Skip to main content

Why You Don't Need Google's Domain Fronting

Google’s removal of domain fronting emphasizes the need for solutions like Psiphon.

Google has confirmed that they will block domain fronting across Google domains and App Engine. For many apps and publishers, this represents a step backwards in the fight for internet freedom. While Psiphon has never relied on this Google service, many app developers continued to depend on the practice as a convenient and straightforward means of circumventing state-level censorship, despite the long-running speculation that Google would close this loophole (eg. Will Scott’s blog post in 2017).

While the announcement has been met with criticism from internet activists and service providers alike, Google has defended their decision, saying “domain fronting has never been a supported feature”.

Domain fronting has been a popular means of censorship circumvention for several years, being embraced by popular apps like Signal, who publicly adopted the practice in 2016. While using Google domains to front traffic does not require advanced technical knowledge, it is a half measure that relies on Google, without consultation, to provide infrastructure for something it was not designed to do. In short, using the Google App Engine for domain fronting meant taking advantage of an unsupported loophole. For this reason, the practice would inevitably face restrictions as it gained popularity.

In 2015, Cloudflare also ended domain fronting across its domains when it began matching the SNI and host header of web traffic, after its infrastructure was implicated in censorship circumvention.

Most recently, in a frenzied attempt to block Telegram, which has made use of this loophole, Russian censorship authority Roskomnadzor blocked an estimated 17 million IP addresses. The interference disrupted access to Gmail, Google search, Google Play, YouTube, and other Google services.

Domain fronting is hardly the preeminent censorship circumvention solution. In cases where Google itself is blocked, as it is in Iran, any site or application that used Google for domain fronting would be unavailable as well. Psiphon’s network relies on a wide variety of protocols and obfuscation techniques to deliver Internet freedom. The complex and ever-changing nature of our network protects against over-reliance on one technology or approach.

The importance of a diversified circumvention toolbox cannot be overstated - for apps like Signal, reliance on Google domain fronting resulted in the need for an immediate and complete shift to another CDN. Tools like Psiphon seek to mitigate this risk by implementing numerous protocols, thereby eliminating reliance on any one method. Both Telegram and Tor’s use of multiple domain fronts minimized the disturbance caused to their services.

Popular posts from this blog

Social Media and Internet Ban in Turkey

Following the detainment of 12 pro-Kurdish lawmakers from the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) in the early hours of November 4 th , Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, WhatsApp and Skype were blocked in Turkey . There were reports that Turk Telekom internet provider completely disabled access to the internet or throttled the connection to the point that it was impossible to connect. Despite lack of official decision about the restrictions, and BTK’s explanation that there was a technical problem throughout Turkey, Prime Minister Binali Yildirim made a statement later in the day and said “For security reasons, these kinds of measures can be taken time to time. These are temporary measures. Everything goes back to normal after the danger is eliminated.” Social media and internet bans ended the following evening in most of the country, but there were still some short-term connection problems during the weekend in some regions, and it was reported that some Turk Telekom users

Psiphon Usage Surges as Brazil Blocks WhatsApp

At 9PM ET on December 16th WhatsApp was blocked in Brazil . The ban came after a judge ordered that the messenger app be blocked for 48 hours when the company refused to hand over private user information related to a criminal case. For months, Brazilian telecommunications companies have been attempting to shut down WhatsApp because it provides free messaging and voice services. WhatsApp is the most popular messenger service in Brazil and telecoms blame it for luring millions away from paid cell phone use. Internet users in Brazil reacted strongly to the ban, criticizing the decision to block WhatsApp widely on social media. Millions turned to alternate messenger services and shared circumvention techniques over social media. Psiphon was praised by people in Brazil for being free, open source, and able to keep them connected throughout the blocking event. Psiphon’s surge capacity was able to cope with the increased demand, with peak data use of more than 8x that of a normal day. Psip