Slashdot Mirror


Paraguay Telco Hijacks DNS Before Elections

MrJones writes "In Paraguay we are at T-9 days to national elections. The ruling party has been in power for nearly 61 years (including more than 30 years of dictatorship). Now the state-run ADSL company is hijacking the DNS nationwide of a site that denounces the corruption in the party."

150 comments

  1. yet.... by the_real_valaki · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    ...another reason to hijack the olympic torch...

    1. Re:yet.... by the_real_valaki · · Score: 1

      ok.. i admit, it wasn't funny.

    2. Re:yet.... by der_alte · · Score: 1

      absolutely :)

    3. Re:yet.... by threat_or_menace · · Score: 1

      Um, anyone tried reading the sites that are in trouble with the national provider? In the US I think that at least some of this stuff would get a court order pretty fast, for example
      at www.partidocoloradoantrodeladrones.org we find:

      "Sitio oficial del Tembotá, gran valor, GRAN PEDÓFILO, gran JAPÚ, ñe'erei de profesión, hurrero de vocación"

      It's a fairly amusing site and all that, but the link reeks of late-90s Usenet kookery: all caps, accusations of pedophilia, the whole nine yards. Neither site qualifies as a .org site in the US sense of the term, either. Oh, and the second referenced site, partidocolorado.org, is registered through Domains by Proxy - so it's that much harder to be sure of who's actually behind it. (Domains by proxy doing dot-org registrations? Tastes bad to me.)

      Now, is it really a DNS screwup at all? If you look at the (supposedly) bogus site at
      201.217.51.114, you are presented with a Partido Colorado website. Is it possible that Partido Colorado won a court order in Paraguay saying that partidocolorado.org was not allowed to run their site at that address? (Yes, this would be political speech in the US - but we are not talking about the US, and we are talking about people who by US standards are trying to run a site in .org space that they probably have no business locating there.)

      In short, we're being told very little of the story here, and the poster is hoping some slashdotter with mad skillz will see this as black and white and fix the problem.

  2. No oil by Gothmolly · · Score: 5, Funny

    Do you have oil? If you do, then this corruption is a worldwide tragedy which must be stopped, we'll send troops^Wobservers right away.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:No oil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hilarious! Mod Parent Up!

    2. Re:No oil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, the US is about to open a military base in Paraguay, to have a tight leash on Bolivian oil fields, I guess.

      So, I think we will side with the ruling party in this one.

    3. Re:No oil by shadowofwind · · Score: 1

      Do you have oil? If you do, then this corruption is a worldwide tragedy which must be stopped, we'll send troops^Wobservers right away. Argentine oil is much, much more important to the US interests than Iraq's, and the US has not reacted in such a manner to events there.
    4. Re:No oil by Kenrod · · Score: 1

      "Bolivian Oil Fields". Right.

      I suspect they are there to assist with anti-terrorism activities in the the remote tri-border area in southern Brazil.

      http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/pdf-files/TerrOrgCrime_TBA.pdf
      http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0PBZ/is_5_84/ai_n7069238

      --
      Good heavens Miss Sakamoto - you're beautiful!
    5. Re:No oil by w000t · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      WTF are you talking about? what oil? what events?

    6. Re:No oil by hjf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      never heard of Tarija, Bolivia, right?

    7. Re:No oil by hjf · · Score: 1

      the oil stolen by Spain with the disgustingly corrupt sale of YPF (Argentina's state-owned oil company) to Repsol (Spain's oil monopoly) in the 90's

    8. Re:No oil by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      WTF are you talking about? what oil? what events?
      Cocaine is a hell of a drug.
      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    9. Re:No oil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Repsol is not a monopoly for about 15 years now.
      And the sale is more recent than you claim.

      Please check your facts before posting.

    10. Re:No oil by hjf · · Score: 1

      Repsol is a monopoly, I don't care what you claim. Also the sale is from 1999, so it's in the 90s. Fuck you, anonymous :)

    11. Re:No oil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, never. Wikipedia is not helping. What are you trying to say.

    12. Re:No oil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would either of you care to cite some facts for the monopoly / not monopoly thing? Or are there none since you just started cussing instead?

    13. Re:No oil by hjf · · Score: 1

      the gratuitous insults were unnecesary because I wasn't the one to say that you were going to open a military base in Paraguay. I'm not paraguayan either. anyway, you obviously have no idea about the economics in south america, if you think only Brazil is having immigration problems, and if you think wealth is distributed equally in brazil, you're very wrong. but whatever, you're just an average american racist. don't forget, tomorrow's sunday, you have to wake up early for church.

    14. Re:No oil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where do you buy your coke? That must be some powerful $@#!...

    15. Re:No oil by w000t · · Score: 1

      I share your opinion on the YPF sell, but I'm still pretty sure the person I responded just can't tell Argentina from Venezuela...

    16. Re:No oil by w000t · · Score: 1

      I don't know about the rest of the world, but Repsol is not a monopoly on Argentina.

    17. Re:No oil by galoise · · Score: 1

      actually, the us already had its hand in paraguay AND bolivia when it was believed that there was oil in the chaco region, shared by the two countries.

      this eventauly ended up in a war between paraguay and bolivia, with the US based Standard Oil supporting Bolivia, and the UK based Shell Oil supporting Paraguay.

      This was the worst armed conflict in latin america in the 20th century. over 35.000 died. and of course, there was no fucking oil whatsoever.

      --
      entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
  3. They should host the site on high-profile domains by mysidia · · Score: 5, Informative

    I.E. Google pages

    And put the site in many places so it isn't as easy to silence.

    While hijacking DNS of a small domain may go unnoticed

    Hijacking say Google's or Yahoo's DNS could possibly be highly noticed by the citizens.

  4. Down with goverment censorship by bumof2005 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's amazing how easily entire countries of people can be manipulated. China is in the spotlight now but it is nothing compared to countries like North Korea who will get thrown in jail if they have a cell phone for fear that people will actually figure out that nothing they are told is true.

    1. Re:Down with goverment censorship by orasio · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In fatc, the issue now at Paraguay is different.
      China is a communist country, where manipulating the media is justified by their ideology.

      Paraguay is a country ruled by a conservative coalition. Their means of manipulating the media are much more occidental, and ruled by market news.

      In other words, what happens now in Paraguay is just an expanded version of what happens in most occidental countries. Big interests control everything, corrupt government people follow those interests, and use the weight of government + corporations to keep in power.

      In South America, we call that "la rosca". In the US it would be "coporate lobbysts".

      What I mean is that you shouldn't look at what happens in Paraguay as a third world thing. To me, it's a risk we all have.

    2. Re:Down with goverment censorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just for the record, even if you are right (which i doubt you are) i am soo sick of hearing these conspiracy theories.

    3. Re:Down with goverment censorship by tamrood · · Score: 1

      You are right. China should copy America. Over here, the leaders of government don't care if they get caught lying any more.

      --
      The meaning of your Life is up to you. Mean well. -- Me, 9/11/2001
    4. Re:Down with goverment censorship by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Wow. Some tinfoil hatter had mod points today. I'm not even going to qualify your ramblings as theories. They're paranoid delusions. Not to mention, completely wrong, even in the questions you're asking. Sheesh.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    5. Re:Down with goverment censorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Try living in the US. You think we're in the picture with honest "news"?

