Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon Tells Signal's Creators To Stop Using Anti-Censorship Tool (theverge.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the mission-accomplished dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: The team behind secure messaging app Signal says Amazon has threatened to kick the app off its CloudFront web service unless Signal drops the anti-censorship practice known as domain-fronting. Google recently banned the practice, which lets developers disguise web traffic to look like it's coming from a different source, allowing apps like Signal to evade country-level bans. As a result, Signal moved from Google to the Amazon-owned Souq content delivery network. But Amazon implemented its own ban on Friday. In an email that Moxie Marlinspike -- founder of Signal developer Open Whisper Systems -- posted today, Amazon orders the organization to immediately stop using domain-fronting or find another web services provider. Signal used the system to provide service in Egypt, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), where it's officially banned. It got around filters by making traffic appear to come from a huge platform, since countries weren't willing to ban the entirety of a site like Google to shut down Signal. "The idea behind domain fronting was that to block a single site, you'd have to block the rest of the internet as well. In the end, the rest of the internet didn't like that plan," Marlinspike writes. "We are considering ideas for a more robust system, but these ecosystem changes have happened very suddenly. [...] In the meantime, the censors in these countries will have (at least temporarily) achieved their goals. Sadly, they didn't have to do anything but wait."

16 of 99 comments (clear)

  1. Fascists can die in a fire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This just in: fascist corporate America doesn’t give a shit about protecting your rights if it doesn’t have a way to monetize that.

    1. Re:Fascists can die in a fire by GLMDesigns · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Amazon and Google are fascist. OK.

      What is fascism?
      What makes something fascist? I don't know anymore. It used to be relatively simple. It was defined by Mussolini but now everything is Fascist.

      Hey - you libertarian over there are you for free speech and free markets? "Yup" Well, then, you're a fascist.

      Now I'm not fond of either Google or Amazon.

      I use Brave or Firefox, use DuckDuckGo unitl and unless I'm forced to go to Google. I've reduced my use of gmail. (Using protonmail)

      It can't be because they oppose free speech and the free expression of ideas? Because then Antifa would be fascist? Right?

      So, what the fuk is fascism.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    2. Re:Fascists can die in a fire by alvinrod · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I believe that Orwell's essay on fascism is still as apt as ever. Essentially it's just a way to describe a political (or more generally, any ideological) opponent you don't like and historically been flung at just about everyone from communists to Catholics. It's a fancier way of saying "bad guy" in most cases.

    3. Re:Fascists can die in a fire by HeckRuler · · Score: 4, Interesting

      More like Amazon and Google are yielding to pressure from Egypt, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) (or from one of their friends) that don't like when people bypass their bans, which itself is pretty fascist when they dictate how you can use the Internet.

      What makes something fascist? I don't know anymore. It used to be relatively simple.

      Yeah, I get that. Some asshat called me a fascist and assumed I agreed with NAZIs because I had the audacity to defend free speech. But that sort of hyperbole has always been around. It's bullshit and has always been bullshit. It's a cheap and easy low-effort insult by pseudo intellectuals who can't stop their rage-boner against Hitler. Tribalism through and through. They simply hate the other side enough to hate anyone near them as well.

      There's a bunch of little things that taste like fascism, but I think it boils down to trying control what people do. If they're free to make their own decisions without being forced, compelled, threatened, or encouraged than it's not fascist. And yeah, that's a sliding scale. If China instituted fines for muslims instead of outright confiscating their prayer mats that'd be a step away from fascism... but it's still pretty fascist. If NY added a sugary-drink-tax to try and make people be less fat... that's a little fascist.

      A handful of shitty countries are trying to control how people use the Internet. That's fascist. They're pressuring these companies (or their political allies, like the USA govt) to put a stop to the workaround. These companies are yielding, or helping out, probably just because it helps make them a buck as well. That's aiding fascists.

      Maybe that's reading into it though. Maybe they really just want to control the internet a little more and make it a little more regulated (which WILL help them profit). That's a slight amount of... controlling others. Forcing Internet services to have a more truthful identification. Imagine if slashdot suddenly forced you to stop using "GLMDesigns" or being an anonymous coward and enforced "real names only". In the name of stopping shitposting. That's control. Regulation. And it's a little fascist.

      So, what the fuk is fascism.

      Authority enforcing unity through the threat of capital punishment. "Do things our way and conform or we'll chop you down to size".

  2. move to azure in the meantime by williamyf · · Score: 5, Informative

    Marlinspike writes. "We are considering ideas for a more robust system, but these ecosystem changes have happened very suddenly. [...]

