Yep i can’t see any ingest.sentry.io logs in pi-hole. Issue is fixed Hurray!!!
It is marked Solved. However I am still getting these PiHole log entrys every minute. I am on Core v2024.1.0b3 and Supervisor v 2023.12.1
Very annoying
Just chiming in on this one. I’m seeing the same.
Yeah Im getting a load of these from my HA install recently running
Core 2024.2.5
Sup 2024.02.0
Can’t be sure when they had actually started but quiet clearly a massive talker DNS wise
It is not solved at all. I’m still full of these “sentry calls”. Please, could someone help with it?
24-03-03 23:21:59 WARNING (raven-sentry.BackgroundWorker) [urllib3.connectionpool] Retrying (Retry(total=0, connect=None, read=None, redirect=None, status=None)) after connection broken by ‘NewConnectionError(’<urllib3.connection.HTTPSConnection object at 0x7f3707f3c110>: Failed to establish a new connection: [Errno 111] Connection refused’)': /api/5370612/envelope/
EDIT
I think I solved it via SSH. After I’ve checked via command:
“ha supervisor info”
I found line:
*diagnostics: true"
So I disabled it by command:
“ha supervisor options --diagnostics=false”
And no more sentry calls.
I do not understand why there is no UI config for supervisor 
I have always had analytics turned off in Settings. Yet my Pi-hole shows that my number 1 blocked domain is sentry.io, currently with 16,000 blocks. (I don’t know the period).
I find it disturbing that
- HA is supposed to be open source yet is sending out analytical data without my consent
- there was nowhere in the installation that obtained my consent
- there is no mention anywhere that HA sends analytical data out if it is set not to
- that this forum thread has people in it downplaying this as “just” anonymous data in exactly the same way that every large corporation has tried to do so for the past twenty years, then turning on the people that protest as if the public are in the wrong for being concerned.
Whether the data is harmless is not the point. The point is that HA is sending out data without user consent; then claimed that it was a bug and fixed; then ignored that it still happens.
Anyone fancy a class action lawsuit? Some of us have no problem with spending money on litigation.
I find it disturbing that
- someone so passionate about privacy do not check their logs more regularly
- someone thinks open source equals no local access
- someone can not accept a bug and that it is fixed and if that is stance, then do not review the code before installing it
- someone tries to compare proprietary closed code with open source. Closed code can not be reviewed, but open source can, so you can yourself see what is happening. Being concerned is fine, but with open source it is easy to settle that concern and you should be obligated to do so before you complain.
- someone complains that a bug is still happening, but have no clue on what period their data is from
- someone threatening with litigation, yet have no looked in to the facts before doing so
The use of the term “class action lawsuit” suggest a US base, since this concept is often used to gather a group of people and trying to win a lawsuit and get a big reimbursement, because the US law is based on the reimbursement should be the penalty the firm.
US law is just really lax on consumer protection, so the user will pretty much have to accept the software license as is and a litigator will quickly see that point 7 and 8 will make any lawsuit in US fruitless.
Had you been European based, then the consumer laws are much more strict, but a class action lawsuit is rarely used in EU, because most European law is based on the concept that a plaintiff can only be reimbursed for what is actually lost. The penalty for the firm in Europe is the fine that goes to the government.
When looking at what you have lost European law will look at what user data that have been breached.
User data is data that can be uniquely linked to you, which is not the same as general usage data.
HA has a good description of the data being sent in the analytics integration, which is also where the “breach” happened.
Looking at the data, then there is no data that can be considered user data, so your reimbursement will be zero, because you have no loss.
Looking at the usage data that have been “breached” then it would not even be possible set a fine, because it is not illegal to gather usage information without consent.
If you want to still sue for reimbursement, then I am sure there are many Switz litigators that will take your money.
1 Like
Same on my side, it looks like the problem is back recently with a high number of requests (close to 15k per day). It looks related to the 2024.7.2 update based on my PiHole statistics.
Doesn’t HA → Settings → Statistics → [Setting all 4 to “OFF”] help? 
I’ve gone through the HASS source code, and found the following:
With Supervisor 231, shipped with Home Assistant 0.114, we added a new option on the System panel, to share diagnostics and crash reports with us anonymously.
This will allow us to find and fix problems.The shared information is only accessible to the Home Assistant Core team and
will not be shared with others. The data does not include any private or
sensitive information and you can disable it in settings at any time you want.
The problem is still occurring. The original git issue and those connected to it were all closed in 2022-2023 as fixed but it’s not fixed, or the bug has reoccurred. I’ve had another 16,000 hits recorded in pihole in the past 2 months.
Same here. About ~6.000 calls everyday.
Hi!
Just discovered this thread because I observed the same behavior. Roughly 25% of my blocked calls are to “o427061.ingest.sentry.io”.
Core: 2024.10.4
HAOS: 13.2
Supervisor: 2024.10.3
Enabled all diagnostic features.
Since I want to “support” nabu casa I whitelisted the domain for now. But I’m not entirely happy about it…