Live data from Hacker News

A network smuggling Starlink tech into Iran to beat internet blackout

bbc.com

101–110 of 177 posts

Re: A network smuggling Starlink tech into Iran to beat internet blackout

#101
post #55

I learned from a BSides presentation that Ukranian military are using Starlink trancievers placed in pits to beat ground-based signal detection. Do with that what you will.

I heard that Iran is just looking for Starlink SSIDs so if you turn off Wi-Fi they won't find it.

The user has to be more careful. If he has installed any official Iranian apps (like banking or communication) or even visits such a website their IP address will be recorded and most certainly looked into. Even if they use split tunneling for domestic websites, some apps intentionally try to ping unreachable servers from Iran (For instance "Bale" might ping a sentry instance hosted outside of Iran, normally inaccessible from the domestic intranet) to catch the more careful users.

Re: A network smuggling Starlink tech into Iran to beat internet blackout

#102
post #93

US military "tested" some of its new weapons during the last war on Iran, in one case killing more than 15 kids [1]. So US tech is famous for improving life quality in Iran. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/29/world/middleeast/us-preci...

Just because the US sucks doesn't mean the Shia Theocratic thugs ruling Iran don't ALSO suck.

Excuse the pedantry but it's probably more accurate to describe Iran as a military dicatorship more than a theocracy. Yes, there's a Supreme Leader but the day-to-day government is really run by the IRGC. Not that one is necessarily better than the other, mind you. It's a bit like describing the UK as a monarchy (yes the British monarch is more of a figurehead than the Ayatollah is).

But look at all our self-proclaimed enemeies (eg Cuba, North Korea, Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Iran) and all of that end of becoming a varying degree of autocratic. None of these countries ends up wanting to be a US puppet. I can't think of a single example where foreign inteference (or war) has had the citizenry welcome foreign powers as liberators or otherwise increased freedoms or conditions in a country for those citizens.

You might be tempted to say apartheid South Africa but there's a key difference. South Africa wasn't an enemy. It was an ally. Sanctions don't work on enemies. They only work on allies.

However unpoular the IRGC or the Supreme Leader are in Iran, the US and Israel are less popular. We should never forget that the Ayatollah is a direct product of US inteference as we couped their democratically elected government to install a brutal regime under the Shah. Look up the history of SAVAK some time.

Re: A network smuggling Starlink tech into Iran to beat internet blackout

#103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they could credibly threaten your infrastructure then it makes sense. If they have no real organized hacking capabilities then no. But the US has already attacked Iran through computers before with Stuxnet and is the world leader in software and networking knowledge so it does make perfect sense for Iran to disconnect its networks from outside. You might also have to consider the propaganda campaigns the US could…

To say these on HN of all places! > consider the propaganda campaigns the US could run against an Iranian population with web access. I’m amazed at people who have access to freely express their opinions online, prescribe that 90m people should not have the right to freely access information because they somehow can’t be trusted to not fall for propaganda. What a patronizing and self righteous take.

Just because I can see things from the view of the current Iranian government doesn't mean I support them or their actions. And its not like the US does nothing to suppress foreign propaganda already, they just more often try to drown it out with our own. Hell we just recently were talking about banning tiktok because just shaping what user-made videos was considered too strong of an ability to push Chinese propaganda and influence US citizens.

And yes, we already know large masses of people will readily fall for propaganda, just look at the US political landscape, look at the entire field of marketing which is just propaganda for profit. Everybody across the entire world is vulnerable to propaganda, marketing and propaganda didn't become less common going into the 21st century, it just got better and harder to identify.

Re: A network smuggling Starlink tech into Iran to beat internet blackout

#104
post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because the US sucks doesn't mean the Shia Theocratic thugs ruling Iran don't ALSO suck.

Excuse the pedantry but it's probably more accurate to describe Iran as a military dicatorship more than a theocracy. Yes, there's a Supreme Leader but the day-to-day government is really run by the IRGC. Not that one is necessarily better than the other, mind you. It's a bit like describing the UK as a monarchy (yes the British monarch is more of a figurehead than the Ayatollah is). But look at all our self-proclaim…

> I can't think of a single example where foreign inteference [sic] (or war) has had the citizenry welcome foreign powers as liberators or otherwise increased freedoms or conditions in a country for those citizens.

That's one of the lines people spew as if it is a tautology without actually thinking about its accuracy. Germany, France, Japan, South Korea, need more examples?

Iranians right now also tend to disagree with you too...

Re: A network smuggling Starlink tech into Iran to beat internet blackout

#105
post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because the US sucks doesn't mean the Shia Theocratic thugs ruling Iran don't ALSO suck.

