Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A technical look at Iran's internet shutdowns

zola.ink

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 130 posts

Re: A technical look at Iran's internet shutdowns

#121

Post by ACCount36 »

coderatlarge wrote: post #115
ACCount36 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It already does that. That's how Starlink works over the ocean.

does that mean the authorities can’t locate someone transmitting or receiving to/from starlink? in many places the consequences of detection could be dire…

No. The links between the satellites are lasers, but the user traffic still goes up and down over radio.

You still need the Starlink coverage to be enabled on system level, and the local government to care enough to track down Starlink users at the same time. I can't imagine that there are many countries that meet both criteria.

Re: A technical look at Iran's internet shutdowns

#122

Post by Ray20 »

dvdkon wrote: post #71
Ray20 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>there will always be those networking and collaborating and bypassing whatever restrictions get put in place. I don't think so. It's just a question of the severity of the punishment for violating regulations. A couple of small fines for an unlicensed networking and collaborating - and there will be no one left. >There's a ton of cheap tools now that can be used for running local or citywide networks, hams have thei…

> It's just a question of the severity of the punishment for violating regulations. A couple of small fines for an unlicensed networking and collaborating - and there will be no one left. I don't think you give people enough credit. There have been dissidents in totalitarian regimes the world over, even when the punishment was death or being sent to a labour camp. You might think that unlicenced networking isn't impo…

> I don't think you give people enough credit. There have been dissidents in totalitarian regimes the world over, even when the punishment was death or being sent to a labour camp.

You probably know very little about totalitarian regimes? The thing is that they usually have a rather weak legal system, governed by the principles of lawlessness. This creates strong incentives for dissident activity:

- You won't be caught, because the police are interested in breaking their own laws, and not in finding criminals - If you are caught, there is a chance to buy your way out, because the police are more interested in receiving bribes than in jailing a dissident who has violated something unclear - Even if you are completely law-abiding, you can still be detained as a dissident, because they urgently need to catch a dissident today - You can't be completely law-abiding citizen, no one can, laws doesn't supposed to be workable. And if you break a bunch of laws just because you breathe, it's easy enough for you to break just another one - And even if you obey all the laws you can, what awaits you? A miserable, half-starved life that can be cut short at any moment for any reason - You don't receive social stigma and disapproval, because the majority of society clearly does not approve of the persecution of dissidents

The point is that severe punishments, including the death penalty, are used under totalitarianism precisely because of impotence in the fight against dissidents.

But we are talking about completely different regimes. Regimes with laws that work. Regimes with extremely efficient bureaucracy. Regimes where people have very much to lose and where they clearly know what they need to do to avoid losing it. And regimes with a system of totalitarian surveillance of all citizens. People won't need to be executed. Just a small fine EVERY time - and very quickly there will be no one left.

> but I think many people would see it as the start of China-like censorship.

The start has already begun, and as I see it, China is a children's party with tea and custard cakes compared to what awaits us.

Re: A technical look at Iran's internet shutdowns

#123

Post by coderatlarge »

ACCount36 wrote: post #121
coderatlarge wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

does that mean the authorities can’t locate someone transmitting or receiving to/from starlink? in many places the consequences of detection could be dire…

No. The links between the satellites are lasers, but the user traffic still goes up and down over radio. You still need the Starlink coverage to be enabled on system level, and the local government to care enough to track down Starlink users at the same time. I can't imagine that there are many countries that meet both criteria.

i believe countries with major firewalls and vpn blocking policies would track down and make examples of a set of users periodically if only to deter others.

Re: A technical look at Iran's internet shutdowns

#124

Post by robertlagrant »

ACCount36 wrote: post #93
robertlagrant wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Starlink Only when (if) Stalink removes the need for base stations and just sends the traffic directly between satellites.

It already does that. That's how Starlink works over the ocean.

Oh, cool. I haven't kept up to date. That's amazing.

