[HN Gopher] Atlas of internet surveillance maps ownership of net...
___________________________________________________________________
Atlas of internet surveillance maps ownership of network
infrastructures worldw
Author : wglb
Score : 114 points
Date : 2024-03-07 00:28 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (techxplore.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (techxplore.com)
| crotchfire wrote:
| _The characteristic pattern: In authoritarian states, more
| influential internet service providers are predominantly state-
| owned, whereas in democracies they are largely privatized._
|
| This is basically irrelevant as long as there are only a small
| number of gigantic providers. If the shareholders disagree with
| the government, the company will do what the government wants.
|
| This all played out with crystal clarity over two decades ago,
| when the CEO of Qwest (then one of the five largest carriers)
| refused to spy for the NSA. So they threw the CEO in prison and
| drove the company to the edge of bankruptcy (it no longer
| exists).
|
| That was the last time a "privately owned" telecom giant ever
| said "no" to the NSA.
|
| https://www.vice.com/en/article/pgg7q7/the-telecom-exec-who-...
|
| https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/10/qwest-ceo-nsa-punished...
|
| https://www.businessinsider.com/the-story-of-joseph-nacchio-...
|
| https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2013/09/30...
| rekttrader wrote:
| I can't upvote this more, kudos to realization that the
| evolution of the apranet has not ever been anything less than a
| military network controlled by the US.
| cookiemonsieur wrote:
| Exactly. So called "liberal western democracies" are
| essentially running the same game as the oh so bad
| "authoritarian states", just in a roundabout way (Protect the
| children, the war on "terror" etc ...) .
|
| These "privately owned" companies have always been in bed
| with the military industrial complex. I'm glad more and more
| americans and westerners are waking up to this reality and
| this false dichotomy.
| verisimi wrote:
| Yes, corporations and the state working together is concealed
| fascism. We can choose red or blue, but nothing changes.
| WarOnPrivacy wrote:
| > concealed fascism. We can choose red or blue
|
| Presuming this, I can see distance between dominant and
| recessive fascism. Elements of recessive fascism can be
| whittled down - if enough of society is conscientious.
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| The article begins by assuming a world split into two camps;
| freedom-loving liberal democracies and authoritarian hell-
| holes, each delimited by strong national borders.
|
| That's still somewhat true. We may criticise our society in
| this forum and not be arrested by thugs. That should be
| evidence enough that for 80 years since the last world war
| we've maintained an alliance of ideals that were worth fighting
| for. Indeed, it's why we have concepts like "national
| security", although the common meaning of that has been
| perverted and its reputation dragged into the mud.
|
| Our more subtle problem is the supposed perimeters are no
| longer clear. We have fascists amongst us on our own soil. They
| are well ensconced in both government and private enterprise.
| Globalism and the Internet allowed the spread of
| authoritarianism which has taken root "at home", sadly much
| assisted by the technology we've built.
|
| I think it's cynical and does us a disservice if you suggest
| that _every company_ who disagrees with what the government
| wants has their CEO thrown in jail. When bullied, providers
| like Lavabit, TrueCrypt and others chose to shut down their
| companies and tell everybody why rather than collude in
| fascism. Much as I dislike Apple (because they are duplicitous)
| they also put on a show of principles. They may even sincerely
| believe that "protecting" their customers is a core value.
|
| 80 years ago people chose to make the "ultimate sacrifice" by
| giving their lives. Today the ultimate sacrifice is to forgo
| money. Qwest folded because they were weak on fascism and put
| money first, but they are not the only example to hold up.
| There are more important things than money in this world.
| pydry wrote:
| >That's still somewhat true. We may criticise our society in
| this forum and not be arrested by thugs.
|
| This is possible in many if not most oppressive countries
| too. It's simply not worthwhile to throw every critic in
| prison. This doesn't mean they are protecting freedom, it
| just means that they've made a cost/benefit trade off that
| left somebody who wasn't that much of a threat to begin with
| out of prison.
