[governance] Could the U.S. shut down the internet?

Fouad Bajwa fouadbajwa at gmail.com
Sat Feb 5 15:06:02 EST 2011 

I have sometimes felt that the point of a treaty may be precisely to
create the monopoly in a single way of handling things..........an
example as shared by a friend can be that if we take the case of movie
DVDs carrying region codes appears as a form of censorship upheld by
treaties.

My colleague suggests that the possible solution around this is to
work on the interfaces between participants in the Internet space and
Domain names are such interfaces and inspite of the domain names,
there are many languages are interfaces and computer protocols and
social networks...

.......................whats the way in your perceptions?

On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
> Good article Louis – similar thoughts expressed by Douglas Rushkoff below
>
>
> http://edition.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/05/rushkoff.egypt.internet/index.html?hpt=C1
>
>
> As I see it, our most common communication channels currently can be closed
> at the whim of corporations and governments, and often governments foreign
> to our own, if servers or registrars or registries or a host of other
> incidental arrangements exist within the blocking parties sovereignty. (or
> pass through their sovereignty in some instances). And often this is
> happening with no judicial checks and balances.
>
> Ths is a huge issue for the Internet as we know it and it is a governance
> issue.
>
> Avri mentioned some of the new technical workarounds – and some of the old
> ones. These will help the more literate but don’t solve the underlying
> problem, which is a fundamental lack of  sensible agreements to ensure that
> the actions of individual governments and/or corporations are subject to a
> number of checks and balances before any takedowns occur.
>
> Things that will assist could include
>
> international agreements and/or treaties on the right to communicate (yes I
> know we went there in the 1980s)
> codes of conduct with corporations
> policy statements by companies as part of user agreements
> an agreement by nations to require judicial action before any takedowns
> within their area of sovereignty
> education on the threats to human rights inherent in the current situation
> activism
>
> And I am sure there is more that can be done. Thanks Louis for putting the
> basic situation before us so well.
>
> Ian Peter
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Louis Pouzin (well)" <pouzin at well.com>
> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, "Louis Pouzin (well)"
> <pouzin at well.com>
> Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 16:00:50 +0100
> To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> Subject: [governance] Could the U.S. shut down the internet?
>
> Recent events in Tunisia and Egypt have dispelled a tenacious myth, that it
> is impossible to block communications in internet. Practically it doesn't
> take long for a clever technical staff to turn off part or all of a national
> internet. Indeed, due to a very small number of popular applications
> provided by USA based quasi-monopolies, the net is no longer enjoying the
> characteristics of its initial design. Instead of peer to peer traffic
> exchanged between a large number of users, the net has regressed to a
> primitive client server model of proprietary services typical of the 70's.
> While dominant providers may be credited of a brilliant money making
> ability, their architecture vision has been definitely mediocre. If this is
> taken as a notable achievement of the private sector, we'd better look
> elsewhere for innovative concepts.
>
> A second myth has also been badly hit, that of the USA being a guardian of
> the freedom of expression. Like in China, Egypt, Iran, Myanmar, Tunisia, and
> more, the US govt makes every effort to eradicate from the internet
> information it doesn't like, e.g. Wikileaks, but not only. The seizure of
> domain names, by administrative rather judiciary process, is a clear symptom
> of a dangerous drift towards denial of justice and witch hunt. Remember
> McCarthyism. Sadly, in the western world this present trend is not limited
> to the USA.
>
> The case of rojadirecta, a Spanish site, is an interesting example of messy
> seizure by DHS.
> http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?s=5b403119ad7fc612b5b915ef0fe0c041&t=420566&page=1
> Actually, rojadirecta remained on the net through other links, which was the
> most expedient alternative.
>
> As argued by some postings, DHS seizure of domain names seems to be a
> blatant violation of the US Constitution. Suing DHS in a US court is not a
> practical solution. DHS would be a sure winner, either by a biased judgment
> or by dilatory tactics. However, publicity on the process would call world
> attention on the risks involved in dealing with US controlled registries.
>
> A major lesson to be drawn from those recent events, and not to be
> forgotten, is that no country and no application is a safe haven. Putting
> all corporate information systems under some .com, .net, .org or similar
> TLD's is not just naive but irresponsible. Domain names should be hosted in
> a diversity of countries and registries. Check which organization is
> operating the DNS and where it is physically located. Have a private DNS, or
> at least keep track of IP addresses of essential sites. Maintain dialup
> telephone access to servers on voice grade modems. What else in extreme
> conditions ? Ham radio, satellite telephone, mail pigeons.
>
> At the same time frustrated citizens in authoritarian countries rush to
> Facebook for setting up demonstrations and keeping the world informed. Do
> they realize that security flaws give the police clues to identify them and
> their friends, collect their profiles, and impersonate them ?
> http://www.europe1.fr/Medias-Tele/Il-s-est-glisse-dans-une-faille-de-Facebook-398657/
> http://www.john-jean.com/blog/advisories/facebook-vulnerabilites-csrf-et-xss-ver-destructeurs-sur-un-reseau-social-372
>
> Btw, 500 millions of Fakebook profiles are a gold mine for all kinds of data
> collectors.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
>



-- 
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

More information about the Governance mailing list