails and they are never
               | meaningfully enforced. Case in point, Anthropic DMCAing
               | thousands of repositories that simply mentioned the word
               | "claude".
        
         | petcat wrote:
         | Spain is mandating their ISPs block cloudflare to stop people
         | from illegally streaming soccer games. Cloudflare isn't the one
         | doing the blocking.
        
         | ufocia wrote:
         | How so?
        
         | StrLght wrote:
         | You made a few typos in "LaLiga"
        
         | skgsergio wrote:
         | I can agree on how much power on the global traffic they have,
         | but this blocks affect many other CDNs like Fastly, Akamai,
         | CDN77, BunnyCDN, Alibaba...
        
       | anthk wrote:
       | Yea, La Liga it's crapping out as always. Docker needs either
       | some I2P gateway, or a Tor service.
        
         | fc417fc802 wrote:
         | The pirate streams need an I2P service that way LaLiga might
         | give up.
        
       | anthk wrote:
       | CF could just sue LaLiga and the judge as interrupting and
       | intercepting telecomms it's a really serious crime in Spain. Call
       | the AEPD too because of consumers' right against both ISP and
       | LaLiga's snooping. Another huge fine.
       | 
       | This is not an issue under the civil code (civilian issues), but
       | something to be dealt under penal (criminal) code.
       | 
       | In Spanish
       | 
       | https://www.fiscal.es/memorias/memoria2020/FISCALIA_SITE/rec...
       | 
       | Oh, and BTW, LaLiga has just partnered with a CF rival.
       | 
       | Now CF can just sue both like hell because of unfair competition:
       | 
       | https://nitter.tiekoetter.com/xataka/status/2042658662850724...
        
         | quadrifoliate wrote:
         | Looks like they already tried to appeal the block, and lost:
         | 
         | https://x.com/jaumepons/status/1904906677335245294
        
           | buzer wrote:
           | They could potentially file the suit against Spain in
           | European Court of Human Rights if they have exhausted
           | national remedies. ECtHR has previously ruled some blocks to
           | be illegal, but generally in the context where country sought
           | the ban. Of course in both cases Court is the one that
           | actually orders the ban.
           | 
           | One relevant would be Yildirim v. Turkey where court ordered
           | blocking access to all Google sites because there was one
           | that where someone insulted the memory of Ataturk. This was
           | due to request from Telecommunications Directorate. This then
           | caused the appellant's website to get blocked as well.
           | 
           | Another one would be Vladimir Kharitonov v. Russia.
        
         | prmoustache wrote:
         | I think they are doing it already.
        
       | pjc50 wrote:
       | This is why technology businesses and professionals need to take
       | a little bit of an active role in local politics. Otherwise you
       | get nonsense.
        
         | DocTomoe wrote:
         | That's an interesting euphenism for 'spend a massive amount of
         | money on ~~corruption~~ lobbying',
        
           | lentil_soup wrote:
           | not necesarilly, any government will make decisions, if
           | there's no one to speak up and inform them why the decision
           | is stupid, like the one from LaLiga, then we end up in this
           | situation
        
             | afh1 wrote:
             | This is incredibly naive.
        
               | lentil_soup wrote:
               | ok, then what do you suggest? we don't get involved and
               | decisions at the government level are made for us? I
               | might be naive, but let's not be restrained by the
               | cynicism of any involment in politics and governance is
               | corruption
        
               | embedding-shape wrote:
               | What? This is how governance and public opinion happen,
               | at least in Spain. Government does something bad?
               | Everyone out on the streets to complain, and calling
               | politicians to change their mind.
               | 
               | Sometimes it works, sometimes it does not, but doing
               | nothing is never an option if you disagree with what
               | they're doing. To think that doing nothing is better than
               | something, that's incredibly naive.
        
               | ryandrake wrote:
               | Doing nothing can't be better, but it's entirely possible
               | that doing nothing has exactly the equal effect as doing
               | something.
        
               | embedding-shape wrote:
               | > but it's entirely possible
               | 
               | You're right, it possibly has the same effect. How could
               | we figure out what's the actual answer in practice?
        
       | danirod wrote:
       | Heh, lucky you, at least you get a message. My ISP just drops
       | traffic to the affected IPs. No ping, no traceroute, just a
       | spinner in the browser until it says "page not found".
       | 
       | Every response and comment from LaLiga, the football organization
       | responsible for this, has been so far that this is a minor issue
       | that only affects a few bunch of nerds who talk about "docker
       | images" or "github repositories" or "whatever that means".
       | 
       | Meanwhile, there are testimonies of smart home devices like anti-
       | theft alarms or automatic doors, that stop working whenever there
       | is a football match, because their backends rely on Cloudflare.
       | 
       | Last week, a woman asked for help on social media, as the GPS
       | tracking app she uses to see where her father with dementia is,
       | went offline during a match. It was getting late and he still
       | wasn't back home, and she couldn't locate the tag he was wearing
       | to find him:
       | https://www.infobae.com/america/agencias/2026/04/05/laliga-d...
       | 
       | It's hard to say this, because no one should experience an event
       | like this, but as stressful as these are, it's the only way to
       | make the mainstream people care about this censorship. "I cannot
       | pull a docker image" will never be on nightly news, but safety
       | and personal security is a more powerful driver for discourses.
        
