Google’s automated hit on a competitor it couldn’t acquire – NaturalNews.com

• Google’s Safe Browsing service wrongly flagged the entire domain immich.cloud, home to the self-hosted photo platform Immich, as “dangerous.”
• Automated blocking displayed severe red warning screens, effectively preventing users and developers from accessing their own services.
• The flagged URLs were internal testing and preview environments for the Immich project, not malicious sites designed for phishing or scams.
• Although the appeal was successful, the ban was automatically reinstated, forcing the Immich team to migrate their systems to a new domain to avoid further disruption.
• This incident highlights the significant power one company has over web accessibility and raises concerns about systemic bias against independent, privacy-focused software.

In a move that highlights the dangers of centralized control of the Internet, Google’s automated security systems recently misidentified Immich, a prominent self-hosted alternative to Google Photos, as a dangerous entity. The incident, which began in October 2025, saw Google’s Safe Browsing service block access to the entire immich.cloud domain with severe warning screens, effectively throttling the service designed to offer users escape from the company’s data collection. For privacy advocates and a growing number of users disillusioned with Big Tech, the misreporting of an open source project serves as a stark reminder of the power a single company has to dictate what is safe and accessible on the open web.

The automated gatekeeper goes awry

Google’s Safe Browsing service is built into major web browsers, including Chrome and Firefox, where it acts as an automated guard against malicious websites. Its purpose is to protect users from phishing and malware. However, in this case, the system targeted Immich, a platform that allows individuals to host and manage their photo libraries on their own servers, keeping personal data out of the hands of companies. The system described Immich’s internal preview and testing sites as deceptive, claiming that they were “trying to trick users into doing something dangerous.” The result was a “red screen of death” warning that prevented most users from continuing, paralyzing access for both the development team and the public. The Immich team’s only recourse was to go through Google’s appeals process via Google Search Console, a requirement that itself forces independent developers to rely on the very ecosystem they’re trying to circumvent.

A systematic pattern of bias

Imic’s ordeal is not an isolated event. It fits a documented pattern where open source and self-hosted platforms face disproportionate scrutiny from automated filters controlled by big tech companies. Other prominent projects such as Jellyfin, Nextcloud, and YunoHost have reported similar unjustified bans. This recurring problem indicates a fundamental flaw in how these automated systems are trained and operated; They appear to be ill-equipped to accurately assess the legitimacy of software that exists outside the mainstream commercial application ecosystem. The consequences are dire: a single algorithmic decision can render an entire project inaccessible, undermining user choice and stifling innovation in privacy technology. This dynamic creates an unlevel playing field where alternatives to big technology services are artificially hindered by the gatekeeping power of their competitors.

Historical context of data control

The struggle over who controls user data is not new, but it has intensified as the Internet’s infrastructure has been consolidated in the hands of a few companies. For years, companies like Google have built vast financial empires on the back of user data, offering “free” services in exchange for detailed profiles of individual behavior, interests and movements. This business model has fueled widespread surveillance capitalism, where the user is the producer. The rise of self-hosted software represents a direct challenge to this model, which calls for a future in which individuals own their digital lives. Incidents like the EMIC blockage show that the powers that be not only own the data, but also control the infrastructure to suppress competing models that prioritize user sovereignty.

• The Immich team had to move its preview systems to a new domain, immich.build.
• The original domain immich.cloud was repeatedly flagged, even after successful appeals.
• This highlights the reactive and often ineffective resources available to developers who fall into the trap of automated filters.

A call for decentralized flexibility

The solution, for now, was a tactical retreat by Immich developers, who migrated their preview environments to a new domain to avoid Google’s automatic triggers. However, this does not solve the systemic problem. This episode serves as a strong case for the continued development and adoption of decentralized technologies and open source protocols that are not subject to the whims of a corporate board of directors. As more people seek to regain their digital independence, the resilience of the entire movement depends on building an infrastructure that is as independent of central gatekeepers as possible. The goal is a network where user safety is not synonymous with corporate control, and where privacy is not mislabeled as a threat.

Reclaiming the digital commons

The Immich misnomer is more than just a temporary technical glitch; Rather, it is a symptom of a much larger struggle over the future of the Internet. It exposes the dangers inherent in giving a single entity the authority to determine safety for the entire web. For a society that increasingly recognizes the value of data privacy and the dangers of monopolistic control, this incident is a clarion call. The way forward is to support and invest in a diverse ecosystem of tools that empower users, foster true competition, and ensure that the digital public square remains open and accessible to everyone, not just those who conform to the standards of the largest technology platforms.

Sources for this article include:

Restore TheNet.org

Immich.app

X.com