    6. Re:Down with goverment censorship by hey! · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Paraguay is a country ruled by a conservative coalition.


      Which only goes to show what my old bolshie Uncle Ivan used to say. "Kid," he'd say, "nobody believes in capitalism. Nobody believes in socialism. It's socialism for me, and capitalism for you!" Ivan may have been a red, but he was a cynic first and foremost, and that keeps you honest.

      In the end, there is only one thing that really matters in any system: transparency. At least if the system is supposed to be run for the benefit of the people who live under it. You can be all for the proletariat, or all for the free market, but if you're pulling the wool of the peoples' eyes, you aren't any different from anybody else running a con behind high sounding priciples.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    7. Re:Down with goverment censorship by hjf · · Score: 1

      just proves my point. thank you.

    8. Re:Down with goverment censorship by hjf · · Score: 1

      oh and don't worry. there's no global warming. the war on iraq wasn't about oil. all third world countries are like that because of their own mistakes, the US didn't have anything to do with that. the US is perfect, nothing's wrong, terrorists are a constant threat but they're under control. and of course, we have oil for at least 100 years more, more than enough time to allow the good oil companies to do some research in alternate energy and give us enough time to make the switch.

    9. Re:Down with goverment censorship by hobbit · · Score: 1

      Even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    10. Re:Down with goverment censorship by hjf · · Score: 1

      "The bigger the lie, the more it will be believed."

    11. Re:Down with goverment censorship by BungaDunga · · Score: 1

      GRAVITY IS AN ILLUSION! GEORGE BUSH IS AN ALIEN/ILLUMINATUS/THE ANTICHRIST/JESUS! Those are lies, pretty big ones, and you don't believe them because they're not true.
      Your argument is tautological: if we disagree, you claim it proves your argument. If I say "mice are actually 7-dimensional aliens who are controlling your brain" and you say "WTF, that's impossible." I can just say "See?! The mice are controlling you! QED." It's just not a solid basis for an argument.

    12. Re:Down with goverment censorship by witherstaff · · Score: 3, Informative

      You don't have to worry only about the government censorship - corporate media censors items when it fits their interests too. While the article is about Paraguay, even in the US "land of the free" we have censorship and outright lies broadcast as news every day. Fox news had reporters fired when they refused to lie in one of their reporting pieces. They sued under the whistleblower laws but lost.

      Here's the chilling verdict: There is no law in the US that news cannot lie to you. Or for better wording - Because the FCC's news distortion policy is not a "law, rule, or regulation"

      While any government outright censoring is bad, any media company that passes itself off as a news source that is able to lie is even more insidious. While most news sources have a political bias, you shouldn't expect to have to decipher lies!

    13. Re:Down with goverment censorship by Artuir · · Score: 1

      That's why it's called a delusion. Anyone could say anything and you've got this whole web of false facts or crazy beliefs so you can respond to just about anything with your rhetoric. It's amazing what confidence and a bit of ego will do even with batshit insanity .

    14. Re:Down with goverment censorship by hjf · · Score: 1

      what you say is stupid, but that's how it works: if someone comes and wants to say something against the establishment, they will ridicule you, call you crazy, paranoid, whatever. it's the perfect system, and your claims just make the wrong more right: they let you say things, to prove that "there is freedom of speech", but they call you crazy. the problem is when people don't dare question things, and in the middle ages, nobody dared to question the church: you were called crazy if you thought the earth wasn't the center of the universe. but now we seem to think different. claims, counter-claims. paid scientists, investigators. people voted for bush out of fear. many realize everything is a lie. many don't because the lie is so well done: you have been taught to believe there is democracy (which there is), and that the majority of people are represented in the senate (patriot act was approved 98-1: does that mean that over 98% of the population agrees with everything the patriot act says?). and people like to leave big decisions to politicians, so what the government tells us MUST BE RIGHT. it was funny, back in 2005 when Bush came to Argentina, all media in the world had their own satellite uplinks. local media was surprised that US media had to pass through government censorship (that means 'news' don't even hit the US, they're sanitized before they're even near the US). so much for freedom of speech. but hey, what the american people thinks is that "the government does that to protect us". from what? do you need to be protected from the truth? also the truth and freedom of speech are so limited in the US: you are free to say "kill the niggers, KKK rules" and that's freedom of speech. but you can't have a site like Wikileaks or TPB (copyright is on top of freedom of speech!). but you STILL BELIEVE the government. you still carry your normal life, and that's OK! but what americans don't know, and don't care, about what happens OUTSIDE the us, in the rest of the world. and for talking like I do, you're called a crazy, paranoid, anti-american (my favorite: patriotism at the service of disinformation).

    15. Re:Down with goverment censorship by hjf · · Score: 1

      it's called fear. conformism. stupidity. keep believing what the government tells you, they're always right. and if someone dares to question anything, call them stupid. it's cool to be popular!

    16. Re:Down with goverment censorship by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1

      Well, just because I have 5 minutes to kill, and like the comedy, here's a what-if: What if 9-11 really wasn't a government conspiracy. What proof would it take to convince you that it isn't a government conspiracy?

      For the record, I'm perfectly aware that nothing will change your way (considering how splendidly wrong you are about me), but am looking for some entertainment. I'm always curious how the brains of the deluded work.

      BTW - you do know that some people are ridiculed because they are, well, crazy?

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    17. Re:Down with goverment censorship by hjf · · Score: 1

      well, at least i KNOW I'm not crazy :) ok, for the record, when I said "you", I didn't specifically target you, NeutronCowboy. I was talking about "you, the american people in general". Joe Sixpack or whatever you call it nowadays.

        anyway, it's not just about 9/11. it's about everything in this world. when you look at the facts, you realize that nothing seems right. for every claim, there is a counter claim. for instance, there is solid evidence that smoking causes cancer and many other diseases. but Big Tobacco keeps lobbying and misinforming people. they now can't deny that smoking causes cancer, but that doesn't keep them from telling other "lies". Big Tobacco is big. really big. But Oil is bigger. what makes you think that Oil doesn't control the world? Why are you afraid of thinking that a big oil company put your president in his current place? Are you ashamed of even thinking that your own president had so many people killed in their own country? Yes, it's extreme, but what I'm trying to do is stick a splinter in your brain. I want you to take the red pill. Think more objectivelly.

      back to your question:

      what proof do I need? I need more bombings. more, lots of them. every day, in every small town and big city in the US. If there is an enemy against the US, and IF they're willing to do anything, and IF they've been saying they WILL do it, then bring it on. no? Oh, our security forces must be doing their job well (Bear Patrol?).

      but no, there are no bombings in the US. now, let's look at Israel. suicide bombings, almost every day. and they have armed military on the streets. they're a much smaller country, with lots of surveillance, and an amazing warfare development, and US support. and they still have suicide bombers. because they do have an enemy. but not in the US, no bombings. there is no enemy. there's the ghost of terrorism, but in the thousands of miles of US territory, the only massacres are executed by your own people (in schools or shopping malls). and that proves my point: there's so much security, and they can't keep a stupid student from murdering half the school. but there are thousands of towns, malls, cities, where a willing terrorist could cause more harm. even trains, buses, subway stations. but oh! jack bauer takes care of everything.

      so much security. airtight security. but mexicans keep coming (oh, but there is a magical barrier that keeps the Crazy Arabs outside?). the drug keeps coming, directly from Colombia. where the US with all their satellites still can't figure out where the hell FARC is and they don't do ANYTHING to help with the Ingrid Betancourt affair.

      but don't mind me. I'm just crazy.