         | freetanga wrote:
         | All people affected should file a complaint with your ISP and
         | with Oficina de Atencion al Usuario de Telecomunicaciones
         | claiming financial loss for arbitrary service censorship.
        
           | pixl97 wrote:
           | Yep, flood them with complaints.
        
           | bakugo wrote:
           | Sadly, it won't accomplish anything. La Liga seems to have
           | enough political power in the country to bury all of that.
           | Probably bribing everyone involved.
        
             | cluckindan wrote:
             | Corruption at that level could mean organized crime. Is
             | there a culture of betting through illegal bookies, are
             | they fixing matches, or ?porque no los dos?
        
               | embedding-shape wrote:
               | Well, I think when the organized crime is registered as
               | proper businesses and they have the judges on their side
               | even if the law isn't, I think we just call that "for-
               | profit capitalism" nowadays.
        
               | dualvariable wrote:
               | penalti para el real madrid!
        
           | embedding-shape wrote:
           | I've been filing complaints since a year ago, told others to
           | do the same too, nothing happens. There been moments I've
           | meant to deploy fixes to issues but I cannot, because some
           | tooling goes offline.
           | 
           | I've claimed financial loss, claimed sanity loss and
           | everything in-between, but I'm afraid unless something
           | reaches the European/EU courts, Spain will continue to be in
           | the pocket of the La Liga owners.
           | 
           | Straight up fucking censorship with wide collateral being
           | completely accepted in a Western country in 2026, beyond
           | comprehension how this is allowed.
        
             | lentil_soup wrote:
             | how do you make claims, here:
             | https://usuariosteleco.digital.gob.es/? Can't find a way of
             | doing it with Cl@ve
        
               | GranPC wrote:
               | I think this is it: https://reg.redsara.es/#login
        
               | embedding-shape wrote:
               | I've used this: https://usuariosteleco.digital.gob.es/rec
               | lamaciones/telefoni...
               | 
               | Used my digital certificate (which is installed in the
               | browser), but AFAIK, you can use Cl@ve on that page above
               | too.
               | 
               | In the past, I've cited BOE-A-2022-10757
               | (https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2022-10757),
               | done a reclamacio for the repeated loss of lawful access
               | on my connection, and a denuncia about a broader
               | overblocking practice affecting access to lawful
               | services.
               | 
               | Also, supposedly, we should be able to make claims to
               | CNMC as well, but haven't figured out how. Also of
               | course, been complaining to my ISP every time it happens
               | too.
        
             | ryandrake wrote:
             | Whenever I get a little down over how much power unelected
             | corporations have in my country, I can at least cheer
             | myself up a little by being thankful that something as
             | stupid as _football_ doesn 't have enough power here to
             | control whether or not I have internet access.
        
               | embedding-shape wrote:
               | Ignorance is a bliss, agree :) Sometimes we all need to
               | force ourselves into that so we can get a bit more joy.
        
               | sneak wrote:
               | It would if it were bigger business in your country. Try
               | torrenting an MCU movie and see what happens to your ISP
               | account.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | Someone in Texas torrenting an MCU slop doesn't
               | disconnect me from half the Internet.
        
               | necovek wrote:
               | La Liga is basically operating like an "unelected
               | corporation" as well.
        
             | emptysongglass wrote:
             | Because the EU as a whole is quite happy to censor and
             | generally wield the same tricks as "non-Western" countries
             | in their desires to combat misinformation (however our EU
             | bureaucrats define it), child abuse materials (see Chat
             | Control that thing is not going to go away), and hatred (oh
             | boy).
             | 
             | We've never guaranteed the right to free speech and because
             | we haven't it's a slippery slope all the way back down to
             | the furnaces of autocracy we sprang from.
             | 
             | The Spanish president has come out on record saying we
             | don't deserve anonymity on the internet.
        
             | rock_artist wrote:
             | If anyone who's capable in Spain set a petition or the
             | relevant steps and put it on HN. I'm pretty sure any
             | Spanish resident in HN would be more than happy to take
             | part even if it means to send a Bizum for the cause.
             | 
             | (Sadly as living in Spain for about a year I'm still not in
             | such place to raise this or understand the full steps
             | needed)
        
           | loloquwowndueo wrote:
           | It would be great if there was a webpage with clear
           | instructions on how to do this, maybe fill out a few
           | questions and get a printable pdf you can mail, or at least
           | telling you how to file an online complaint. Making
           | complaints very low friction will lead to more of those and
           | perhaps more attention to the issue.
           | 
           | Snail mail uses up physical space so it might get more
           | attention, it would be hilarious to see news reports of
           | truckloads of complaint mail being dumped in front of the
           | whatever office.
        
             | embedding-shape wrote:
             | > It would be great if there was a webpage with clear
             | instructions on how to do this, maybe fill out a few
             | questions and get a printable pdf you can mail, or at least
             | telling you how to file an online complaint. Making
             | complaints very low friction will lead to more of those and
             | perhaps more attention to the issue.
             | 
             | This is a great idea, we definitively should make this
             | happen! If people are curious on collaborating on
             | something, reach out, email in profile (English or Spanish
             | emails welcome!).
        