Re: A technical look at Iran's internet shutdowns

#125

Post by dvdkon »

Ray20 wrote: post #122
dvdkon wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's just a question of the severity of the punishment for violating regulations. A couple of small fines for an unlicensed networking and collaborating - and there will be no one left. I don't think you give people enough credit. There have been dissidents in totalitarian regimes the world over, even when the punishment was death or being sent to a labour camp. You might think that unlicenced networking isn't impo…

> I don't think you give people enough credit. There have been dissidents in totalitarian regimes the world over, even when the punishment was death or being sent to a labour camp. You probably know very little about totalitarian regimes? The thing is that they usually have a rather weak legal system, governed by the principles of lawlessness. This creates strong incentives for dissident activity: - You won't be caug…

I based my comment mainly on my knowledge of communist Czechoslovakia and other East Bloc countries. There the country was hardly lawless and the state was pretty efficient in its efforts to find and punish dissidents. Laws were being bent and corruption was high, but I'd never heard of anyone bribing their way out of dissent charges. There were plenty of people who were relatively well-off and/or were willing to snitch to rise in the ranks.

Totalitarian regimes don't need to be failed states. These countries had functioning rule of law and bureaucracy before WW2, and this apparatus was fully used by the new totalitarian governments. So I think they're the closest model that we have for how our ("western") societies might work after sharing undesirable information is made an offence.

Re: A technical look at Iran's internet shutdowns

#126

Post by ashoeafoot »

baby_souffle wrote: post #46
coderatlarge wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it seems to me that a nation determined to control wired network traffic within its borders cannot be circumvented. if they can control the ISPs and observe packet flows then they can just obstruct any connection they cannot conclusively prove is acceptable. it seems then that store-and-forward ad hoc p2p (ie extremely high unpredictable latency) is the only option for those who can reach some node with a connection…

> it seems to me that a nation determined to control wired network traffic within its borders cannot be circumvented. Starlink/Kuiper and the geostationary satellites are an alternative. Not perfect... but far better than *nothing*

There is also the travelling salesman hauling in external culture like games and movies via SSD. Wish there was a protocoll to deaddrop large file requests smuggled into a country.

Re: A technical look at Iran's internet shutdowns

#127

Post by heraldgeezer »

bawolff wrote: post #95
MangoToupe wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The important part is its use. You could call it magic key negotiation and I wouldn't care. RCS and SMS are fundamentally different technologies in every way.

They are presented to the user in the same way. They serve the same function. From a user perspective, its about as different as http2 is from http1.1 or 3. (I.e. very different under the hood but not in a user visible way)

Since when are we mere users?

Job security for me I guess lol thanks

Re: A technical look at Iran's internet shutdowns

#128

Post by coderatlarge »

ashoeafoot wrote: post #126
baby_souffle wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it seems to me that a nation determined to control wired network traffic within its borders cannot be circumvented. Starlink/Kuiper and the geostationary satellites are an alternative. Not perfect... but far better than *nothing*

There is also the travelling salesman hauling in external culture like games and movies via SSD. Wish there was a protocoll to deaddrop large file requests smuggled into a country.

yes massive store-and-forward :)

Re: A technical look at Iran's internet shutdowns

#129

Post by ZoomZoomZoom »

ninjin wrote: post #96
ZoomZoomZoom wrote: post #17

> WireGuard uses UDP and a small handshake footprint, making detection and blocking via DPI harder. Not quite true. Wireguard is already actively detected and suppressed if necessary. There's already a fork that employs basic changes to improve the protocol in this regard. AmneziaWG was shown to be more robust to detection for now. https://docs.amnezia.org/documentation/amnezia-wg/ Too bad managing WG is such a pain…

> Too bad managing [Wireguard] is such a pain[.] It is? My clients on OpenBSD need about ten lines in /etc/hostname.wg[0-9]+ and that includes the routes!

If hub-and-spoke does it for you, it's manageable.

Re: A technical look at Iran's internet shutdowns

#130

Post by one-note »

voidUpdate wrote: post #91
one-note wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only way to have global uncensored sharing of information is shortwave radio. Always has been, always will be.

Couldn't someone just jam an active shortwave band?

Sure. You play cat and mouse with SNR. Not trivial, but easier than the same with cut cables.
Post reply on HN