    18. Re:Down with goverment censorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being skeptical of conspiracy theories doesn't mean you support the government or believe everything they say.

      By the same token, mistrusting the government (as I do) doesn't mean that they are culpable for every bad thing that happens.

    19. Re:Down with goverment censorship by hjf · · Score: 1

      there's a blurry line between mistrust and paranoia.

    20. Re:Down with goverment censorship by Angostura · · Score: 1

      it's called fear. conformism. stupidity. Keep believing that the government is out to get you, they're always evil. If someone dares to question the evil nature of the government call them stupid. it's cool to be a conspiracy theorist!

      Some politicians are stupid but very few are malevolent. For the most part, in my experience they are people who wanted to get involved to actually help people. Shocking, I know.

    21. Re:Down with goverment censorship by Angostura · · Score: 1

      if someone comes and wants to say something against the establishment, they will ridicule you


      Quite the opposite, I think you'll find. Walk into a bar and say "politicians suck, they are all in it for what they can get, they don;t care about real people" and you will recieve a general murmur of approval. Add that many of them are corrupt and cover up their misdemeanors and heads will nod".

      It is only when you get as far as "and they are hiding the truth about for alien cattle mutilation" that people will actually raise an eyebrow.
    22. Re:Down with goverment censorship by hjf · · Score: 1

      US politicians? come on. US capitalism is all about individualism. That's why americans don't have free health care. Supposedly, you will have better healthcare if you have to pay for it. And maybe in the US, you do. But it's top-of-the-line or nothing. If you don't have money to pay for it, you have to die. It's an evil kind of natural selection. Sometimes you have to get a mortgage to pay for an operation. But you already had a mortgage, we can't approve another! You took the risk, now you gotta die (OK, ok, we told you it was fine, it's a completely legal way to get money, and you have the right to, and we advised you to do it, but hey, we are corporations. Sometimes we lose too. Only we don't die). It's an extreme example, but it happens.
      When someone comes with the idea of publicly-funded health care, is quickly called a crazy communist, and that taxpayers don't have to pay for the diseases of a few lazy-asses that don't want to work. And that if we provide free health care, people won't have a reason to work...
      while some politicians wanted to help people, many (most) have been corrupted and helping people doesn't matter anymore. I don't say they are malevolent (as in evil). they're just greedy bastards. money corrupts people.

    23. Re:Down with goverment censorship by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1

      what makes you think that Oil doesn't control the world?

      Ah. This is where we differ. I need positive evidence to believe an assertion. You merely look for absence of negation to believe an assertion.

      As for the difference between Israel and USA - Israel has terrorists on its border and inside. Still, suicide bombings aren't daily, and there are no major attacks. Random rocket attacks and random bombings are not major successes. Terrorists have to cross rather large oceans to get in. And they did manage to get in not once, but at least twice. The second time, they managed to succeed in a spectacular fashion. Plus, why go to the US when you can kill Americans much more easily in Iraq and Afghanistan?

      As said
      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    24. Re:Down with goverment censorship by hjf · · Score: 1

      so, oil doesn't control the world? where are cars that run on water, or fusion power? I mean, nuclear energy was developed in record time, but we're still struggling to make fusion power, the holy grail of energy: almost for free, clean, endless... sounds too good to be true? well, we're used to think things that sound "too good to be true" usually are. I like to think that Big Oil buys all those things, and lobbies to keep most others from being developed. am I too paranoid to think that? is it really that crazy to think that the biggest business on earth will do anything in its power to suppress competition?

      and regarding to israel, I love the way you minimize things. you seem lost in the concept of terrorism. terrorists killing soldiers in afghanistan/iarq is not news. random terrorists in your own backyard is a different story. if I wanted to terrorize america, I'd do what they do in Israel. not daily, maybe. but destroying a big target like the WTC, scary, but people think "well, I'm not in the big city". now, start random attacks inside the US, the message would be clear: you aren't safe, no matter where you are. welcome to the reign of terror. want us out? convince your government to leave us alone and we'll leave.

      Osama allegedly has hundreds of terrorists in training, all willing to die, and he has millions of dollars, and resources to make all that happen. yeah, right. there is no osama. there is no spoon. terrorists don't exist.

      when you say "I need positive evidence to believe an assertion", well, I don't buy that. I'm a human being and I can make my own conclusions. I don't expect everything to be handed to me, sometimes you don't have someone to trust.

      And part of your reasoning just gives the system more power: I say "this" you say "no way, that!". Now we're enemies. You don't try to find a neutral point. You call me a crazy conspiracy theorist, what I say is overly exaggerated, and I'm just plain wrong. Matrix scores again.

      also, have you read any "anti-9/11" things? I'm usually biased pro-america, so I'm usually skeptical about that. But I bought this book, "Nadie Vio Matrix" (No one saw "Matrix"), and it's full of references, links, etc. A lot of interpretation by the author, but the "evidence" is mostly there.

    25. Re:Down with goverment censorship by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1
      where are cars that run on water, or fusion power?

      Your imagination. Water doesn't contain large amounts of easily available energy, and any fusion technology in the foreseeable future will need shielding too heavy for road vehicles.

      I mean, nuclear energy was developed in record time, but we're still struggling to make fusion power, the holy grail of energy: almost for free, clean, endless... sounds too good to be true?

      Fission happens spontaneously, in our natural environment, fusion doesn't. Why is it hard to believe that fusion would be more difficult to make practical?

      is it really that crazy to think that the biggest business on earth will do anything in its power to suppress competition?

      No, but it is crazy to think that they've somehow gotten to every person involved in fusion research, especially without any evidence.

      when you say "I need positive evidence to believe an assertion", well, I don't buy that.

      Then you aren't being rational, it's that simple.

      You don't try to find a neutral point.

      There isn't a "neutral point" between one person's evidence-free speculation asserted as fact and another's bare minimum of reasonable skepticism.

    26. Re:Down with goverment censorship by hjf · · Score: 1

      you just need to talk to more people. people who disagree with you. maybe a tour down here on "third world" countries will give you a different perspective.

    27. Re:Down with goverment censorship by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1
      you just need to talk to more people.

      I explain why I don't agree with three of your theories, and you reply with "you need to get out more"?

      people who disagree with you.

      I'm talking to you! What more you you want?

      maybe a tour down here on "third world" countries will give you a different perspective.

      I like seeing things from a new perspective, but I don't think that a trip to Zimbabwe is going to change my perspective on how easy it is to make practical fusion technology.

  5. fp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fp

  6. TOR by explosivejared · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Get the word out about tor. Vidalia is an easy to use controller. This is the exact sort of time when a network and protocol like onion routing is extremely valuable.

    --
    I got a catholic block.
    1. Re:TOR by mysidia · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hm.. yes.. but is there much to stop them from putting up "phony" exit nodes that also hijack the site?

    2. Re:TOR by erroneus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unfortunately, for most computer users, "Clicking the blue E" is the most they know about getting on the internet. Someone out there needs to create a really handy Active-X plugin that does TOR and put it out there for people to click on. I know, it'd probably cause more problems than it's worth, and may not even work that well as far as getting people to use it... perhaps someone else has a better idea on how to get some of these fundamental technologies out there to the unwashed masses? TV ads might do it...