           | estebarb wrote:
           | At this point the protests should be against the matches
           | themselves. But let's be honest: nobody cares anymore.
        
         | pxc wrote:
         | > Heh, lucky you, at least you get a message. My ISP just drops
         | traffic to the affected IPs. No ping, no traceroute, just a
         | spinner in the browser until it says "page not found".
         | 
         | This is generally how the GFW works in China. Instead of an
         | overbearing nanny like a school or corporation's DNS blocker,
         | you're left with a sense that you're on a version of the
         | Internet that is just intermittently and somewhat mysteriously
         | broken.
         | 
         | And indeed, in China, a lot of things that probably aren't
         | fully intended to be blocked are not reliably accessible.
         | Implementation varies, so you get strange routing and peering
         | issues. It feels like an Internet that isn't fully formed, that
         | hasn't finished coming together yet.
         | 
         | Nation states and corporations obviously gain some things
         | sometimes by having Internet censorship/blocking frameworks in
         | place. Maybe, sometimes, ordinary people even benefit, too, if
         | it helps shut down illegal and genuinely harmful businesses.
         | 
         | But it feels like the whole world is gradually trending towards
         | more and more Internet censorship without realizing that we are
         | _un-building_ a miraculous thing that took enormous effort and
         | cleverness and expense to build. I wish we could think about
         | this not only in terms of freedom (and we absolutely should
         | think about it in terms of freedom), but how we are
         | _disintegrating the infrastructure_ of communication and
         | computing.
        
           | nrds wrote:
           | > a version of the Internet that is just intermittently and
           | somewhat mysteriously broken.
           | 
           | That's actually just how the Internet is. Nothing to do with
           | the great firewall.
        
           | RiverCrochet wrote:
           | Your last paragraph: it is sad. But we had successful global
           | networks before the Internet (the PSTN, telegraph) and we'll
           | certainly have global networks after this at some point in
           | human history. Perhaps in the the time between the Internet
           | and what's next, the world will become a bit more mature
           | about a few things.
        
             | mschuster91 wrote:
             | > But we had successful global networks before the Internet
             | (the PSTN, telegraph)
             | 
             | These were ripe with espionage, wiretapping and sabotage.
             | Access to it used to be highly restricted as well, up until
             | the 90s for example you were only allowed to connect
             | government-licensed modems to the German PSTN directly.
        
               | sneak wrote:
               | There was also no way for a normal person to easily and
               | cheaply communicate with 20 million people in realtime.
        
               | RiverCrochet wrote:
               | > These were ripe with espionage, wiretapping and
               | sabotage.
               | 
               | Just like today's Internet. BGP spoofing, CALEA, DDoS.
               | 
               | > Access to it used to be highly restricted as well ...
               | 
               | And this is where the regression or "downfall" is
               | beginning. Access to the Internet (as in ability to
               | send/receive arbitrary data to the wider Internet) is
               | something I bet is going to be increasingly restricted,
               | but most people won't notice because they don't
               | understand the difference between apps and the Internet.
               | 
               | I'd be surprised if direct access to the Internet is
               | possible for consumers in the next 10 years. Everything
               | will have to be through approved apps (age assurance is
               | going to be the catalyst) that work over registered
               | tunnels contracted through ISPs, if there isn't an
               | outright blurring or merger between the concepts of
               | phone/CPE, ISP and CDN. Your non-tech layperson will not
               | know any difference whatsoever if all they use are their
               | phone plan, streaming/banking apps and Facebook.
        
               | angry_octet wrote:
               | Surely this was simply the nature of Deutsche Bundespost
               | / Deutsche Telekom? Like, of course you had to use
               | hardware they had approved to connect to their network.
               | 
               | This was the same in many places. The cost of hardware
               | and connection time limited connections, and no one had
               | cryptography except the government and ultra nerds.
        
             | jazzyjackson wrote:
             | this is teleological thinking. it's not necessarily the
             | case that things get better over time.
        
             | Spooky23 wrote:
             | Those predecessor networks weren't problem free. Many
             | conversations to "interesting" places were monitored.
             | 
             | The counter-reaction to this era will include additional
             | communication control.
        
         | the_gipsy wrote:
         | It's ridiculous and wrong what LaLiga does. But it's also a
         | weakeup call to consider ditching cloudflare's centralization.
        
           | estebank wrote:
           | The companies relying on cloudflare won't be in Spain. If you
           | buy a GPS tracker by a Canadian company, developed in India,
           | manufactured in China, they are unlikely to know, even it
           | they cared, that a single country that accounts for a tiny
           | percentage of their sales breaks fundamental internet
           | infrastructure on the regular "because futbol y dinero".
           | 
           | And when purchasing a product, there's no "bill of materials"
           | telling you about the services it relies on, beyond "internet
           | connection" at best.
        
             | encom wrote:
             | >fundamental internet infrastructure
             | 
             | I'm not saying this situation isn't bullshit, but the
             | bigger problem is that CloudFlare is now "fundamental
             | internet infrastructure". This is precisely the situation
             | that the internet was designed to prevent.
             | 
             | Yesterday I got stuck in endless CloudFlare CAPTCHA's,
             | trying to access theretroweb.com. I had to give up. Many
             | such cases. I hate CloudFlare so much, it's unreal.
        
