Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Funding Stealth Internets to Circumvent Repressive Regimes

Posted by samzenpus on from the under-the-radar dept.

snydeq writes "The Obama administration is leading a global effort to deploy 'shadow' Internet and mobile phone systems that dissidents can use to undermine repressive governments that seek to silence them by censoring or shutting down telecommunications networks. According to a report from CBS News: '...by the end of the year the State Department will have spent $70 million on efforts to provide alternate pathways for dissidents to access the Internet and telecommunications services. One group received $2 million to develop an "Internet in a suitcase" that could be easily carried and set up in a foreign country.'"

36 of 289 comments (clear)

  1. Is it just me... by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...or doesn't this seem a little hypocritical in light of how the whole Wikileaks thing has been handled?

    --
    .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
    1. Re:Is it just me... by gilbert644 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Every government limits freedom, its inherent to its role.

    2. Re:Is it just me... by ArhcAngel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      At first blush yes. But what they don't tell you is they have a back door into this system so it won't work in the US.

      --
      "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
    3. Re:Is it just me... by amiga3D · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Indeed. Government is a necessary evil. That government is best which governs least. The kind of thing you don't hear much anymore as it's gone out of style.

    4. Re:Is it just me... by rsilvergun · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It hasn't gone out of style, it's just plain wrong. The world is a different place then when Thoreau wrote that (and it wasn't too close to the mark then). Do you honestly think there is anything else besides a strong central government that can stand up to mega-corps? Do you honestly want those few mega-corps (and their oligarch CEOs, kings of the new millennium) running things. Power is going to concentrate whether you like it or not. I'll take my chances with Obama over the Koch brothers any day.

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    5. Re:Is it just me... by hitmark · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think the inherent issue here is approaching government as a "us vs them" issue, rather then considering that government, at least in a representative democracy (take the "it is a republic" somewhere else), is by the people for the people. As such, it is there to uphold the rules that the majority of the nation agrees upon (you anarchists and libertarians can keep quiet for now). The last couple of decades however it appears that corporations and other special interest groups have managed to co-opt this system. As such we are seeing laws being written that will make the majority of the people criminals. Did we not learn a thing from the failed attempt at prohibition?

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    6. Re:Is it just me... by rodarson2k · · Score: 3, Informative

      Would the oppressive regimes not claim that their "police actions" are state secrets?

    7. Re:Is it just me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, we weren't set up to be a majority rule country. Read the Federalist Papers, I think #10 is where Madison argues against the evils of what he calls "tyranny of the majority".

    8. Re:Is it just me... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

      Did we not learn a thing from the failed attempt at prohibition?

      Yes, we learned how to do it without requiring a constitutional amendment.

      Sorry, drug war's a pet peeve and you provided a perfect riffing-point.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    9. Re:Is it just me... by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2

      The whole point of providing "internet in a suitcase" or whatever is so people in repressive countries can talk about things that government doesn't want them talking about. Otherwise why bother - every country has some kind of internet-like communications network and if all you want to do is discuss local sports results, the local governments will happily let you do so. Even China has "public access to the public internet", the difference is it's the public internet minus the parts the government doesn't want you to see.

      In the USA things work differently, there's no censorship of the internet. However the government does try and suppress publication of information it doesn't like in other ways. For example, by getting payment processors to refuse payment to legal organizations they don't like. It's just a different way of achieving the same thing - circumventing the judicial system.

    10. Re:Is it just me... by exentropy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      it [the government] is there to uphold the rules that the majority of the nation agrees upon.

      I'm probably gonna get a -1 flamebait for this, but I'll counter this point anyways. There is no need to have a government, if its sole function is to uphold the rules of the majority. If the Fed didn't exist, people would still agree that, say, stealing is bad; we don't need a government to affirm this conviction. But I do agree with you: we do have a federal government that imposes (better word) the will of the majority on everyone. E.G. if most people don't like drugs, hey, "we should ban them!" "Don't like gays? Hey, make their marriages illegal!" I think that's a better way to look at it.

    11. Re:Is it just me... by Velex · · Score: 2

      This dopeheads are idiots meme needs to go away.