    3. Re:TOR by cromar · · Score: 1

      Making it easy for people is the first step. After that, I'm sure a lot of other people would be happy to donate to ad campaigns for Tor or other encrypted network technologies (I know I would). Currently, it's hard to even find trusted peers for most people who even understand how to set it up.

    4. Re:TOR by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      perhaps someone else has a better idea on how to get some of these fundamental technologies out there to the unwashed masses?
      Yes. We first have to stop electing corporatist authoritarians who believe they have a God-given right to meddle in the affairs of other sovereign countries.

      You can look at almost every single right-wing dictatorship and tin-pot tyrant in the world and find the fingerprints of the Nixon, Reagan, Bush I or Bush II administrations. Iran-Contra, Noriega, Saddam, Osama, Musharraf, Columbia, Bolivia, etc etc. The list goes on forever.

      Last week, in testimony before Congress, we were told that the President no longer has to abide by treaties because it's a "time of war". That includes trade and environmental treaties.

      After World War II, the United States was really considered a beacon of freedom around the world. We had the respect of everyone. Even after Viet Nam, there was a significant amount of Good Will toward the United States. Starting in 1980, we began squandering that good will, and in the last seven years, George Bush has destroyed every last bit of good faith that the international community had for us. Throw in a 12 trillion dollar debt and millions of lost industrial jobs, a phony war with somewhere between 1/2 million and a million civilian deaths, secret prisons and torture, and there is no longer any doubt that this administration has by far done more damage to our own country than any enemy could possibly do.

      Heckuva job, Chippy McSnort.The fact that he and Cheney will retire rich and happy to their respective ranches is absolute proof that there is no God.

      You better bet that the citizens of poor little countries like Paraguay are just keeping their heads down and trembling with fear until the day these monsters leave office.
      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re:TOR by erroneus · · Score: 1

      During WW2, or possibly before that, many US companies realized there's a LOT of money to be made in the war business. I think it has less to do with a desire to meddle as much as a desire to keep arms selling. The trouble is, that business model doesn't work in the long term and they haven't figured out what the recoil on this latest campaign will be.

      There a bit more to it than my simplistic view of "why the US meddles with other nations" but selling arms is a big part of it. We've got these little-discussed revolving doors where an executive from some company will see to it that a politician gets re-elected and then later that same executive gets a cushy government job with life-time benefits and connections for the next door he might step through. Cheney is a classic example of this revolving door. He's been with Haliburton, been with major pharmaceuticals and others and all the while, in between the two, he has held high ranking government positions such as secretary of defense. (And while he was in a position to do so, he helped push the twice previously rejected aspartame through FDA approval.) But the classic revolving door could not be illustrated better where Cheney, SECDEF what then hired into Haliburton and later became vice president of the united states... but he's been doing that for a LOT longer as have others.

      (Another interesting and not well discussed issue is the current issue of the revolving door between airlines and the FAA... several prior FAA inspectors and executives have gone on to high positions within the airlines and leading up to the scandal's breaking, various airline complaints about FAA inspectors lead to some very questionable activity within the FAA's structure. At least one of the FAA leaders had since gone on to one of the major airlines for a high-paying job.)

      It doesn't even stop there... yes, we meddle in the lives of other nations. We created Israel. Why? Is it our business to do so? Do a little digging. You probably won't approve of what you find. And as far as the Federal Reserve goes... has there ever been a non-Jewish chairman or board member? I'd be shocked if there were.

      By bringing these areas, I mean to show that a relatively restricted list of players are involved in playing the government game. (Yes, I know that the Federal Reserve is not a branch of the U.S. Government, but a privately held corporation... but they exist with the permission and oversight of the legislative branch which has the power to dissolve them if needed.) The people who are put before us as electable choices are carefully selected before we have anything to say about it. So you can say we "keep electing the wrong people" but the right people are never allowed to participate in the game. You saw what happened to Ross Perot. This guy forced himself into being a candidate and many people voted for him. Various questionable activities led to his not being elected not the least of which may have been threats to his family. Perot was an anomoly, though... the people who get put before the U.S. voter isn't likely someone the U.S. voter actually wants. (This is an OLD tactic giving people the illusion of some control. This tactic is also used on children to get their cooperation by giving them "a choice" -- "do you want to go to bed now or in 5 minutes?")

      The problem is not that we're voting in the wrong people, it's that there are no right people to vote for since the selection is made for us. And this nonsense about "party affiliation" is all part of this game with millions of people calling themselves democrats and republicans thinking they'll back "their" candidate. These "parties" are ultimately controlled by their owner-interests and we already know who owns which party thanks to handy references like open secrets. We don't stand a chance of having a "non-player" elected until these systems are dismantled. There may be hope though...

      Look at how the music industry had risen and is presently in danger of falling and why. The indust

    6. Re:TOR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the problem is that people who would jump through hoops to get to this content are probably already convinced. The rest either don't know or don't care.

      We are assuming, of course, that the content is worth getting to in the first place. I don't know anything about Paraguay or its politics. For all I know we could be talking about the ramblings of a white supremacist.

    7. Re:TOR by EdIII · · Score: 1

      TOR has a DNS "leak" in most configurations. Sure, you are visiting the website anonymously, but you requested the DNS Records from a hijacked server.

      Now, Freenet on the other hand is not designed to be only anonymous, but to be a content provider. Hijacking a Freenet website would prove to be much more difficult to do then hijacking a DNS server.

    8. Re:TOR by Scaba · · Score: 1

      Cheney is a classic example of this revolving door. He's been with Haliburton, been with major pharmaceuticals and others and all the while, in between the two, he has held high ranking government positions such as secretary of defense. (And while he was in a position to do so, he helped push the twice previously rejected aspartame through FDA approval.)

      You're conflating Cheney and Rumsfeld. Cheney was with Halliburton, but never any pharmaceuticals; Rumsfeld was with Searle when aspartame was approved.

      It doesn't even stop there... yes, we meddle in the lives of other nations. We created Israel. Why? Is it our business to do so? Do a little digging. You probably won't approve of what you find. And as far as the Federal Reserve goes... has there ever been a non-Jewish chairman or board member? I'd be shocked if there were.

      Most of them weren't Jewish. Saying "I'd be shocked..." is no substitute for a little research.

    9. Re:TOR by a_nonamiss · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, the unwashed masses don't care about privacy anymore. To them, the only people who use technologies like Tor are terrorists and child pornographers.