               | embedding-shape wrote:
               | > This is precisely the situation that the internet was
               | designed to prevent
               | 
               | Right, but on the other hand, our constitution and laws
               | are supposed to give us the rights to access a internet
               | where the government cannot block entire companies who
               | host websites, because a few bad websites are hosted
               | there.
               | 
               | Not to mention all us freelancers, contractors and just
               | in general computing users, who sometimes want to
               | continue working although 90% of the country is watching
               | football, we should be able to do so even if pirates use
               | Cloudflare for shitty stuff.
               | 
               | I agree that Cloudflare sucks, people should avoid
               | defaulting to putting Cloudflare in front of absolutely
               | everything they do and I too get stuck at the CAPTCHAs
               | sometimes. But that doesn't remove the fact that
               | Cloudflare, just like every other lawful company, should
               | be allowed to be visited during La Liga matches.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | I'd love for a way to put all my sites behind Cloudflare
               | _only_ during La Liga matches.
        
           | trailheadsec wrote:
           | I agree with this take (that it's a wake up call). Makes one
           | question their entire app design and if using Cloudflare is
           | "good enough" for managing CDN, tunnels, etc. for their apps.
        
         | boredatoms wrote:
         | Perhaps its time to put a VPN into all your CI jobs
        
           | tryauuum wrote:
           | You can't fight political issues with clever technical
           | solutions
        
             | psychoslave wrote:
             | That's actually part of rebellion modus operandi, so
             | totally something realistic. But not within the frame of
             | law and not in the sweet position of someone away from the
             | "I'll die for the just cause" mindset.
        
               | tryauuum wrote:
               | can you rephrase your idea please. What's realistic,
               | fighting stupid laws or corporations with a VPN? Yes, but
               | not for long. They are always stronger than you, they can
               | switch from blacklisting to whitelisting and your VPN
               | becomes useless.
               | 
               | What is this "sweet position" you talk about?
        
               | psychoslave wrote:
               | Sorry for being unclear.
               | 
               | I was trying to refer to an actual rebel position, which
               | is actors which use illegal practices to achieve their
               | goals agaisnt institutions in place. Which might have the
               | cool attitude imagery attached to it, but which is
               | certainly not an easy one in reality.
        
             | peanut-walrus wrote:
             | Yes you can. Fight with clever technical solutions and the
             | politics will follow once the solution becomes common or
             | displays its usefulness. It is in fact the most effective
             | way to fight dumb political issues.
        
               | tryauuum wrote:
               | In my country (Russia) the politics followed, now the
               | ISPs block the OpenVPN and wireguard packets. And
               | sometimes the white list mode is enabled, so you cannot
               | connect, with your clever custom VPN solution, to a host
               | outside the country
        
               | peanut-walrus wrote:
               | And eventually even a worm will turn.
        
               | necovek wrote:
               | You should be able to use things like sshuttle or even
               | tunnel through HTTPS whatever you want, right? As you can
               | control both sides of the tunnel with encryption (comes
               | by default), no MITM-ing unless you are forced to use
               | solutions that install and eavesdrop on your secure
               | traffic too.
        
               | out_of_protocol wrote:
               | 1) they do protocol sniffing, and any inconsistency
               | (including statistical) gets you blocked 2) "white list
               | mode" which engaged sometimes (poorly implemented atm),
               | means nothing goes outside of country at all (means 99.9%
               | of everything is broken). They really want to become
               | North Korea soon
        
             | toast0 wrote:
             | It depends on what the political system is trying to do.
             | 
             | A VPN won't help against government blanket outages, where
             | the target is complete control of communications, and
             | attempts to circumvent may result in extreme penalty. In
             | this case, where the government policy is to stop
             | unauthorized streaming, and collatoral damage is
             | acceptable, a VPN hosted in a more favorable location is
             | likely to work enough. Afaik, I don't think Spain has the
             | political appetite to block VPNs and such during football
             | matches.
             | 
             | You can still fight the political issue with political
             | means, but in the mean time, you can also get work done.
        
               | swiftcoder wrote:
               | > Afaik, I don't think Spain has the political appetite
               | to block VPNs and such during football matches
               | 
               | Unfortunately nobody is quite sure what appetite they
               | have, because LaLiga is doing this all on the back of a
               | relatively narrow judicial ruling that hasn't been
               | reviewed in a long time
        
             | logicchains wrote:
             | You totally can, that's why bittorrent still exists and
             | works fine.
        
             | fc417fc802 wrote:
             | That became a popular refrain at some point but the truth
             | of it varies. In fact many political issues are brought
             | about by technical changes so obviously the reverse must be
             | possible as well.
             | 
             | What technical solutions can't change is the underlying
             | social dynamics.
        
               | necovek wrote:
               | Even that is IMO untrue: "technical solutions" have
               | indeed changed society at large quite significantly; eg.
               | "social media" is one very influential example, "smart
               | phone" is another, "internet" itself, etc.
        
