Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft IM Blocking YouTube Links
A number of readers are sending word that the blogosphere and Twittersphere are alight with reports of Microsoft's new block on messages containing YouTube URLs. Both MSN Messenger and Windows Live Messenger reportedly implement the block. One blogger sniffed the network to discover that such messages receive a NAK from Microsoft's servers. Microsoft has been blocking messages by keyword, as an anti-phishing measure, for some time, but *.youtube.com would not seem to provoke much worry about phishing. Instead, as B.E.T.A Daily speculates, "This block seems to be related to the recent launch of Messenger TV in 20 countries which allows for sharing video clips from MSN Video on Messenger." Hard to get away with in an arena where you don't enjoy a monopoly.
In all seriousness, I've been sending YouTube links around (and receiving them) just fine. Dunno where the problem is.
Well, I tried both Adium and the official Messenger for Mac, and YouTube links got blocked on both of them.
That is very easy to test. I tested it yesterday with a friend and also today and in both cases the url send failed.
If I remove the http and www it works, it also works if I change the youtube domain name...
Just tried it. They are indeed blocking Youtube links; You'll get an error immediately if you try to send someone a message including a URL with youtube.com in it.
Mod me down. They literally must have implemented it in the last 15 minutes, because as of right now, they are blocked, but weren't (for me) right before the I posted the first time.
I just tested with a friend, the same youtube URL failed to go through twice (and not a rickroll or anything, just a cat on a treadmill). Went through fine on yahoo chat, though. And she just tried sending one back, getting a message that it couldn't be delivered.
The thing is, this isn't being blocked at the client level. Its the servers that are blocking these links. Even if you switch to a different client, like Adium, or Pidgin, these links will be filtered.
We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
deviantart.com
googlepages.com
mediafire.com
ebuddy.com
xanga.com
Workaround: don't add the "http://" in front of the address.
Circumcision is child abuse.
They do have a monopoly in the UK (and perhaps many other countries in Europe). No one I've ever met uses AIM, a couple of people use Yahoo but they seem to have MSN anyway.
Not a TCP NAK, an MSNP NAK. MSNP messaging uses a NAK'ing model. (So, unless you get a response back, your message is assumed to have succeeded)
I'm sorry. The number you have reached is imaginary. Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and try again.
Sorry. I meant "Leaving the http:/// in results in an error". Actually:
/watch?v=something: not blocked if you omit the host
www.youtube.com/: blocked
youtube.com/: not blocked
http://www.youtube.com/: blocked
http://youtube.com/: blocked
Yahoos IM and Microsofts one are compatible so that's probably why they seem to have MSN aswell.
Here in Sweden everyone use MSN aswell, which suck.
I think ICQ was quite large in Germany still, Poland have their own IM-client and ICQ are still biggest in Russia aswell. So it all depends on where you live.
I guess people switched because of Hotmail being bought by Microsoft, included Messenger in the OS and the webcam support.
Earlier today some youtube links were being blocked.
Friend in Belgium alerted me to the issue, as trying to send a link across the room to her friend would even fail.
After some investigation...
It looks like it was a temporary error in the server response, so instead of saying yes, it would just deny the link out of default, suspecting an attack or a bot.
The server responses are now working correctly and so are the links.
Back to your tinfoil and OFFICIAL MS IS ALWAYS EVIL CLUB of the insane...
PS - How come when Google/Firefox re-routes or blocks URLs, (in error or for questionable reasonss) it never makes it to the front of SlashDot?
Get over MS, they dumped you or you them, they are your ex girlfriend, you have a new girlfirend(OS), quit stalking her... (Wait, bad analogy in a geek forum.)
Star Wars Episode III screwed you, get over it... (Better analogy?)
The English word "censorship" has a long and glorious history of applying to entities other than governments. But by all means, continue with your Orwellian attempts to change the language to suit a particular political view.
It's always a long day... 86400 doesn't fit into a short.
Actually, in GP's example, Verizon enjoys common carrier status. If they were to filter based on anything, they would lose that status.
Quite simple: profit
They've been convicted of monopolistic practices. They keep up at them. They get fined for each time they do, but the fines never address the problem.
I would see one solution: if their online services get caught trying to participate in monopolistic practices, make sure the court orders them to sell the online service to a hostile party. Not just a third party, it has to be someone who has a fiduciary responsability to make microsoft shares worth zero. Tell them right now that's the next penalty for this, and we'll see if they do it again.
I can just imagine msn being owned by a consortium of ibm and aol(ok ok I need a better example...)
Mactrope, willeyhill, inTheLoo, Erris and gnutoo (among others) are sockpuppet accounts of twitter. He uses them to game the moderation system. This whole thread is just twitter replying to himself to see if someone thinks there's an interesting discussion going on and gain karma to get his accounts out of the -1 posting default he's at for trolling.
Every ISP I used has the option to turn on or off those filters, this means that the user is supposedly aware of that kind of filtering (and can opt out). Indeed Microsoft may be violating some laws (and GP interpretation of said law doesn't look that flawed if you consider that detail).