      --
      -Arthur
      Cave ne ante ullas catapultas ambules
    10. Re:TOR by menace3society · · Score: 1

      And as far as the Federal Reserve goes... has there ever been a non-Jewish chairman or board member? I probably shouldn't even dignify this with a reply, but before Greenspan, the only chairman who was Jewish was Eugen Meyer. Burns, Miller, Volcker, Martin, McCabe, these are not Jewish names.
    11. Re:TOR by will_die · · Score: 1

      Wow you sure don't let the the facts stand in the way of your hate.
      If you want to talk about war mongering at least bring in Clinton, under him the US attacked more then 14 different countries a majority of those without any discussion or talk before he attacked. More than both Bush combined.
      That the president did not have to abide by treaties was known back in the 1800's and has been backed up by the supreme court in the 1920. So you are probably mixing up the facts again and confusing it with the recent talk about the president having no right to tell states that they have to comply with treaties.
      Job wise there has been a growth non-farm jobs of around 5.8 million including the loss of last month. Percentage wise according to the BLS Clinton averaged 5.2% so far Bush has averaged under that, current figures are 4.8%.
      The debt is not at 12 trillion, it is under 9.5.
      Yes the US has lost some respect because we are not doing what the rest of the countries are telling us what to do. But a large amount of that is just negative articles that spread around the world, two examples.
      1) I live in Europe and it is not uncommon to see groups of Americans over here demonstrating against the US and the US president. The Democrate party has admitted that they have funded people to travel to other parts of hte world and talk about the negativies of Bush.
      2) Negative media all around, for example the Univerity of Maryland did some counting of the number of time that the US economy was in a recession compared to Clinton when we were actually in a recession to last year, when we were not, there were 78% more negative article for Bush.
      There are plenty reasons reasons to bash Bush, his many liberal pushes have been harmful to the US but aleast be truthful.

  7. Augh? by Monokeros · · Score: 1

    What's the ruling party called?
    The "Ironic Party"?

    --
    The Statue of Liberty is America's lawn jockey.
  8. Links to English Versions by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1
    Here's that story linked to English translations of the sites in question:

    "In Paraguay we are at T-9 days to national elections. The ruling party has been in power for nearly 61 years (including more than 30 years of dictatorship). Now the state-run ADSL company is hijacking the DNS nationwide of a site that denounces the corruption in the party."


    There are other languages available at those links (hay otros idiomas disponibles en los enlaces).
    --

    --
    make install -not war

  9. Census of cyberspace censoring by KillerCow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In 1993, Internet pioneer John Gilmore said "the net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it", and we believed him. In 1996, cyberlibertarian John Perry Barlow issued his 'Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace' at the World Economic Forum at Davos, Switzerland, and online. He told governments: "You have no moral right to rule us, nor do you possess any methods of enforcement that we have true reason to fear."

    At the time, many shared Barlow's sentiments. The Internet empowered people. It gave them access to information and couldn't be stopped, blocked or filtered. Give someone access to the Internet, and they have access to everything. Governments that relied on censorship to control their citizens were doomed.

    Today, things are very different. Internet censorship is flourishing.

    Read more at: Internet Censorship.

    1. Re:Census of cyberspace censoring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So instead of integrating the internet into society, addressing censorship issues, addressing local mores, addressing filters for parents, etc etc these hipster libertarians just gave a big collective FU to everyone who isnt exactly like them... and they expected this to end well?

    2. Re:Census of cyberspace censoring by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. I get your point, but the fact is (outside of, say, China) it's true. If nobody trusted the telco enough to use their DNS and instead used 4.2.2.1 (I think?), this wouldn't be a problem.

      Now, even the Great Firewall of China isn't awfully challenging to get around... you just put your life on the line.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
  10. So would it be any better if ... by Skapare · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... I put up site that supports the corruption of the party in control?

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
  11. Re:They should host the site on high-profile domai by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

    Wonder if Google Pages was tried by anyone behind the Great Firewall of China?

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  12. so what can we do? by gibbsjoh · · Score: 2, Interesting

    a. What is known about this in Paraguay? Are people aware that this is going on?
    b. What can those of us outside Paraguay do to help? Mirror sites, etc?

    JG

    --
    -- "...I'm a bad guy because I, well, I sing some rock-and-roll songs." M. Manson
    1. Re:so what can we do? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I am from Paraguay, and no. People (the vast percentage without internet access) is not aware of what is going on (was, they 'fixed the unfortunate mistake' already). Internet access here is very expensive, restricting it to the wealthier population.

      It really didn't do much harm, because the ones with internet access tend to be the more critical to the way things are here, with or without having access to the hikacked sites.

      It is well known to the ruling party (Partido Colorado) that once internet gets cheap enough for people in the middle/lower classes, their everlasting rule will come to an end. Because it is an information source that can't be controlled.

      But hey, let them try. This is not the great firewall of China. It is just a bunch of idiots thinking they can hijack DNS entries and go unnoticed.

      Unfortunately it isn't much you can do to help. It is us that need to wake up and put an end to 61+ years of corruption and oppression.

      Elections here are going to be very similar to those in Zimbabwe. The ruling party has taken all kinds of dirty measures to control the election process. Partial judges, excessive number of reception tables, news fabrication, threats to people working in public institutions... business as usual.

      Maybe this time the difference against them will be so overwhelming they won't be able to change the outcome.

      Wish us luck...

    2. Re:so what can we do? by orasio · · Score: 1

      A - Oh, yes, they know
      B - Get this on CNN.

    3. Re:so what can we do? by Portal1 · · Score: 1

      It has already run on television here.

      I would say, big fire back
      sad new
      nobody cares

      --
      There are no stupid questions, Just a lot of inquisitive idiots. (from a good friend)
  13. put it everywhere by kris.montpetit · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If I were Paraguayan right now I would be spamming every forum I knew of with the argument of corruption, regardless of what the forum was about, so anyone using the net in Paraguay/the world is likely to see part of the message at least once.. If they couldn't post the whole idea at once, I would do it in parts, on a stay tuned kind of basis, and just keep the coverage of your spamming campaign as diverse as possible so no single entity can silence it...Think anonymous.

    Seriously, Paraguayans should be spamming this news story..right now.

    1. Re:put it everywhere by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what happens when they find you and kill you?

    2. Re:put it everywhere by khallow · · Score: 1

      Looks like they are. I don't think it's a coincidence that we're hearing about it.

    3. Re:put it everywhere by khallow · · Score: 1

      They have to find you first. And killing someone right before an election seems rather tricky. They don't have that level of control, otherwise the protest site wouldn't exist in the first place.

    4. Re:put it everywhere by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      Killing someone before an election is very easy. The trick is to manage the news enough to make everyone beleive you haven't done it.

      Try standing for the opposition in north korea some time.

    5. Re:put it everywhere by orasio · · Score: 1

      IANAP, but I know corruption by the Colorado party is widely known there.

      The issue is that lots of people just don't care and they don't think anything can be done against them.

      Activism is seen as worthless. Maybe that can change things a bit.

    6. Re:put it everywhere by orasio · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is not that kind of government.
      Of course, they _could_ kill you (they have the ability, but it's not their m.o.), but they don't need to. Think of it as a conservative government that is friends with all the media. They don't need to actively censor a lot of people.
      The internet is an issue, because it doesn't respond that much to corporate interests. That's why they are censoring this. That, and because they just don't know how the internet works, and don't know about the Streissand effect.

    7. Re:put it everywhere by khallow · · Score: 1

      My point precisely.

    8. Re:put it everywhere by Portal1 · · Score: 1

      I live here and would not agree the media is on the hand of the government

      As mentioned before the rerouting has run on television already yesterday

      --
      There are no stupid questions, Just a lot of inquisitive idiots. (from a good friend)
    9. Re:put it everywhere by Cigarra · · Score: 1

      If I were Paraguayan right now I would be spamming every forum I knew of(...) We are ;-)

      As the sibling post noticed, that's why you are hearing from us right now. We also digged it, ICANNed it, and sent it to many other news sites.

      Of course we also told the local radios, TV and newspapers. Even though Internet is almost always still viewed here as a secondary issue with regards to national politics, this time everybody just couldn't hold the rage this stupid move generated. We even made it to the cover of the most important national newspaper on saturday. Obviously they (the ruling party) are desperate because they certainly CAN lose the power after 60 years, and they're gonna try just anything.