               | fc417fc802 wrote:
               | Aren't you agreeing with me? None of those things changed
               | the underlying social dynamics that humans exhibit but
               | they nonetheless affected widespread social and political
               | change.
        
         | tobz1000 wrote:
         | > there are testimonies of smart home devices like anti-theft
         | alarms or automatic doors, that stop working whenever [...]
         | because their backends rely on Cloudflare.
         | 
         | The fault here lies 100% with horribly designed IoT devices
         | that turn into bricks when they lose internet connection.
        
       | mrvaibh wrote:
       | This is a great example of why blanket IP blocking is such a
       | terrible enforcement mechanism. Cloudflare hosts hundreds of
       | thousands of services behind shared IP ranges -- blocking one IP
       | to stop a piracy stream takes out everything else on that IP,
       | including Docker registries, API endpoints, and CDNs that have
       | nothing to do with football.                 The real fix on your
       | end until Spain sorts this out: set up a pull-through registry
       | cache (e.g. registry:2 with proxy.remoteurl) on a VPS outside
       | Spain, and point your Docker daemon's mirror config at it. Your
       | GitLab runner pulls from the cache, the cache pulls from Docker
       | Hub via a non-blocked IP. Also insulates you from Docker Hub rate
       | limits.            But yeah, the fact that a court order about
       | football streaming can break docker pull for an entire country is
       | genuinely absurd.
        
         | tom1337 wrote:
         | just wait until they block Azure as well so the official La
         | Liga site also stops working
        
           | jacquesm wrote:
           | Hmmm. Don't they have a reporting form or something like
           | that? Down with those filthy Azure pirates on IP
           | 52.166.113.188.
        
           | littlecranky67 wrote:
           | I wondered how they actually managed to have their own
           | business to be unencumbered by that. At a certain corporate
           | level, you have to have some piece of tech in your portfolio
           | that relies on cloudflare. I hope one day there companion or
           | "2nd screen" apps stops working during a game, because using
           | cloudflare.
        
           | mcintyre1994 wrote:
           | Dumb question but why don't the pirate sites all host on
           | Azure if Cloudflare is blocked and Azure isn't?
        
             | tom1337 wrote:
             | i have no data to back this up but in the past cloudflare
             | was much more lax with piracy sites and I can imagine that
             | Azure is stricter with blocking them
        
             | kjs3 wrote:
             | I would imagine they do. The people running the pirate
             | sites know what they are doing. Noone who really wants to
             | stream pirated games is stopped. Blocking CF is
             | performative, not effective.
        
           | joquarky wrote:
           | Sounds like the answer here is to host alt streams on Azure.
        
         | embedding-shape wrote:
         | > This is a great example of why blanket IP blocking is such a
         | terrible enforcement mechanism
         | 
         | AFAIK, they're not doing "blanket IP blocking", they're
         | intercepting requests based on DNS and IP, and try to serve
         | their own certificates and their own content. Obviously, in
         | most cases it fails, as the certificate doesn't match the site,
         | so the browser rejects it, but as far as I can see and tell,
         | there is no "blanket IP blocks", more like "DNS and IP
         | interception".
         | 
         | The difference doesn't really matter in practice, sucks
         | regardless, but I thought I'd clarify for the ones who are not
         | experiencing these blocks themselves at least.
        
       | richwater wrote:
       | Spain is a failing country. Their economy is in shambles and the
       | government has ceded internet control to a private corporation
       | who runs football games.
        
         | gruez wrote:
         | >Their economy is in shambles
         | 
         | But it's among the fastest growing in the EU? Granted, part of
         | this is starting from a low base, but it's hardly "in shambles"
         | 
         | https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.KD.ZG?locat...
        
           | nslsm wrote:
           | They are doing this by artificially inflating the numbers,
           | destroying the country forever:
           | https://i.imgur.com/0MAeFaF.jpg
        
             | gruez wrote:
             | >total population change in EU countries
             | 
             | The figures I cited are for GDP per capita, which accounts
             | for population growth. Moreover immigration should have the
             | opposite effect of depressing per-capita GDP, because
             | immigrants typically take lower skilled jobs, dragging
             | overall productivity down. So if anything, the figures are
             | artificially depressed, not inflated.
        
         | estebank wrote:
         | To note that this isn't the executive or legislative but the
         | judiciary doing the bidding.
        
         | embedding-shape wrote:
         | Spain isn't a perfect country, I don't think any is. But the
         | economy isn't in shambles, only someone who doesn't know what
         | they're talking about would say anything like that. It does
         | suck that La Liga can wield so much power, agree, but this is
         | not related to the economy at all...
        
         | chrz wrote:
         | Are you spanish and never went to another country? I only heard
         | such things from never-stop complaining locals that never
         | traveled anywhere. Yeah La Liga is a religion here, but Spain
         | is one of the worlds top of life quality mate
        
       | Jare wrote:
       | It's a disgrace, but apparently all relevant forces still
       | consider soccer the most important thing in the country.
        
       | jcalvinowens wrote:
       | This is the moral equivalent of shutting the water off for a
       | whole city because one dude's house has a leak. The harms to
       | society clearly and obviously outweigh any possible benefits to
       | society. But if that one dude has the power to shut it all off,
       | and doesn't care...
        