|
| When you see how we treat dissidents who are a threat to the
| powers that be (Assange, Snowden, Gonzalo Lira) I don't see a
| huge difference in how we treat them and how our geopolitical
| rivals treat theirs. We're slightly _better_ than them at not
| doing it, but that could just be because our elites feel less
| threatened.
|
| >That should be evidence enough that for 80 years since the
| last world war we've maintained an alliance of ideals that
| were worth fighting for.
|
| Not very well, and we get more like Russia with every passing
| year. Sometimes the similarities are a little _too_ on the
| nose - like when we bring down a jet to try and grab one
| dissident and then a year or two later they do it too.
| lukan wrote:
| "TrueCrypt"
|
| Maybe not the best example as it was very likely build and
| run by a criminal to aid his crime cartel buisness, not
| someone acting on ideals.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Le_Roux
|
| And TrueCrypt did officially recommend switching to
| BitLocker, where I am sure the NSA has backdoors for. So not
| sure what do you mean here.
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| Good to know that's a weak example. Thanks.
| coldtea wrote:
| > _That 's still somewhat true. We may criticise our society
| in this forum and not be arrested by thugs._
|
| Mostly when the outcome of the criticism happening doesn't
| matter.
|
| And one can still very well be fired, fined, thrown off their
| college, for saying the wrong things in their "criticism of
| society", it's just that the establishment has those
| consequences distributed now.
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| You are correct, but this is precisely what I mean by
| sacrifice.
|
| Freedom costs.
|
| One has to have optimism beyond oneself - which is really a
| belief and care for the future and future generations.
|
| I guess my point is that wherever you are in the world, and
| whatever frightened "elites" (legitimised criminal classes)
| you have to deal with, democracy and freedom are not states
| of being but ideals we make sacrifices for.
|
| I think we _have_ done a good job of standing up for that.
| I 'm reminded on International Womens Day that people used
| to throw themselves under trains to make a point. They
| chose _visible_ struggle. Protest is ever more costly. And
| what of Aaron Bushnell? Beyond comprehension! We 've been
| living off the courage and sacrifice of 50 million lives 80
| years ago so we're free to make money and have a good time,
| and that savings account is nearly empty.
|
| Choosing to get fired, trash a "career", or forgo money
| seems a small sacrifice in the scheme of history and what
| others have given up.
| digging wrote:
| > We may criticise our society in this forum and not be
| arrested by thugs.
|
| Sure, but try doing in person and it can be a very different
| story.
| simpletone wrote:
| > We may criticise our society in this forum and not be
| arrested by thugs.
|
| In the US because we have constitutional freedom of speech.
| But plenty of people in 'freedom-loving liberal democracies'
| are arrested for criticizing their societies. Unless you
| think the UK and Germany are authoritarian?
|
| Besides, there are things we cannot even criticize in this
| forum.
|
| > That should be evidence enough that for 80 years since the
| last world war we've maintained an alliance of ideals that
| were worth fighting for.
|
| What alliance of ideals? What are the ideals? Other than
| maintaining the european domination of the world?
|
| > 80 years ago people chose to make the "ultimate sacrifice"
| by giving their lives.
|
| What? You sound like the morons that think we invade iraq to
| bring freedom and democracy.
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| > In the US because we have constitutional freedom of
| speech.
|
| In the UK we recently lost a lot of fundamental freedoms.
| Our current Tory party are spiteful and corrupt.
|
| > Unless you think the UK and Germany are authoritarian?
|
| There are extremist authoritarians everywhere. That was my
| point in the original post. And since they are essentially
| anti-democratic I think it's fair to label them as traitors
| and "enemies within".
|
| > Besides, there are things we cannot even criticise in
| this forum.
|
| We know that. Ycombinator has owners and a clear agenda.
| The punishment is being down-voted and made invisible. But
| there are ways to challenge entrenched ideas here and drag
| difficult topics out into the sunlight.
|
| > What are the ideals?
|
| Human rights. Particularly freedom of speech.
