145 pointsby el1s75 hours ago20 comments
  • an0malousan hour ago
    My business Workspace account got suspended recently, no reason given, can’t even login to contact support. I’m a solo user so I only had one admin account and that was the one locked out. There was just one text field to submit an appeal, so I did. I never got any email confirmation or tracking number for my appeal, it’s been a week now with no contact from Google. This happened about a week after they charged my credit card for the subscription.

    I’m now in the process of switching to Fastmail. Google doesn’t give a shit about anything besides for their golden goose, I would encourage everyone to move away from their services before they just screw you with no warning or recourse just because they can.

    • pnwan hour ago
      I ditched Google Workspace for Proton earlier this year and haven't looked back. Yes, the Proton apps don't integrate with everything and E2E encrypted data isn't as accessible as the data held in Google apps, but that's a bonus at this point.
    • an0malous36 minutes ago
      I’m also worried that this is just the future of SaaS where everything is a Kafkaesque nightmare of automated processes no one even understands anymore, and even these incidents are lost in so much complexity the businesses either don’t care or don’t even know it’s happening.
  • dmd2 hours ago
    I get this sort of thing constantly because my domain, 3e.org, which I have had for 30 years, is apparently impossible. It's either too short to be real, or starts with a number (obviously impossible).

    And like the author, 90% of the time I can just disable their front-end validation and go on my merry way.

  • ivan_gammel2 hours ago
    Smells like „product engineering“. So a product or an engineering lead gets a task to reduce risks of specific abuse by preventing someone from sending email from yahoo or web.de clone. As a quick solution they add this filter without „overthinking“ it. The impact is low, a few customers in a million, so its stupidity gets unnoticed and, once first complaint reaches them, quietly deprioritized to death. Removing it is cheap: the justification for taking that work is likely the show stopper. Google is an old large corp that hires and fires at a scale. Owning removal of abuse filter to increase revenue by Planck-sized amount is an impossible thing.
  • qingcharles2 hours ago
    I use a .one for a project where it makes perfect sense. Brevo, who are a huge email delivery platform, told me they don't support signing up with a .one domain. Fortunately, after a couple of weeks going back-and-forth one of their developers eventually saw sense and fixed it.

    Sadly, with Google, I don't think you'll ever get the issue that far up the chain.

  • sam_lowry_3 hours ago
    The end is really hilarious. Google had a stupid frontend-only validation, it seems.
    • pigbearpiga minute ago
      I was under the impression Google engineers went through a rigorous hiring process, yet this is the sort of thing you get from lowest bidder consultants who have inexperienced devs.
    • chmod7752 hours ago
      Since Google themselves claim that's a security check, there's a bug bounty here.

      The author of that article missed their chance making Google eat their words.

  • TLDRiskan hour ago
    > Just for context, this is a premium domain with a very high premium renewal fee, no history of abuse obviously.

    The registry premium domains on the new TLDs have several issues. The biggest IMO is a lack of price protection. Non-premium domains at least get the cohort based protection from section 2.10c of the registry agreement.

    So, in addition to being treated as a 2nd rate domain, there’s nothing stopping the registry from cranking up the price if a domain gets popular. I don’t think it’s ever happened, but have never found contractual terms that forbid it.

    I made a website about it a while ago after a registry reclassified one of my domains from standard to premium.

    https://tldrisk.com/beyond-basics/premium-domains/

  • dutchCourage2 hours ago
    Since the author asked about Alice: it was an Internet provider in France in the early 2000's.

    Some domains in that list are truly ancient. That was a trip down memory lane.

  • petepete2 hours ago
    Just wait for someone at Google to read this post and then block the domain retrospectively.
    • llacb472 hours ago
      And ban their entire Google account
      • qingcharles2 hours ago
        And delete all their data.
        • sunaookami2 hours ago
          *make it hidden, they will of course keep the data for themselves :)
  • fillthegap2 hours ago
    I think ditching google would've been a better choice.
    • necovek2 hours ago
      Well, if the alternative was going to be Microsoft 365... not so sure :)
      • an hour ago
        undefined
  • sandeepkdan hour ago
    the last paragraph was probably most important one here, and the lesson is If you truly want to enforce a validation then it has to be in the backend, the client side validation is just additional luxury if you can afford it.

    On a different note, the validations were added for genuine reasons and most likely there would be some discussions/debate on the scope/cost/benefits. I would imagine if some one were to do it a a business seriously then they would have some way to override it on use case basis.

  • sikozu3 hours ago
    This was a fun read. Absolutely baffling behaviour from Google.
  • cube002 hours ago
    If you could just change your company's domain name that'd be swell!

    Surprising Google is happy to lose a paying company over this.

    Although the author is taking quite the risk bypassing Google's validation like that. Not sure I'd be risking my company's workspace to do it in case Google wakes up ban hammer happy one morning.

  • bonzini3 hours ago
    alice.it is indeed an email provider's domain; based on the code snippet it seems like they are active in other countries.

    alice.app however isn't registered anywhere.

  • Elliott-Diyan hour ago
    Crazy that .one gets locked, but .arpa is fully okay.
  • t0mas883 hours ago
    I would hope that somewhere at Google there is a policy that says you can't do anti-fraud and security checks in frontend only...
  • spl757an hour ago
    that's a trip. nice catch!
  • yieldcrv2 hours ago
    ooof that's bad, all levels of support missed the frontend validation and blamed you and an opaque non-existent process instead
  • 3 hours ago
    undefined
  • xystan hour ago
    The engineer that implemented this probably used it to justify promotion.

    "Reduced fraudulent signups by <made up metric>. Reduce business risk exposure."

    Google engineering has certainly taken a nosedive.

  • mpalczewski2 hours ago
    I wonder how this list ended up being created anyway. Was it a long standing issue, or just some ai slop? web.com, web.org, web.net don't look like an email provider.
    • layer82 hours ago
      The rationale probably was that end users primarily identify the email provider by the subdomain, not the TLD, and therefore to prevent spoofing they block all domains where the subdomain corresponds to an email provider, regardless of the TLD. Like, they don’t want to allow gmail.<anything>, and the same for all other email providers they know of.
    • noman hour ago
      scroll through a list of known email providers and you will notice they registered tlds for the countries they operate in, very typical for the old ones like yahoo yandex Freemail Hotmail etcpp

      web.de is an oldschool German provider, as is gmx.de (and .at, .fr, .com, ...)

      the regex smells like an inexperienced developer trying to be clever

    • mh-2 hours ago
      web.net, at least, absolutely is an email provider.
      • 0x0732 hours ago
        web.de is also a big email provider in Germany.
        • brewmarchean hour ago
          Yes and gmx (listed next to it) as well, and I’m pretty sure that gmx offered/offers multiples TLDs (gmx.net, gmx.de, gmx.at, …)

          I think the same goes for Alice (big ISP, offering mail addresses, in multiple countries)

          It looks like some of these wildcards are for mail providers who use multiple TLDs.

      • mpalczewski2 hours ago
        fair enough. at least not primarily an email provider. so if they offer any email.