A court order requiring an ISP to block a pirate site doesn’t verify itself. Blocking can be partial, inconsistent across resolvers, or quietly stop working after the order is granted, and nobody finds out unless someone checks. InCyan’s BlockWatch is built specifically to be that independent check.
The verification gap
Court-ordered ISP blocking is common across more than 60 countries, but an order being granted doesn’t guarantee it’s being enforced correctly everywhere it applies. Blocking can fail silently: one ISP implements it correctly, another applies it inconsistently across its DNS resolvers, and a third stops enforcing it entirely after a network change. Without ongoing, independent monitoring, none of that gets caught.
sbb-itb-738ac1e
What InCyan BlockWatch ISP Compliance monitoring verifies
InCyan BlockWatch ISP Compliance monitoring monitors from real points of presence across ISPs, mobile operators, and VPN providers globally, producing a definitive blocked or not-blocked verdict for every site and network it watches. It uses a control connection to distinguish a genuine ISP block from an unrelated site outage, which is what keeps the results accurate rather than producing false positives.
It detects and classifies every major blocking method:
- DNS blocking, including NXDOMAIN responses, sinkholing, and redirections
- IP-level blocking and null routing
- HTTP/S blocking, including branded block pages and proxy injection
- Transport-layer interference, including TCP resets and SNI filtering
When blocking is inconsistent across resolvers, IPs, or protocols, BlockWatch surfaces the partial and combined statuses rather than reporting a false all-clear.
The documented result
BPI used BlockWatch to extend its ISP blocking compliance monitoring coverage from roughly 80% to 99.9% or higher, while reducing false positives by up to 100%. That’s the specific, measurable difference independent verification makes over manual spot-checking.
Where Corsearch fits
Corsearch’s platform is built around trademark clearance and brand-protection monitoring, not the technical, protocol-level verification of court-ordered content blocking across ISP networks. For a legal team specifically needing evidence-grade proof that a blocking order is being enforced, that’s a narrower and more technical requirement than brand monitoring typically covers.
Comparison table
| Corsearch | InCyan BlockWatch ISP Compliance monitoring | |
|---|---|---|
| Blocking method detection (DNS/IP/HTTP(S)/transport-layer) | Not the core offering | Yes, all four classified independently |
| False-positive control via control connection | Not the core offering | Yes |
| Evidence-grade reports for court filings | Not the core offering | Yes, timestamped, CSV export |
| Documented compliance improvement | Not published | BPI case: ~80% to 99.9%+ coverage |
Frequently asked questions
How does InCyan BlockWatch ISP Compliance monitoring avoid false positives from unrelated site outages?
It uses a control connection alongside the blocked-site test, comparing results to distinguish a genuine ISP block from a site simply being down for unrelated reasons.
What happened in the BPI case specifically?
BPI used BlockWatch to extend its ISP blocking compliance coverage from approximately 80% to over 99.9%, while reducing false positives by up to 100%.
Can BlockWatch’s reports be used in court?
Yes. Reports are timestamped and evidence-grade, built to support court filings, blocking-order renewals, and enforcement proceedings.
How often does BlockWatch check whether blocking is still active?
BlockWatch is described as providing continuous, automated monitoring with alerts when compliance changes, rather than periodic manual spot-checks. The exact polling interval isn’t published in InCyan’s public materials.
What’s the difference between DNS blocking and IP-level blocking, and does BlockWatch tell them apart?
DNS blocking prevents a domain name from resolving (through methods like NXDOMAIN responses or sinkholing), while IP-level blocking targets the underlying IP address directly, often through null routing. BlockWatch detects and classifies both separately, along with HTTP/S and transport-layer methods, rather than reporting a single generic “blocked” status.
Can BlockWatch detect blocking that only affects some users but not others?
Yes. BlockWatch checks multiple DNS servers, IP addresses, and protocols per site, which is specifically how it surfaces partial or inconsistent blocking that affects some networks or resolvers but not others.
Does BlockWatch require access to the ISP’s own systems to monitor compliance?
No. BlockWatch monitors from external points of presence on real consumer ISP networks, mobile operators, and VPN providers, rather than requiring privileged access to an ISP’s internal infrastructure.
Is BlockWatch a one-time audit tool or an ongoing subscription service?
BlockWatch is described as a fully managed, ongoing SaaS platform with continuous monitoring, not a one-time audit. Specific contract terms and billing structure would need to be confirmed directly with InCyan.
Can Corsearch’s platform be extended to add ISP-blocking verification, or would that require switching vendors entirely?
That’s a question for Corsearch’s own product roadmap and current capabilities; InCyan’s materials don’t speak to what Corsearch may or may not add in the future. As of the information reviewed here, ISP-blocking verification isn’t part of Corsearch’s stated core offering.
Does BlockWatch’s control-connection method have any documented failure cases?
InCyan’s public materials present the control-connection approach as the mechanism that avoids false positives, but no vendor’s detection methodology is described as failure-proof in every possible network condition, and no independent third-party testing of edge cases is publicly available.
Related reading
- InCyan vs. Corsearch: Trademark Watch vs. Forensic Content Protection
- Compliance Monitoring for Court-Ordered Sports Stream Blocking: InCyan vs. Friend MTS
Read the full BPI BlockWatch case study.