|
| > Other than maintaining the European domination of the
| world?
|
| I don't think it's fair to equate those things. I'm well
| aware of historical hegemony, That torch passed to the USA
| in the last century.
|
| > What? You sound like the morons that think we invade Iraq
| to bring freedom and democracy.
|
| Oh dear. I don't know where to start with all that. Iraq
| was an offensive resource war waged by the US to secure
| oil, with the side effect of toppling a disobedient puppet
| and assuaging the egos of two second rate Western leaders.
| That's not even debatable now. But to confuse that with the
| defeat of Nazism and Fascism in a world war in which 80-100
| million people died shows an astonishingly poor grasp of
| history and politics.
| betaby wrote:
| The thole 'paper' is a trash-level 'research', adds no
| knowledge at all. Typical in that area: 'I run ping from random
| places here are random graphs', let's assume some nonsense and
| there are bizarre conclusions.
| pcw7321 wrote:
| There is another motivation for the state to run isps other than
| censorship. Socialists may consider the internet infrastructure,
| just like roads. This article does feel a bit like propaganda for
| truth justice and the American way..
| lukan wrote:
| "Socialists may consider the internet infrastructure"
|
| In general yes, but which countries in question would you judge
| socialist?
|
| And the socialist countries from before, well I rather would
| describe them as a constructs, where everyone was employed by a
| state owned company.
| cookiemonsieur wrote:
| I came here to just say that
| PeterStuer wrote:
| I'm confused by their methodology. If I can put a tap on the
| AMS=IX, that gives me access to a huge % of EU traffic regardless
| of wheter private or public entities own some adress space. In
| practice the Internet is full of these points of concentration.
| Whether these were more often born out of traditional network
| effects of peering in commercial settings or because of
| authocratic enforcement, the resulting surveillance and control
| centralization remains the same.
| hulitu wrote:
| > A German-American research team led by the University of
| Konstanz has mapped the ownership of network infrastructures in
| democratic and authoritarian states worldwide to show how
| autocrats control the internet via state-owned service providers.
|
| They "forgot" to look at the nodes, who are all controlled by
| NSA.
| Faaak wrote:
| Since when is, CIXP for example, controlled by the NSA?
| varjag wrote:
| You can demonstrate in countless ways that democracies are freer
| than dictatorships but that will never stop a huge swath of
| online population from claiming that they are, in fact, the same.
| whearyou wrote:
| Case in point, this thread.
|
| I wonder what it is about people in the West over the last
| generation that eliminates their ability to distinguish between
| "not ideal" and "terrible", if the "not ideal" is their home
| base.
| FrustratedMonky wrote:
| The internet itself is often cited as the cause. "Social
| Medial"
|
| Income inequality is probably more likely, with internet
| making it easier to see.
|
| In the US, while economy is "good", it ignores a large % of
| population struggling, and if they are on Social Media, they
| see the differences.
|
| Then popular uprising, and boom, revolution, dictatorship.
|
| The people that are suffering, don't have the bandwidth to
| think about "not ideal" versus "terrible".
| zabana wrote:
| Ironically, the internet and the free access to information
| that comes with it have essentially removed the veil.
| salawat wrote:
| I think it's a class thing. I've told juniors that at a
| certain point in the social ladder, people start using
| language funny. Someone saying something is "not ideal" tends
| to translate to "it's terrible", but specifically when used
| by management/political types it picks up the real consequent
| of: "but I'll subject my people to it if that's what it
| takes, and no one can come up with anything better".
|
| I've increasingly found that the more life manages to
| centralize around just a few people being in those types of
| positions, the worse it gets.
| 123yawaworht456 wrote:
| the problem is, the democracies are adopting the worst
| practices of dictatorships at an alarming rate.
|
| it is all veiled in a thin veneer of legitimacy, of course -
| protecting children, fighting terrorists, fighting nazis,
| fighting disinformation, etc, etc, etc, and there are plenty of
| people who will foam at the mouth to defend such measures as
| absolutely necessary and morally just.