      Actually, the reaction was so strong (and certainly unexpected by the Telco) that the "mischief" lasted less than 24 hours: they fixed it quietly the next morning.

      This week is the last one before the most crucial elections in this country modern history. Let's just hope this helps to oust those bastards once and for all.
      --
      I don't have a sig.
  14. Dig output by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting
  15. Re:They should host the site on high-profile domai by jmnormand · · Score: 2, Interesting

    might also catch googles attention, who happens to have a market cap 400% greater the gdp of paraguay...

  16. Re:They should host the site on high-profile domai by KillerBob · · Score: 1

    IIRC, the Google.cn site de-lists sites not approved by the great firewall. From that point, it wouldn't be difficult to add the non-Google.cn versions of Google to the firewall's block list, no?

    --
    If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
  17. OpenDNS by cjb658 · · Score: 1

    You should tell everyone in Paraguay about OpenDNS.

  18. ... and now slashdotted? by pieleric · · Score: 1
    As if the guys of partidocolorado didn't have enough pain with the DNS hijacking, we are now going to slashdot the site...

    We are such helpful nerds!

    1. Re:... and now slashdotted? by orasio · · Score: 1

      Partido Colorado is the ruling party. They are the censors. Not the censored.

  19. Py response by Portal1 · · Score: 1

    Hi I am a foreigner living in Paraguay.

    The issue is a little more mixed
    It seems they rerouted www.partidocolorado.gov.
    They claimed it was illegal use of their name/trademark.
    same as one would try to register CocaCola.gov

    In my point of view they should not have done this by using their powers in the national tel com and reroute the page, but they should have used the legal way "trademark/name infringement".

    Another point is that people get a government they vote for. It is not so bad here that people are motivated to vote anything else.
    Maybe this time there will be a change

    About corruption,
    Paraguay is one of the top positions, but nobody seems to care (sadly enough)

    --
    There are no stupid questions, Just a lot of inquisitive idiots. (from a good friend)
    1. Re:Py response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a Paraguayan citizen. And what you say is somewhat true, but they also rerouted www.bastacarajo.com and www.victorbogado.com

      It is not about illegal use of trademarks.. It is plain old censorship... the stupidest and most obvious, brain-dead way, but censorship nevertheless.

      They backtracked now, because lots of people voiced their anger. But they tried, no doubt about it.

    2. Re:Py response by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Another point is that people get a government they vote for.
      I wish. Please google the 2000 US presidential election for details.
      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:Py response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh jesus, give it a rest. Gore lost, by a considerable margin. After more recounts than you can count on both hands, which overwhelmingly indicated that Bush won, I think it's time to stop crying wolf. Just because the president is a dickhead doesn't mean we didn't elect him.

    4. Re:Py response by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Gore lost, by a considerable margin.
      In the Supreme Court, yes.

      In votes, no.
      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re:Py response by schmeckelgruben · · Score: 0

      I wish. Please google the 2000 US presidential election for details.
      I googled it for you:
      Bush won the 2000 election with 271 electoral votes, vs. Gore's 256 votes. Your wish has been granted!
      http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/scores2.html#2000
  20. OpenDNS is neither open or a dns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful


    yeah trade one broken DNS for another except opendns shows adverts, resolves everything (breaking apps) and tracks every DNS request just like spyware except the t&c does mention this if you read it

    to be honest you have to be ignorant and stupid if you think opendns is a solution to anything (except the owners pocket books)

    1. Re:OpenDNS is neither open or a dns by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Adverts? Spyware?

      It's an alternate root, not a proxy server. Most DNS queries are cached downstream anyway so they wouldn't get a lot of useful data if the tried.

      Last I heard it was run by volunteers but according to the site now it looks like they've got some funding. Good for them.

  21. Re:They should host the site on high-profile domai by orasio · · Score: 3, Informative

    They are hosting some of them at googlepages now.
    Anyhow, they are not small domains the ones that were hijacked. One of them is the official page of the party.

    This is not something that could ever go unnoticed.

  22. It's not new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm from Brasil and lived some months in Foz do Iguassu on the border with Paraguay.
    Many people in BR go to PY to buy eletronics and others "made in china", or cigars, or guns, or....

    Well, some years ago, vice president of PY was caught driving a stolen Jeep Cherokee in São Paulo - Brasil (a car like this in Brasil costs ~ US 97.000)

    I said you can buy any movie or software there for ~ U$ 0.50 ?

    Another legal history is that Bruce Wayne has drawn driver's licence there by telephone. This was done by a newspaper to show the ease in achieving false documents.

    1. Re:It's not new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I am a paraguayan citizen and can confirm those news. Let's not forget it is the brazilian mafia the one who controls the illegal business of pirated sw/movies in Paraguay.

      It is even worse: you can find the same thing right in the heart of Sao Paulo, so don't come here telling that as if it isn't a thing that also runs in your country.

      It is a shame, yes, and it happens in your country, too. ;) peace, brazilian 'brother'.

  23. Venezuela by Gocho · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Same thing happened in Venezuela last year during the last referendum (which Chavez lost, BTW). The newly nationalized CANTV (the main Telco) hijacked all of its customers DNS to block access to the two biggest anti-chavez websites (NoticieroDigital and Noticias24). Nothing new here but good, old fascist techniques....

    1. Re:Venezuela by Voline · · Score: 1

      I hadn't heard about this. Do you have any citations to back up your assertions?

    2. Re:Venezuela by Vexorian · · Score: 1

      You know, all sites containing citations were also DNS hijacked by the Venezuelan-Illuminati influenced ISPs over the world.

      --

      Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
  24. Re:They should host the site on high-profile domai by mysidia · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The only people they have to prevent noticing it are a majority of the population of their country.

    And they probably have control of the media there, so this probably will go unnoticied by most people, until some time long after the elections, if ever.

    They might not care if a few dozen technically-inclined people in their country happen to notice, or if people in other countries notice.

    Govt' can explain away the "hijacking" as a technical problem, and people may buy the government's technical explanations over anything "some Americans" or some DNS nerds have to say about it. The gov't can just throw in jail or use ad-hominem attacks to marginalize the folks that claim they did something bad.

    After all, the government is known by most to be a more "trustworthy" and "valid" source for that type of information.

    Billy Bob just accusing the gov't folks of wrongdonig because he's a protestor, extremist, seditionist, has a beef with the gov't, etc.

    They will either convince their people to believe it or intimidate their people into believing it, and either approach works all the same.

  25. Gret way to prove uncorrupt by a_generic_name · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh yeah, hijack a site saying you're corrupt. What a great way to prove that you're not.

  26. Re:Hard to fight if Bush is behind this. by shawnap · · Score: 4, Funny

    There are quite a few dubious claims in that article, but the most unbelievable is the implication that Bush knows that a country called Paraguay exists.

  27. OpenDNS by davidu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They are using our OpenDNS servers as the control group. We've been noticing that a lot lately.

    Plus, a lot of folks are using http://cache.opendns.com/ to start checking the records of their personal site from around the world.

    --

    # Hack the planet, it's important.
  28. Mod Parent Up by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    Now how in the fuck is the above post "off-topic"?