      I'll bet you do something that someone else would think is stupid, too. Grow up.

      Did you know some people use dope because it allows them to live fuller lives? Maybe some day you'll find that marihuana is the best substance available to treat some symptoms you might have. Will you be an idiot then? Or is it smarter to take something less effective with more side effects that costs more just because it's approved by big brother?

      But yes, I'm right with you on the democracy thing. Most people seem to share your views, i.e. that it should be legal but it's still "bad" somehow to use it. I guess whatever floats your morally superior boat. The will of the people will probably never prevail on this issue, though. Gotta vote for the politician who's tough on crime since you gotta be afraid to leave your front door in today's ever increasingly increasing society.

      --
      Join the Slashcott! Stay away entirely Feb 10 thru Feb 17! Close all tabs to prevent autorefresh!
    12. Re:Is it just me... by poliscipirate · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm of the mind that what we're seeing is a regrowth of the powerful families system that has dominated government throughout most of human history, but in this iteration it's "corporate aristocratic" families instead. To me, it's roughly analogous to ancient Rome - the masses have at least the illusion of say and can get some things changed if they complain loudly enough, but for the most part things are run by, or on the behalf of, the powerful, wealthy, and privileged organizations of the day. The dissolution of the traditional large and extended noble family system created something of a power vacuum for a newer social unit to exert its interests through government... instead of the Julia, the Flavia, and the Cassius families, we have the Monsanto, Koch Industries, and ExxonMobil families.

    13. Re:Is it just me... by blind+monkey+3 · · Score: 2

      Manning, however, is likely to suffer for his actions if, in fact, he is the leak.

      Is likely to??? Are you saying he is not already suffering whether guilty or not? The conditions he was held in from July to April were cruel and spiteful to say the least - this is before being convicted (a formality I suspect, regardless of whether he is guilty or not).

      I have heard the doom and gloom stories regarding the release of this information but from what I can see, the aftermath seems to be a spring cleaning of oppressive regimes, it appears to be a bit cheaper than it has cost / is still costing to remove Saddam.

      If Manning is responsible, perhaps he should get a medal - unless the U.S. government wants these thugs to stay in power.....

      --
      BM3
  2. No it's not just you.. by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What would happen if there were, just for arguments sake, dissident Americans........
    Pause..

    --
    If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    1. Re:No it's not just you.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They're not supplying freedom, they're supplying a means of communication that makes monitoring/shaping/manipulating events abroad easier and safer.

    2. Re:No it's not just you.. by obarthelemy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      we'd call those terrorists, and patriot-act them.

      --
      The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
  3. how about we in the USA? by rubycodez · · Score: 2, Insightful

    is someone making a package for us to circumvent our ever-repressive government in the Demokratik Polize State of Amerika ?

    1. Re:how about we in the USA? by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The sad thing is recent behaviour of both democrats and republicans show that it doesn't make a difference which party rules. They just screw their population in slightly different ways, unless you have the cash to pay to screw.

      The recent problem has been the heavy handed shutting down of sites without due process. Given the number of problem sites I can understand why they want to do this, but at the same time shouldn't there be some sort of transparency. Also, it would be nice if the US crack down of sites only affected sites in the USA and didn't impact what other countries see.

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
  4. Umm.. didn't they just say.. by SuperCharlie · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This kinda thing is an act of war?

  5. What's good for the goose by Omnifarious · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've read that parts of Anonymous also work on projects in this same vein. And that same facet of Anonymous is who carries out the DDoS attacks and other various distressing things. I wonder if the irony of sharing goals with Anonymous is completely lost on the US government. I expect probably so. Freedom abroad, a slow slide towards facism at home, that'll be the way of it.

    --
    Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
    1. Re:What's good for the goose by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      There is Freenet - it's not a separate internet, but a network of caching nodes running on the internet that makes communications untraceable. Such a thing could be shut down easily enough by just shutting down the internet entirely - but really, that's still a win, as it would incite further unrest in itsself. I don't know how many Anons use it, but I know it was used to publish Scientology documents, so probably at least one.