|
| I live in an authoritarion shithole myself, and I'm watching
| EU/US/CA/ANZ rapidly become more and more like my country with
| a mix of amusement and dismay.
| chickazama wrote:
| I've been hit so many times by the 'you have freedom of
| speech - as long you agree with us' line in the last 5 or 6
| years... and can't believe how many friends also think along
| similar lines.
| buran77 wrote:
| Many people haven't experienced dictatorships or authoritarian
| regimes. So their view of this is painted in relative terms,
| not absolute. Things got worse, things look more and more like
| what they hear from dictatorships so they draw a conclusion
| that democracies doing the same means they are the same.
|
| But in fact in such cases they're more right that you think. If
| a force is powerful enough to push a healthy democracy towards
| authoritarianism you damn well should be very, very concerned.
| Because it takes an enormous amount of will and effort do do
| this but it gets easier at every step. This is far more power
| than most dictators have to just maintain the status quo.
|
| Like a train slowly rolling out of the train station, don't
| think it's barely moving, think that the motor behind it can
| move the whole damn thing from a standstill. By the time you
| figure out what's happening it's too late to fix anything
| without a lot of collateral damage.
| varjag wrote:
| I somewhat disagree. Folks who are aware of authoritarian
| trends in societies are generally nuanced enough to see that
| there's still a chasm to be crossed. So you don't get to hear
| the "USA is on the way to become $dictatorship" near as often
| as "actually $dictatorship is just as free or freer than the
| USA".
| WarOnPrivacy wrote:
| > you don't get to hear the "USA is on the way to become
| $dictatorship" near as often as "actually $dictatorship is
| just as free or freer than the USA".
|
| I think either can be the prominent message; it depends on
| the speaker(s). People who favor dictatorship-enabling
| factors will rationalize and redefine those factors as
| freedom.
| buran77 wrote:
| From my personal experience (very anecdotal of course, also
| Western but outside-US view*) I can't remember a time I've
| heard someone saying "$dictatorship is just as free or
| freer than the USA". I occasionally heard "it's not as bad
| as it sounds". On the other hand I hear "USA is on the way
| to become $dictatorship" almost on a daily basis.
|
| But it makes sense because in the way it's meant to be
| understood it's correct. One is a threshold that's
| reasonably easy to judge, the other is a process and the
| rate of advance can be the same whether you're close to the
| start or end of the process. The rate is the strongest
| signal, not just the absolute position.
|
| If you travel from NY to LA most of the time you can tell
| if you're closer to one or the other. But no matter where
| you are on the route, you _are_ indeed traveling from NY to
| LA. Going back to what I said in my previous comment, you
| should be scared that it 's happening nonetheless. Getting
| a huge democracy like the USA to start to slide into
| authoritarianism, even just localized (for now) takes a lot
| of power and every step towards that destination becomes
| easier. The hardest part was already done - the inertia was
| defeated and the train is slowly rolling. Don't sit
| comfortably thinking "we're clearly freer than Belarus"
| because you're right today but you won't even notice when
| you pass the point of no return. Boiling frog and all that.
| I say this as a person who lived through times like that
| more than once. Freedoms are lost in the silence of the
| night but are (re)gained usually with blood, sweat, and
| tears. Wherever you think you are, be mindful of that.
|
| *I have some bias here, I have mostly Western/EU-like
| views, I'm on forums with more US/EU people where they may
| complain about their own home, but they're also likely to
| "silence" opinions like "dictatorship better than your
| country". Or any opinion that doesn't align with the same
| Western views. More and more places are open just to
| pandering to the popular opinion. Like sitting in front of
| some 1st place football team supporters telling them their
| team is slipping, you'll still get your clock punched even
| if you're right.
| zabana wrote:
| Please make that demonstration then.
| hosteur wrote:
| Link to the actual study:
| https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/3/3/pgae069/76081...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-03-08 23:02 UTC)