         | spwa4 wrote:
         | If you think that's even remotely close to the worst the
         | Spanish government has done, don't look up "Catalunya".
         | 
         | https://int.assemblea.cat/civil-and-human-rights-abuses/tool...
        
           | Ikatza wrote:
           | Just so everyone here has the full picture: the source linked
           | -- Assemblea Nacional Catalana -- is not a human rights
           | watchdog, an international observer, or a journalistic
           | outlet. It is the main pro-independence criminal activist
           | organization in Catalonia. Citing them as evidence of Spanish
           | human rights abuses is a bit like citing the murderer's wife
           | as an impartial witness.
           | 
           | For context, Spain is a full constitutional democracy,
           | subject to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human
           | Rights, with a free(ish) press, independent judiciary, and
           | regular elections -- none of which Assemblea itself disputes,
           | because it participates in all of them. The events OP is
           | referencing (the 2017 independence referendum aftermath) were
           | reviewed by European courts, and the outcomes were, shall we
           | say, not quite the narrative Assemblea sells on its website.
           | 
           | If there are genuine, documented human rights concerns, I'd
           | welcome impartial sources from the Supreme Court or the ECHR.
           | 
           | What I'd push back on is treating a political lobby's own
           | press releases as neutral reporting. You should do better
           | than that here, OP.
        
       | torben-friis wrote:
       | As a Spaniard, I would be very happy it cloudflare stops serving
       | Spain. The situation is beyond stupid and I know without
       | international pressure and shaming we're not getting rid of this
       | abuse.
        
         | littlecranky67 wrote:
         | They should at least do a single "awareness day" during which
         | they block the same IPs and sites they are ordered by court, as
         | if there was a football match on. Ideally with a 7 days public
         | notice announcement. Probably won't happen though, as their
         | contractual obligation won't allow for voluntary suspension of
         | services.
        
         | pier25 wrote:
         | As a Spaniard I couldn't agree more. This situation is just
         | absolutely ridiculous.
        
       | yangm97 wrote:
       | Maybe it's time to reflect upon the reliance on centralized
       | services? Not long ago docker hub started rate limiting access
       | and we all turned to blanket solutions like the GitLab registry
       | cache. I wonder if the IPFS distributed docker registry thing
       | still exists/works.
        
         | tabwidth wrote:
         | This isn't really about centralization. ISPs are blocking at
         | the IP level, not Docker Hub specifically. You could self-host
         | a registry behind Cloudflare and still run into the same thing.
        
       | Magnets wrote:
       | BT used to block the entire streamable.com site during football
       | matches
        
       | gchamonlive wrote:
       | Here in Brazil sometimes my ISP goes into a weird state where I
       | can't SSH into a remote machune. Got two ISP links here and still
       | sometimes I need to resort to Mullvad to get stable internet
        
       | giorgioz wrote:
       | POSSIBLE FIX:
       | 
       | I think changing your default DNS servers to Google 8.8.8.8 or
       | Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 might bypass the spanish sunday ban on
       | Cloudlflare.
       | 
       | macOS + Cloudlfare 1.1.1.1
       | https://developers.cloudflare.com/1.1.1.1/setup/macos/
       | 
       | Google 8.8.8.8 https://developers.google.com/speed/public-
       | dns/docs/using
        
         | echoangle wrote:
         | I don't think it's a DNS ban, it looks like they actually ban
         | connections to the IP range.
         | 
         | But you can just use a VPN.
        
         | LtdJorge wrote:
         | Nope, it's IP ban. At least for Vodafone and Telefonica.
        
       | lofaszvanitt wrote:
       | Good. Cloudflare is the next evil entity on the internet.
        
       | breppp wrote:
       | Vote early, vote often
        
       | jjcm wrote:
       | Barring an Internet giant suing them in court, it really feels
       | like this is unlikely to change as most just don't understand the
       | why or the effect.
       | 
       | Someone needs to write a heist movie set in Spain where a key
       | part of the plan is they steal something while La Liga is
       | blocking some key security route.
        
       | Dibby053 wrote:
       | Going to play devil's advocate here but I suspect if Cloudflare
       | had been more cooperative about taking down illegal content,
       | LaLiga would not have resorted to blanket blocking individual
       | IPs.
       | 
       | I would really like to understand more about the process that
       | they should follow but didn't / followed but didn't satisfy them
       | / doesn't exist, in order to remove infringing websites quickly
       | from CloudFlare.
        
         | lokar wrote:
         | They will take down anything you get a judge to agree with.
        
         | JoshTriplett wrote:
         | LaLiga wanted the right to tell Cloudflare to block specific
         | sites without going through a court.
         | 
         | Cloudflare, rightfully, said that was ridiculous and
         | unreasonable.
         | 
         | A Spanish court, wrongfully, decided to let LaLiga block all of
         | Cloudflare.
        
         | integralid wrote:
         | I work with actually malicious content (things that make people
         | lose their life savings) and Cloudflare abuse is relatively
         | helpful (compared to most ISPs who just don't care).
         | 
         | They just refuse to take down random things that some media
         | company representatives send their way, without a court order
         | or any oversight. And this is a good thing.
        