  6. Great News! by ohnocitizen · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Now we'll have a way to circumvent ICE copyright censorship, attempts by government officials to target critical bloggers, and of course everyone's favorite restrictions on videos/recordings of police actions. Let's boot this baby up and see what it can do....

    localhost$shadowtubez start
    ==Welcome to ShadowTubez==
    Fight the Power, with the help of the USA!
    (Connecting to shadowtubez.us.gov to establish freedom fighter credentials...)

    Doh!

  7. PROTECT IP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So, will we Americans be able to use this shadow internet and mobile phone networks to access what PROTECT IP tries to block?

  8. Starting messages in the subject line is lame by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

    Umm.. didn't they just say..
    This kinda thing is an act of war?

    No. This is no more of an attack than facebook, twitter or even TOR are "attacks."

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  9. America the Land of Liberty! by Haedrian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    America the Land of Liberty*. Freeing the people from oppression**

    *Note: Liberty is only available other countries.

    **Does not count for people living in America

    1. Re:America the Land of Liberty! by hitmark · · Score: 2

      You are free to speak your mind, just not using anything copyrighted, patented or trademarked by our corporate elite.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    2. Re:America the Land of Liberty! by atriusofbricia · · Score: 5, Insightful

      America the Land of Liberty*. Freeing the people from oppression**

      *Note: Liberty is only available other countries.

      **Does not count for people living in America

      I'll bite.. Will I get thrown in jail for saying Obama is a dick? No? Oh, so I suppose I'll get sent to GITMO for saying that the government is crap? Won't happen?

      I know, I'll get thrown in jail for traveling to another state without permission.. oh.. not happening either?

      Prevented by the government from visiting or moving to another country? Damn, nope.. not that either..

      Disallowed from owning guns, property, practicing my religion or protesting peacefully?

      I'll find random politically objectionable websites filtered on a national scale? Well damn, not that either.

      So what exactly is this oppression you're speaking of? I'm not saying it's perfect, but where is better and more free?

      --
      I was raised on the command line, bitch

      "Nemo me impune lacesset"

    3. Re:America the Land of Liberty! by MoonBuggy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree that the GP post was unreasonable, and that many countries are of course much worse, but the US does still have legitimate problems which need to be faced. The government is making consistent efforts to increase their powers both to act in secret and without warrant or oversight - we've seen where this leads both on a small scale (violent and corrupt police officers intimidating citizens with cameras) and on a large one (warrantless wiretapping); that's a road I'd really rather not see the US follow any further than it has. Police raids on private residences are also becoming increasingly militarised, a trend which has been shown to drastically increase the "us and them" mentality on both sides, and again is a catalyst for violent abuses of power. Often the justice system shows a marked difference in treatment of the rich and powerful compared to that of the poor. While political speech may not be enough to have your website seized, an accusation of copyright infringement may do it, again without conviction, oversight, or recourse. Wikileaks has revealed that some people in Guantanamo were there for little to no reason - while the white American citizen might not have anything to fear on that side of things, the Pakistani guy in the wrong place at the wrong time might not be so lucky; again, the real problem is the lack of transparency making abuses almost impossible to catch, let alone rectify.

      As for the 'where is better and more free?' question, I'd say most of Scandanavia, The Netherlands, and probably Canada and New Zealand too. No, the US isn't too bad, for the majority of citizens who are lucky enough not to have a run-in with the authorities, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't strive to be better.

  10. Pfft. by benjamindees · · Score: 2

    I have five internets in my briefcase right here. Why, just the other day my secretary sent me an internet. Typical government waste. Next thing you know they'll want to build a bridge to nowhere.

