Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Alimardani says that it seems that mobile data services are uneven and, for many people, virtual private networks, which can be used to avoid censorship, have stopped working. This means that it was difficult to reach the country in the country and potentially for information to go out, says Alimardani. “A family who left Tehran today was offline and disconnected from the Internet and finally found some connectivity when it was 200 kilometers outside Tehran in another province,” said Alimardani. “My connections are mainly with people using wide-band Wi-Fi at home, but even it was unstable.”
Over the past decade, countries have increasingly taken the draconian measure of the complete or partial or partial closure of citizens in the event of a perceived crisis. There was 296 closings last yearAccording to Access Now, a non -profit organization on the Internet rights which follows actions – the greatest number of all ever recorded. Stops are often linked to repressive governments Trying to restrict the protests that could damage them, limit the ability of people to come together and communicate freely, as part of conflicts, and even try to stop cheating at exams.
“The Internet is a life buoy, as we have seen in many places in conflict,” said Hanna Kreitem, director of technology and Internet development at Internet Society, who was Follow -up of breakdowns in Iran. Kreitem says that when connectivity in Iran began to drop on June 13, he heard people with parents in Iran, their services had slowed considerably. “People under fire use it to get news, ask for help, learn safer areas and communicate with dear beings. And so that people outside learn what’s going on and know about their loved ones. ”
To limit connectivity, countries use several different technical approaches. Iran has developed its own Internet alternativean intranet system called the National information networkKnown as Nin, for years. The nin, according to Analysis by Freedom HouseAllows “levels” of internet access and allows the government to censor content and push people to local Iranian applications, such as alternative messaging applications, which may have “low confidentiality and security functionalities”. (Freedom House qualifies Iran as “not free” in its most recent Internet freedom measureshighlighting persistent closures, increasing costs and efforts to push people to domestic internet.)
Amir Rashidi, Director of Digital Rights and Security of Human Rights Organization focused on Iran, Miaan Group, said that in the midst of recent farms, there have been increased efforts to push people to Iranian applications. “In a climate of fear, where people just try to stay connected with dear beings, many turn to these unsecured platforms by despair,” he posted onlineTell Wired that an email application called Bale seems to attract attention. “Since they are hosted on Nin, they will work even during the closure,” he says.
Iran is not the first country to restrict people’s access to the Internet – and not censored information – with the potential justification for the protection of cybersecurity or security more widely, explains Lukasz Olejnik, independent consultant and principal researcher visiting the Kings of the Kings War Department of Kings London. While global closings on the Internet have soared in the last decade, said Olejnik, officials of Myanmar, India, Russia and Belarus have all cited security reasons to implement Panus breakdowns.
“Internet closings are largely ineffective against cyber attacks at the level of the real world of real world,” explains Olejnik. He explains that military and critical infrastructure systems, such as energy networks or transport systems, will generally work on separate networks and will not be accessible from open internet. “Professional cyber operations could use other means of access, but this could indeed make it difficult to order and control certain deployed malware (if it was),” explains Olejnik. “What he would mainly block would be access to information for society.”
The witness’ Alimardani says that the technical details supporting any assertion that the restrictions on the Internet aim to protect cybersecurity are “clear” and, ultimately, the objective of these efforts can be to control people in Iran. “The official account of state information channels describes a strong war against Israel and a path to victory,” said Alimardani. “Free access and open to the media would undermine this story, and at worst, could encourage Iranians to revolt, further eroding the power of the regime.”