       | dmitrygr wrote:
       | The last sentence of this submission makes no sense. You are in
       | Spain. Allegedly, the country has a representative government.
       | That means that you should have a way to influence the government
       | to fix this idiocy. If, in fact, you don't, then it is not a
       | representative government and ...ahem... further steps may be
       | warranted to remind the government whom they work for.
        
       | pfortuny wrote:
       | > instado por la Liga Nacional de Futbol Profesional y por
       | Telefonica Audiovisual Digital,
       | 
       | (The trial was initiated by LaLiga and Telefonica...).
       | 
       | "Telefonica" is the (exclusive) distributor for the rights of
       | streaming the matches, and is only (of course?) the main consumer
       | (and business) Telco in Spain: they are in a game they cannot
       | lose. This is such an abuse and no government (this, past,
       | whichever) has done anything about it.
        
         | swiftcoder wrote:
         | It is also educational to look up the overlap between
         | Telefonica directors, LaLiga directors, and the government
         | officials who granted the defacto monopoly
        
       | ordersofmag wrote:
       | Interesting alternative. Cloudflare (market cap $58B) buys La
       | liga (market value $5 billion), drops suit.
        
         | outside2344 wrote:
         | Less headaches, free futbol matches!
        
         | lokar wrote:
         | Set an example. Buy them, fire everyone, shut it down and
         | liquidate the property.
        
         | msully4321 wrote:
         | I'm not sure where that number comes from but I don't think
         | it's right, and I don't think that's how La Liga is structured
         | anyway. It's governed by an association of all of the teams in
         | the top two flights of spanish football.
        
       | Kamshak wrote:
       | I'm in Spain as well and it sucks a lot. What I do now is I go
       | thorough Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 VPN (set up on my router). Fixes the
       | issue and there is practically no latency or bandwidth impact.
        
         | baobabKoodaa wrote:
         | You mean 1.1.1.1. DNS? Or do they also serve a VPN through that
         | IP?
        
       | LtdJorge wrote:
       | Thankfully, Adamo hasn't implemented the blockade yet (if ever).
        
       | Myzel394 wrote:
       | Just use a VPN
        
       | mschuster91 wrote:
       | Cloudflare _could_ resolve this without negatively impacting
       | fundamental services... just place all newly registered sites
       | (e.g.  <30 days) on a dedicated block of IP addresses. That way,
       | Spain's government-ordered censorship could be limited to
       | (mostly) pirate sites. Or they could invest money in vetting
       | customers properly.
       | 
       | But of course, Cloudflare rather prefers to hold their actual
       | large customers (who don't have much of an alternative to CF) and
       | everyday Spaniard users hostage.
        
         | fc417fc802 wrote:
         | What would prevent a pirate site operator from registering a
         | domain a few months in advance and sitting on it in the
         | meantime?
         | 
         | How do you propose customers ought to be vetted? Why should a
         | host be expected to take on the duties of a hall monitor? Isn't
         | that the judiciary's job?
         | 
         | I think it is actually Spain using their residents as hostages
         | in an attempt to extort Cloudflare and other large providers.
         | The current situation is best described as blatantly corrupt
         | regulatory capture.
        
           | mschuster91 wrote:
           | > What would prevent a pirate site operator from registering
           | a domain a few months in advance and sitting on it in the
           | meantime?
           | 
           | It's driving up the cost and expenses. Operators of
           | legitimate sites don't have to worry during that probation
           | time about anything with the exception of customers in Spain
           | during LL match hours.
           | 
           | LL has ~10 matches / weekend (Fri/Sat/Sun/Mon), that means
           | pirates have to have about 40 domains/CF integrations per
           | month plus more in standby - and more, for longer probation
           | periods.
           | 
           | > How do you propose customers ought to be vetted?
           | 
           | I dunno... stuff like basic KYC measures would be a good
           | start. Copies of ID cards. Government business licenses.
           | Private entities (credit bureaus). Even phone number
           | verification is a serious hurdle for malicious actors, and it
           | ties activities to real world identities that can be held
           | accountable.
           | 
           | Dangerous stuff (e.g. streaming) could only be made available
           | upon a security deposit.
           | 
           | > Why should a host be expected to take on the duties of a
           | hall monitor? Isn't that the judiciary's job?
           | 
           | No, and that we let ISPs get away with ignoring abuse@ emails
           | is part of why the Internet is such a nasty place these days.
           | You need a license to drive a car on public roads, you need
           | an expensive license to fly a small plane, and you need a
           | goddamn massively expensive license to fly a widebody
           | aircraft. So why shouldn't you need to pass some set of
           | verification before you get access to inarguably the
           | Internet's most powerful data pipes?
        