    While you consider and implement these "ideas for a more robust system", move to azure to buy yourselves more time.

    AFAIK, Azure still supports domain fronting. Granted, is a little different than Google's and Amazon's (in that both the fronted domain and the final destination have to be azure hosted), but still, is better than the alternatie of having your app censored while a new solution arrives, which can take, weeks, months or even years...

    --
    *** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
  3. Told you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Nice application you have there, would be a shame if someone were to pull it offline.

    It's simple, company (Amazon, Google) are making billions in pure profit. Locals want a piece of it. Companies are paying little to no taxes.

    Said this before, it started with TPB, Wikileaks, etc. and I'm going to laugh all the way to the bank as people realize how fucked they've become by depending on these companies to the point you've outsourced everything. What exactly did you expect to happen.

    If they gave two shits about you or me, they would put as much effort into making a stink about this as they do bashing Trump.

  4. Re:"Anti-censorship tool" by rogoshen1 · · Score: 2

    I'd call it "google and amazon can fuck right off".

  5. What do you want to bet.... by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...the actual reason for the changes has to do with another country telling Amazon and Google to quit enabling Signal, or else?

    --
    Finding God in a Dog
    1. Re:What do you want to bet.... by 110010001000 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Not possible with Google. They were founded with the motto "Don't be evil".

  6. Censorship! bad!! by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 3, Insightful
    OK we got that part. Censorship is bad. And this domain fronting is one way to evade censorship.

    So we heard about *one* legitimate noble use of domain fronting.

    Amazon and Google are banning probably to improve their tracking and their own bottom line. Fine.

    Now are there illegitimate uses for domain fronting? Is it used by scammers? Is it used by malware hawkers? Can we have some balance in reporting and mention the dark underbelly of domain fronting? Or has slash dot is PR fronting for some scammers and spammers?

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Censorship! bad!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Now are there illegitimate uses for domain fronting? Is it used by scammers? Is it used by malware hawkers?

      Who cares? It's nobody's damn business. You can use a butter knife to kill a guy too. We need an indelible internet. It is not important who uses it for what. So hopefully we'll soon find a way around the domain fronting thing with something the tyrants can't take down. That is all that matters.

    2. Re:Censorship! bad!! by HeckRuler · · Score: 2

      Amazon and Google are banning probably to improve their tracking and their own bottom line. Fine.

      Why is that fine? You've already established that there are legitimate uses for this. A corporations putting an end to this for their own profit.... is not fine.

      Can we have some balance in reporting and mention the dark underbelly of domain fronting?

      Oh sure. I get that. Call it like it is "Domain spoofing".

      But this? "Signal used the system to provide service in Egypt, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), where it's officially banned. It got around filters by making traffic appear to come from a huge platform, since countries weren't willing to ban the entirety of a site like Google to shut down Signal." This is a legitimate good use-case. Power to the people and all that noise.

    3. Re:Censorship! bad!! by sl3xd · · Score: 2

      Probably not, and further you would be very right to not want me to do so.

      Precisely why I don’t run a Tor exit node. It’s noble in theory, but the reality is there are no legal protections for exit node operators, just high minded rhetoric.

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
    4. Re:Censorship! bad!! by sl3xd · · Score: 2

      A corporations putting an end to this for their own profit.... is not fine.

      You don’t seem to understand how public corporations work. Ultimately, most executives can be forced out an executive for not serving their duties to their shareholders - a bunch who typically care only about profit.

      Cloud provider’s goal is to connect to the most customers in the most markets and the most countries possible, while turning the highest profits possible. They can do neither when a government orders all traffic to them blocked.

      The internet isn’t magic sauce; it’s a telecom network that crosses national borders — and can be cut off at them.

      If you want to direct high minded rhetoric about censorship, then I suggest working with organizations which are actually in a place to effect change. The US Government, backed by the world’s most advanced military, unparalleled economic power, and enough nukes to sterilize the planet, has been unable to get dictators to play nice

      Seriously, what is an internet retailer supposed to do? Ship teddy bears?

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
  7. *DO* Be Evil by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 3

    How many thousands of political dissidents have Google and Amazon enabled totalitarian dictatorships to murder?

    1. Re:*DO* Be Evil by DRJlaw · · Score: 3, Interesting

      How many thousands of political dissidents have Google and Amazon enabled totalitarian dictatorships to murder?

      I don't know, how many have you?

      I mean, you've defined "enabling murder" as simply not allowing someone else to run their communications through their computers. Do you allow that?