    Is there anybody who doesn't think that our current President and Vice-President aren't making plans for their retirement, given that it's looking more and more like they're going to be charged with war crimes? Oh, they'll never face trial, but it's unlikely they're going to be having any European vacations after they leave office.

    How humiliating for our great nation that such low men could have attained such high office, no matter that they did so in an illegitimate manner.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Universe is too beautiful and complex to have been created by any God.

      You are right. That's why it wasn't created by just any god; it was created by the God.

    2. Re:Mod Parent Up by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      That's why it wasn't created by just any god; it was created by the God.
      To which "THE God" are you referring?
      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  29. I assume it's a "trademark" excuse by Punto · · Score: 1

    From looking at the sites, "Partido Colorado" (red party) is the ruling party, and the opposers registered "partidocolorado.org", and put some parody site there. The hijacked DNS redirects to a site that responds to "partidocolorado.org.py", which seems to be the official party site (you can tell because of the heaps of steaming bullshit they have in there). It's actually pretty confusing if you're not familiar with their politics (at first I thought this "red party" was the opposition, so I was confused about the other "red party" site).

    Anyway, I assume they're claiming that "partidocolorado.org" is too similar to "partidocolorado.org.py" and it's taking advantage of their name (which is probably what they were trying to do, otherwise they would have gone with "red party sucks.com" or something.. most people get confused with the .orgs and .pys).

    Of course, I doubt the paraguayan government has any jurisdiction over the root DNS, and I'd be surprised if they had a law that proposes dns hijacking as a solution to a conflict like this.

    --

    --
    Stay tuned for some shock and awe coming right up after this messages!

    1. Re:I assume it's a "trademark" excuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they also hijacked 'www.bastacarajo.com' (something like 'www.enoughisenoughdamnit.com') and that rules out any trademark excuse.

      Plain simple censorship.

    2. Re:I assume it's a "trademark" excuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      They haven't claimed anything. The DNS was hijacked in the state-owned incumbent telco, and today, a manager from the company denied that they have had any responsibility concerning it, and said that they were looking for the responsibles.

      Pure bullshit.

  30. OT: OpenDNS by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Adverts? Spyware?

    It's an alternate root, not a proxy server. I don't have the hate-on for OpenDNS that the GP does, but it does have several weaknesses as a service which caused me to stop using it.

    The biggest problem, and one that the GP alluded to, is that OpenDNS resolves *everything* to a sort of 'parking' page. If you're using OpenDNS and you type in a bogus URL, rather than just not resolving, you'll get a redirect to an OpenDNS page. This is, IMO, misbehavior. However, there's no incentive for OpenDNS to stop, because it's on these pages that they place advertising and pay for themselves.

    This behavior is particularly obnoxious when you combine it with an additional level of caching DNS. Let's say you have a DNS server on your LAN (like most home gateway/routers) and you point it to OpenDNS. If you're working with a site that may or may not exist -- say one that you're trying to configure -- OpenDNS will give you the parking page if it can't be found. But your local DNS server will cache the redirect, and it can take a while to purge. (I'm not sure what TTL they're set to, but it's evidently longer than it should be.) The upshot of this is that a site can look 'down' even though it ought to be up, because intermediate DNS servers cache the bogus OpenDNS result, rather than just failing to resolve.

    I think it's great that there's an alternate root, and I really like that OpenDNS exists. It's a great concept. I just think their execution deviates from accepted practice and standards, and that's no way to run a DNS server. Too much rides on it.
    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:OT: OpenDNS by 3p1ph4ny · · Score: 1

      I've heard this argument before, and I understand it. Right now, though, I don't know of a good (large or small scale) alternative to both my ISP and Open DNS.

      Any suggestions?

    2. Re:OT: OpenDNS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For small networks, this isn't really a problem. I ran into it a few times when I was setting up a (moderately complex) home DNS setup a few weeks ago. My solution was to simply kill the DNS server when I made changes. Since it was monitored, the daemon was restarted almost immediately and there was no DNS cache problem. Of course, I use TinyDNS.... YMMV

    3. Re:OT: OpenDNS by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't know much about them, but I think the "Open Root Server Network" might be a possible candidate. It's an alternate root system, independent from but currently mirroring ICANN's, located mostly in Europe. (The sole non-Europe rootserver seems to be run by Paul Vixie, actually.)

      I gather from the Wikipedia page their major concern is monopolization of the DNS root by the U.S. Government.

      Their site has instructions on switching to their roots, if you run your own DNS server, and a list of publicly-accessible DNS servers that use their roots, if you just want to re-point your workstation or router.

      If they're not your style, WP has a list of other alt roots; most of them seem to revolve around the idea of having more or different TLDs than ICANN. The ones I'd probably consider first would be OpenNIC and the Open Root Server Confederation. The latter's website doesn't seem to indicate, at least to a quick reading, their root server addresses or any publicly-accessible DNS servers.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    4. Re:OT: OpenDNS by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

      It's not an unresolvable problem by any means, I just don't think it should have to be a problem at all.

      I thought the behavior sucked the first time I encountered it, when it was called "Site Finder" and was being run by Verisign. It caused a fairly significant brouhaha, as many here may recall, and they were eventually slapped down by ICANN.

      Although it's obviously more evil to do something like that when you're a default root server operator and not running an opt-in service like OpenDNS, I think the practice is crappy and should be considered broken regardless of who's running it. Bad practice is bad practice.

      There are enough other public nameservers and alternate roots that I just can't see using OpenDNS, unless you really want the "added" services they offer (adult-site filtering, phishing protection).

      The fact that they have large caches is nice, and they can definitely be an improvement over some ISP's default DNS (which really says more negative about the ISP's DNS service than it does good about OpenDNS), I just don't think it's worth the trouble. YMMV, of course.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  31. I disagree - Gilmore's statement is accurate by arete · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not trying to pretend I know what Gilmore MEANT by his statement, but the way the first statement reads to me I certainly think is true. (I'm not saying there aren't bad things going on we should fight against - only that the statement is only false for a very idealist and broad interpretation.)

    First let's strip away youthful idealism - routing around it doesn't mean it NEVER works or magically disappears - it just means it's much less likely to work, easier to fix, etc.

    Second, let's be clear that "the Internet" includes all of us. When someone involved with that site posts it to /., that's part of routing around, and so is when we blog about it. This includes us doing hard work to keep it that way.

    Finally, while it's obviously possible to keep information _out_ (away from some people), it's very hard to keep information _in_ on the internet. If you're going to (for the purposes of this discussion) strictly interpret the word censorship until it was only one of these things, it would definitely be the attempt to keep information in.

    Traditionally censorship is keeping you from printing a newspaper (or killing you if you do) - that's different than going around town and taking away all the newspapers you can find, which is what's really going on here. The second technique only completely silences the _author_ if the newspaper only circulates inside that town.

    Again, I'm not saying this isn't bad... but in pre-Internet censorship we wouldn't even HEAR about this story. Wikileaks is a great example of the Internet being positive in this regard. The world knows about Tibet. The Great Firewall doesn't even really keep people from viewing outside content - you just need a little technical savvy - and a lot of bravery! - to view outside content.

    --
    Looking for freelance Actionscript (Flash/Flex) or ColdFusion work and/or freelance developers. Email me, put Slashdot
  32. Oh, and George Bush... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    And George Bush bought 100000 acres in Paraguay,
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/oct/23/mainsection.tomphillips

    1. Re:Oh, and George Bush... by unitron · · Score: 1


      Of course he did.