       | amarant wrote:
       | I had to Google why this happens, blocking cloudflare during
       | football games seems.. Arbitrary, to say the least. Maybe
       | something to do with hooligans trashing entire cities when their
       | team loses? I could almost get behind that, if I thought it would
       | work..
       | 
       | But no, it's apparently to stop piracy!? Turning off half the
       | internet, and mostly the legitimate parts at that (since when do
       | pirates use cloudflare?) seems like probably the worst method to
       | go about it.
       | 
       | Someone ought to start streaming those games illegally without
       | using cloudflare just to demonstrate how stupid this policy is
        
         | swiftcoder wrote:
         | > Someone ought to start streaming those games illegally
         | without using cloudflare just to demonstrate how stupid this
         | policy is
         | 
         | Oh, the icing on the cake is that they already do. While my
         | whole dev stack gets shut off every weekend, my neighbour
         | watches pirate futbol streams just fine - not only is it a
         | stupid policy, it's an ineffective one, and the pirates
         | bypassed the bans ages ago
        
           | amarant wrote:
           | Makes you wonder why they keep the ban up? Are more people
           | watching more football now that everything else stops working
           | during matches?
           | 
           | Talk about unfair business practices!
        
         | HDThoreaun wrote:
         | Pirates use cloudflare because it solves their biggest problem,
         | DOS attacks. Rights owners figured out that they can shut down
         | these sites by DDOSing them which bypasses the courts and can
         | be done instantly, so the pirates put their sites behind
         | cloudflare ddos protection.
        
       | jesuslop wrote:
       | Just to confirm it is true. This is LaLiga bringing down
       | essential country-wide infrastructure on soccer hours if your
       | internet access is through main ISPs.
        
       | blurb4969 wrote:
       | Welcome to the club, buddies! Here, in Russia, the government
       | doesn't care about collateral damage at all when shutting down
       | whole Internet in cities. They turn on white list mode, when only
       | approved sites and IPs work. Businesses stop working and start
       | losing money? They don't care. Important IT systems stop working?
       | They don't care. People can't communicate with each other? Don't
       | care. And seems like it will happen everywhere else. Sad to see
       | the whole world goes down apart.
        
         | fc417fc802 wrote:
         | I think perhaps there's a difference in expectations between
         | wartime versus a country at peace going after pirates.
        
           | blurb4969 wrote:
           | I wanted to say that Internet freedom dismantlement is a
           | global trend.
        
             | fc417fc802 wrote:
             | Fair enough, I completely agree. However in the case of
             | Russia specifically, I understand that at one point
             | Ukrainian drones were making routine use of mobile internet
             | within the county. Temporary internet whitelists seem like
             | a reasonable alternative to complete blackouts in that
             | scenario. There are plenty of historic examples of malware
             | using just about any communication platform for the C&C
             | transport.
        
       | postepowanieadm wrote:
       | Why are you working instead of watching the match?
        
         | userbinator wrote:
         | That's what crossed my mind too: It's like a nationally-
         | mandated break to watch football.
        
       | swiftcoder wrote:
       | Hah. I have had to use a US-based VPN to access GitHub pretty
       | much every weekend lately. La Liga's efforts to curb pirate TV
       | streams are basically undermining the internet itself at this
       | point.
       | 
       | This is also not new behaviour - Theo posted a YouTube about it
       | nearly a year ago[1].
       | 
       | [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-geGEYEw7g
        
       | thomasjudge wrote:
       | Could you bypass this with a VPN?
        
         | tossandthrow wrote:
         | Yes, and all of Spain is learning how to use VPNs
        
       | Chrisszz wrote:
       | LOL this is so hilarious, blocking a portion of a web infra for a
       | football match
        
         | sva_ wrote:
         | It is somewhat funny until you realize the amount of power some
         | copyright mafia knuckleheads have over the (local) internet.
         | 
         | It isn't even an authoritative regime censoring something, but
         | much more silly.
        
       | rcarmo wrote:
       | Ah, so that's why my site is "down" there:
       | 
       | https://hayahora.futbol/#sobre-los-bloqueos&domain=taoofmac....
       | 
       | They're blocking the CDN too, not just R2.
        
       | samgranieri wrote:
       | This is inexcusable. Just because sports right holders are
       | worried about piracy doesn't give them license to break normal
       | internet operations. Spain, get your act together and put your
       | equivalent of the content cartel in the penalty box.
        
       | genericacct wrote:
       | same thing happens in italy
        
       | aftbit wrote:
       | What's the current state of the art for VPN'ing through deep
       | packet inspection firewalls? I have imagined building something
       | around TLS and Websockets that connects to a popular cloud
       | provider which is "too big to block". Of course, if they'll block
       | Cloudflare, or all connections outside of the country, maybe
       | _nothing_ is too big to block. I remember some solutions to this
       | in the 2010s, like obfsproxy and shadowsocks, but are there any
       | newer or better options?
        
       | rmonvfer wrote:
       | As a Spaniard, this also happens to me. You can either use a VPN
       | or just switch DNS servers to one that doesn't have anycast nodes
       | in Spain.
       | 
       | Cloudflare's authoritative DNS uses EDNS Client Subnet (ECS) to
       | return different IP pools based on where the query originates.
       | Spanish resolvers get IPs from a range that La Liga blocks. If
       | your recursive resolver is physically outside Spain (or you use
       | DoH/DoT to tunnel to one), Cloudflare returns a different,
       | unblocked pool.
       | 
       | AdGuard DNS works well for this.
        
       | zeafoamrun wrote:
       | I don't even like televised sport but this makes me want to
       | figure out how to pirate it at scale
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-04-12 23:00 UTC)