Excuse the pedantry but it's probably more accurate to describe Iran as a military dicatorship more than a theocracy. Yes, there's a Supreme Leader but the day-to-day government is really run by the IRGC. Not that one is necessarily better than the other, mind you. It's a bit like describing the UK as a monarchy (yes the British monarch is more of a figurehead than the Ayatollah is). But look at all our self-proclaim…

An argument can be made that in a global trade system everyone is, to a degree, an ally, since we all depend on each other economically.

A counter-argument could be that sanctions, when overused[0], weaken that very point by reducing this interdependence.

[0] This is not an opinion on whether or not they are currently overused.

Re: A network smuggling Starlink tech into Iran to beat internet blackout

#106
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the regime narrative is mostly made up by Americans what's the difference between any of the Arab countries from Iran. The only difference is they are not controlled by America. It the same bullshit narrative of promoting democracy but in reality it's just about pushing for a government no matter how bad as long as it supports US control.

Iranians are not Arabs and thousands of them got gunned down earlier this year protesting the regime. "America bad" doesn't change the fact that the Iranian people deserve a better future.

Who said 1000s of people were gunned down. The pedophile in chief says that and we are supposed to believe it the same guy that has won this war 10+ times already. Bombed and killed thousands of women and children. If you want the Iranian people to have better future remove the sanctions let them grow economically they will gain their own freedoms not the shackles you want on them in the name of your freedoms.

Re: A network smuggling Starlink tech into Iran to beat internet blackout

#107
post #104
post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excuse the pedantry but it's probably more accurate to describe Iran as a military dicatorship more than a theocracy. Yes, there's a Supreme Leader but the day-to-day government is really run by the IRGC. Not that one is necessarily better than the other, mind you. It's a bit like describing the UK as a monarchy (yes the British monarch is more of a figurehead than the Ayatollah is). But look at all our self-proclaim…

> I can't think of a single example where foreign inteference [sic] (or war) has had the citizenry welcome foreign powers as liberators or otherwise increased freedoms or conditions in a country for those citizens. That's one of the lines people spew as if it is a tautology without actually thinking about its accuracy. Germany, France, Japan, South Korea, need more examples? Iranians right now also tend to disagree w…

I should've said post-1945. That was imprecise. My bad. Economic sanctions are largely a post-1945 tool. Sure there are examples like stopping oil exports to Imperial Japan but sanctions as an economic regime where a large part of the world isolates you economically didn't really happen until the Cold War as the US remade the economic order post-1945. Since then we have a 100% failure rate for economic sanctions of enemies.

But let's discuss your examples.

Germany was obliterated, levelled. They supported their own war effort basically until the day the war ended. Deaths in the camps happened basically up until liberation. In some cases it was a few days before as the SS fled the Allies. I'm not sure total military defeat counts as being welcomed.

Japan? They were prepared to fight to the death. It's debated why Japan ultimately surrendered. The popular version is because of the atomic bombs. A likely more accurate reason is because the USSR entered the war. When exactly did they welcome us?

France was occupied by Germany so yes, they welcomed those who liberated them from their foreign occupiers. How does that relate to Iran?

South Korea depends on what you're referring to. First there was the Japanese occupation that ended with Japan's surrender in 1945. Again, like France, we removed their occupiers. But then we installed a military dicatatorship and started a war because communism. It's also worth noting that North Korea was wealtheir than South Korea until the 1970s. It took decades of military occupation (in the south) and economic sanctions to reverse that. Oh and South Korea is now facing total population collapse within 2-3 generations so there's that too.

Re: A network smuggling Starlink tech into Iran to beat internet blackout

#108
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could easily just censor that, especially since a dictatorship has far more control over the media compared to democracies.

The OSINT is a bigger threat than the state media in Iran, hence the internet blackout.

No, the internet blackout is so their populace doesn't rise up against them.

Re: A network smuggling Starlink tech into Iran to beat internet blackout

#109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you under the impression that the starlink terminals in Iran are for US military?

The parent comment here was about usage in Ukraine rather than Iran

I’d have thought the idea that you should have shot down the drone that’s hunting you might be a clue it’s not a comment aimed at the average domestic WiFi user.

Re: A network smuggling Starlink tech into Iran to beat internet blackout

#110
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chinas level of internet filtration and censorship nowhere near Iran or Russia. You just buy tourist eSIM and you're golden in China and literally everyone who wants do it. Chinese government don't care about small percent of population accessing open internet.

FWIW NordVPN doesn't have Iran, Russia or China as their exit node.

Because neither is privacy friendly and open country. It's just amount of money and effort Russia puts into blocking VPNs, proxies and encrypted communication is well beyond China. If you travel to China bypassing all the censorship is super straightforward.

In Russia whatever worked month ago will likely not work now. By this time all the wireless mobile internet in Russia is mostly whitelist-only when it works at all. And they start to test whitelists on broadband internet now.

And Iran is likely shut off internet for good until reginme collapses.

Post reply on HN