    --
    "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
  11. The revolution will be broadcast... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As the article says "The revolution will be broadcast...", but it leaves out "straight to the US govt who will then decide if they want to a)let you carry on in your attempt to self govern (provided the US can profit from it) or b)arrange for a leak of information that will crush you"

  12. propaganda by julian67 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is pure propaganda. The very last thing the US wants is for genuine freedom of information. What it does want is failsafe communication with its own sympathisers, clients and agents. People make comments along the lines of "what about if they start censoring us?" Did you not notice? Will you consider your news media uncensored simply because nobody puts a 2 minute ad on national TV or a full page ad in the NYT explaining that it's already happened? Wake up. Did you not notice that you are never allowed to hear or read your enemies' words directly or in full? You are only allowed to digest small pieces, decontextualised and presented by public relations people masquerading as journalists. You can identify the real journalists if you have a good memory: they are the people who used to ask hard questions, who were also unafraid to cross frontlines and ask hard questions of the enemy, who are no longer welcome, whose access is rescinded and whose names and reputations are slandered and traduced and who are finally ignored. In their place you have the shame and disgrace of "embedded" journalists, people who are a do not deserve to be called journalists and who have made a compact to deceive you. The English language media is now a rather glossy and expensive upgrade of Pravda. Why on earth would the government legislate censorship when it can be outsourced, bought and paid for? This is how free speech and an uncensored media works in a country with free speech enshrined in the constitution and tested and protected in law. How well do you think it will work in projects funded and controlled by the CIA? Does anyone truly believe these projects exists to counter repression? They exist to promote one kind of repression over another.

    1. Re:propaganda by thrich81 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      To some extent I can see where you are coming from. I was on some international travel in 2003-2004 and it was striking how different the Iraq coverage was by CNN International vs. the domestic CNN feed. However, don't blame the government for that -- the vast majority of people want to hear news which reinforces their already held opinions of things (and it has always been that way). The big news organizations are there to make money (not so true 50 years ago, but there really was no 'golden age' of unbiased news reporting) and for that they sell their audiences what they want to hear, in any country or society nowadays. Don't blame the government for that -- look around and blame your fellow citizens and "news consumers". There is plenty of news and evidence available which puts into question the official reports and societal held opinions, if people are willing to just pay attention. And the fricking "US is the Great Satan" meme is just as bogus as any of them so give that a rest. You don't need better governments, you need better citizens, and most of them aren't willing to be so.

    2. Re:propaganda by Rinnon · · Score: 2

      What it does want is failsafe communication with its own sympathisers, clients and agents. People make comments along the lines of "what about if they start censoring us?" Did you not notice? Will you consider your news media uncensored simply because nobody puts a 2 minute ad on national TV or a full page ad in the NYT explaining that it's already happened? Wake up. Did you not notice that you are never [b]allowed[/b] to hear or read your enemies' words directly or in full? You are only [b]allowed[/b] to digest small pieces, decontextualised and presented by public relations people masquerading as journalists.

      Really? You're unable to Google information on Al Quaeda? You're unable to view Afghan or Pakistani news sources direct by going to their websites? I get that it's cool to act like America is censoring you, and that you're so hard done by living in this "repressive" "freedom hating" state. But if you wanted more than just the sound bite they give you on CNN, you have the Internet, and you can look it up. The only thing stopping you is your inability to read another language. Comparing your primary news source not giving you enough information to hear both sides of a story with a country that actively shuts down the entire Internet to prevent dissidents from effectively communicating is fucking childish.

  13. Per Vernor Vinge by F34nor · · Score: 2

    In Rainbows End the Army rains down networking nodes on a site that they want to control. I have been talking about doing this as a 501c. Make off the shelf Meraki style nodes with a mix and match of bands. E.g. 900mHz backbone and 802.11b/g with every 10th or so with a satellite uplink. Make them cheap enough to carpet bomb out of a b52. Give them a solar panel or a easy connect to a car battery or a 110/220. When ever someone tries to "turn off the internet" just drop a new one. The peer to peer cell phone also has a hand in this a Motorola f4 style phone or even a Belkin Skype phone could be dropped at the same time. TerraNet was already covered on /. http://snapvoip.blogspot.com/2007/09/peer-to-peer-mobile-phones-by-terranet.html

  14. Re:DNS and the world of wonders.. by msaavedra · · Score: 2

    I often wonder what would happen if a group of nerds..like ourselves.. decided to start our own root DNS.. I would suspect that it would be shut down by the FCC in short order under some new or trumped up mangled misinterpretation of some law.

    Alternative root servers have existed for years. The largest is probaby OpenNIC.

    --
    "Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it."
    --Henry David Thoreau