      War criminals always buy retirement property in nations from which they can't be extradited.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  33. Had a city named after a dictator by keeboo · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Until a couple years ago, the city now know as Ciudad de Este was called "Puerto Stroessner", after the former dictator.

    After being ousted that man lived in Brazil until his last days.

    That sucker was a friend with the militars in Brazil and other right-wing dictatorships in South America during the 60s 70s 80s. And those dictatorships had direct support from the USA.

    Funny how often bad things around the world had the US involved.

    1. Re:Had a city named after a dictator by Craptastic+Weasel · · Score: 1

      Until a couple years ago, the city now know as Ciudad de Este was called "Puerto Stroessner", after the former dictator.

      After being ousted that man lived in Brazil until his last days.

      That sucker was a friend with the militars in Brazil and other right-wing dictatorships in South America during the 60s 70s 80s. And those dictatorships had direct support from the USA.

      Funny how often bad things around the world had the US involved. And Kevin Bacon lives in the US! It's six degrees of Americanization!
    2. Re:Had a city named after a dictator by damburger · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      So whenever someone points out an event where the actions of the US made people lives much worse somewhere in the world, you have a laugh at their expense.

      Still trying to figure out why people hate you?

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
  34. Re:They should host the site on high-profile domai by Taelron · · Score: 1

    Just have the whole country switch to using OpenDNS servers, of course then they might start doing China like firewalling to block it...

  35. rules are only for the little people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    look, if you're going to play in the big leagues, just give up on the notion that those in power will be ethical

    As to the results of absolute power, you can clearly see how absolutely corrupt these evil people are.

  36. Re:They should host the site on high-profile domai by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Actually, I doubt that the people there trust the Colorado Party. My father grew up in Paraguay under Stroessner's rule, and the main effect that had on him was imparting a deep distrust of all government. Now, he has a very firm belief that no one can have any effect on a government save for those already working inside of it, and that all government workers are corrupt as all hell. He said that growing up, he had no idea that the stuff that Stroessner did wasn't happening everywhere else in the world.

  37. Hermanos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Paraguayans are anything like us Brazilians, nobody will give a shit about corruption while there's beer, soccer and scantily clothed women on TV.

  38. Re:They should host the site on high-profile domai by Portal1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Actually they don't have control over the media

    Most news papers are in the hands of rich people.
    They are more in favor of the blue party here.

    This incident was on television here last night.

    --
    There are no stupid questions, Just a lot of inquisitive idiots. (from a good friend)
  39. Re:Hard to fight if Bush is behind this. by Portal1 · · Score: 1

    O he does,

    he has a huge property here
    Think huge like several hundred of acres
    Right on top a big water reserve

    --
    There are no stupid questions, Just a lot of inquisitive idiots. (from a good friend)
  40. easy to fix by capologist · · Score: 1

    So the government is highjacking DNS. Can't users fix that simply by editing their hosts file? Granted, nontechnical users would need a little help with that, but it's not difficult.

    1. Re:easy to fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the government is highjacking DNS. Can't users fix that simply by editing their hosts file? Granted, nontechnical users would need a little help with that, but it's not difficult. Yes we can but many people (the non-tech savvy) ones simply don't have the knowledge to do that.
  41. Re:They should host the site on high-profile domai by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    And put the site in many places so it isn't as easy to silence.

    Why bother -- just make sure the IP address is widely publicized. Some years back, Al Jazeera's DNS was crapped on, by some unknown government, I have to presume.

    After the attack died down, I went to the site as soon as I could, then saved a link to the site by IP address.

    No reason multiple sites, all googlable by "[sitename] -- current IP", couldn't host whatever the current address was in an easy to find way. No doubt the PTB would soon try to poison this well, but it's worth a try.

  42. cachit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    que pena para el pais.. ahi se dan cuenta que jamas pero jamas vamos a salir adelante.. para los que estan ahi .. fuerza y animo... saludos

  43. Email the US Ambassador to Paraguay by j0ebaker · · Score: 1

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    What we can do is expose their deeds.  I suggest emailing the US Embassy in Paraguay:

    ParaguayConsular@state.gov

    I wouldn´t suggest threatening them, rather let them know that the world is watching their behavior - that we value freedom of speech and discourage censorship of any kind.  I don´t think the US has any business dictating Paraguay´s affairs but this is just neighborly advice.

    - -Joe Baker
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
    Comment: http://getfiregpg.org

    iD8DBQFIAed77J1dPd3sAmARAtkBAKCec4LQnbLvVNVx+8/R/qBqUONWHgCeLPbl
    IdWGD05962/w1ddRFFOnQ3U=
    =sf+o
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  44. Why Use the ISP's DNS Servers? by gtwilliams · · Score: 1

    Just run your own caching server.

    --
    Garry Williams
    1. Re:Why Use the ISP's DNS Servers? by der_alte · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's why users of private ISPs didn't noticed the hijacking. I personally didn't, before I read about it in a forum post. Once I confirmed the issue, I immediately registered a domain name (partidocoloradoantrodeladrones.org) to put a complaint. The fact is this Telco has a great share of ADSL users in the country. The common user doesn't know any means of configuring DNS adresses, they just know how to plug their routers and go for pr0n. And currently, being a hot topic, people also visit sites related to politics.

  45. Highly Noticed by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    And in a country like that, they can do what about it?

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  46. Re:They should host the site on high-profile domai by schwieter · · Score: 1

    Just tried it here in Chengdu. No dice. Google works but Google Pages does not.

  47. If you're in Paraguay... by wurp · · Score: 1

    The IP I see for www.partidocolorado.org is 64.233.179.121 from my home account, which has a reverse dns of ghs.l.google.com. From my server account in California, it resolves to 64.233.179.121, reverse DNS of hs-in-f121.google.com.

    In case of simple automated filters obscuring that IP, those numbers again are 64dot233dot179dot121 and 64dot233dot179dot121.

  48. Re:They should host the site on high-profile domai by sempernoctis · · Score: 1

    Political issues aside, if somebody with control over your ISP wants to keep you from seeing something, you're pretty much hosed unless you can get an encrypted connection out that has some plausible legitimate explanation. Hijacking a large domain would still work well if you just proxy everything else but the site in question, as would a plethora of other traffic monitoring and filtering systems. You can try putting the material in lots of different places, but your readers then have to keep up with you as fast as the entity that is filtering you.

  49. Re:They should host the site on high-profile domai by mysidia · · Score: 1

    DNS hijacking = trivial and cheap for ISP in 3rd world country

    Filtering one directory off a large domain = More sophisticated filtering, not so cheap or trivial, requires more work and expense

  50. Never ascribe to malice that which can be... by Snowbat · · Score: 1
    adequately explained by stupidity.

    http://www.seologs.com/ip-domains.html shows these domains on 201.217.51.114:
    1) anr.org.py
    2) partidocolorado.org.py

    Oh look - other domains of the same party. 100 quataloos says they moved partidocolorado.org from here to Google hosting but they forgot to tell the former hoster (who happens to be the state telco) about the move. Result: users of the state telco's DNS continue to get the old IP address because the state telco's DNS is still configured as authoritative for that domain.

    I've seen this situation before - an email to the NOC of the former hoster got the obsolete authoritative entries on their DNS pulled within an hour.