Slashdot Mirror
Lawmakers Call On Amazon and Google To Reconsider Ban On Domain Fronting (cyberscoop.com)
An anonymous reader quotes CyberScoop: Amazon and Google face sharp questions from a bipartisan pair of U.S. senators over the tech giants' decisions to ban domain fronting, a technique used to circumvent censorship and surveillance around the world. Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., sent a letter on Tuesday to Google CEO Larry Page and Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos over decisions by both companies in April to ban domain fronting.
Amazon then warned the developers of encrypted messaging app Signal that the organization would be banned from Amazon's cloud services if the service didn't stop using Amazon's cloud as cover. "We respectfully urge you to reconsider your decision to prohibit domain fronting given the harm it will do to global internet freedom and the risk it will impose upon human rights activists, journalists, and others who rely on the internet freedom tools," the senators wrote.
Amazon then warned the developers of encrypted messaging app Signal that the organization would be banned from Amazon's cloud services if the service didn't stop using Amazon's cloud as cover. "We respectfully urge you to reconsider your decision to prohibit domain fronting given the harm it will do to global internet freedom and the risk it will impose upon human rights activists, journalists, and others who rely on the internet freedom tools," the senators wrote.
What these countries should be subjected to is for the rest of the world to decide the internet needs to be free, and totally free, everywhere. No GeoIP fencing, no banned services.
If a private company wants to do it, fine by them. But if a country tried this shit, the rest of the world should block them off the internet entirely, watch their economy have a coronary, and beat them into allowing the net to operate the way the net wants to operate. If you build a messaging service, you should be able to market it to everyone, regardless of where they are.
I think I got that wrong, politicians want Amazon to enable people to circumvent censorship and country lockouts?
Did the RIAA check bounce?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Domain fronting may be useful for circumvent censorship and surveillance, but fact is that it is used mostly for criminal behavior.
So we either stop the usage or just accept that criminals will be the primary users of the service.
... don't touch that, OK?
That's a capitalism of a different colour.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Well the internet as it now exists wasn't built for free.
He means free as in speech, not as in beer.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Fuck off. If I got a rope, I'd Lynch you with it for suggest I hang myself.
Back to the topping at hand. The internet is whatever each country wants it to be, so I'd countries decided they didn't want to partake with other countries who had draconian laws, the herd would move the straggler. That's all I'm saying. Oh, and not that I vote for him (I'm more a balls and strikes kind of guy anyway), but there's no way at this point given the state of the country, Trump loses in 2020. He will win. Statistics make a very strong case, even if the Democrats came up with a good candidate (unlikely).
Thank you.
Should child pornography be banned on the internet? No. Should people who produce and consume child pornography wherever it resides be prosecuted, and in my opinion raped and tortured, yes!
If you wanted to write a history book on Child Pornography, and some state deemed that illegal, that's an infringement of free speech. I don't mind prosecuting for doing things. I do mind prosecuting people for saying things.
Making child pornography is wrong. Consuming it is wrong. But those two don't justify the wrong of keeping people from having the freedom to speak.
Remember, at some point in the US, interracial marriages were outlawed as indecent as well, and let me be clear here: I'm not saying that child pornography is the same thing or should ever be legal. I just don't want the government coming and saying what I say is illegal. I don't mind if the government says what I do is illegal. But what I say is not illegal. Just because I said it. Ever.
Mind you that doesn't mean there aren't consequences. Just that it's not the speech your going to jail for.
Even though "ban child porn" seems simple for us, globally it isn't so. What is a "child"? Why should adult pornography be legal?
You and I probably have the same definitions and overall opinion. But a person becomes an adult at different ages across the world. And yes, they get adult responsibilities. We might think it is 21. Others 17, 15, 13, and some even 10. And that's present day. For Romans it was 8! A person could be sentenced to life at 8! In the US a person as young as 12 can be tried as an adult. Highly unlikely, but possible.
As for porn, many countries have the belief that women (and men) can not consent to such a "profession". It is too damaging to the family structure that their societies depend on that a woman can not make that decision on their own. They view all porn as exploitation of the subject and on the official record ban it.
So a global standard for banning... will just make everyone mad. The dark net will be as big as the official one.
The 2016 election capsized the democrats. The only way for them to recover is to partner with Republicans. If they do not there is a damn good chance the Trump will win again, or worse.
The whole world shifted right at the same damn time. If you think it is going to shift left (moderate) by doubling down on radical socialism or forcing the issues that caused the shift then you are completely out of touch. It shifted right because normal people were assaulted by their governments after ignoring them for decades. (Germany bringing in 1MM refugees after beating people over the head with political correctness and all it entails--for example.) You need buy-in before you flood someone's neighborhood with destitute people--changing it overnight. Regardless of the migrant/refugee plight the influx scared the hell out of people. Turkey brought in 3MM and appeared to accept doing so but it still contributed to destabilizing the country. This is not the only issue but it certainly broke the camel's back. This pattern is repeated in many European and Muslim countries. Lump in the fact that things are not getting better for the less-than-two-dollars-per-day crowd and things are getting worse for the "1st world" middle class and you have a world on the brink of all out war. We are one small economic blip from losing our shit and tipping over the edge but politicians are standing around clueless--most of them.
Electing right-wing politicians is not the answer of course but neither is preserving the status quo. In studying this shift I realized that the leftist parties automatically became the functional conservatives because their platform was rooted in maintaining the status quo. The far right is is now the radical left--which has always been violent as hell. Easy to miss.
TLDR; Democrats better out the establishment on their side of the isle or be prepared to wither away as more people shift right in a march to chaos.
I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
what were we talking about?
I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
"If you want to revert back to BBS's and dialup modems than please go right ahead."
Don't temp me.
I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
Which makes the data ephemeral unless it is housed on a server. Sure the servers are distributed at first, until they aren't. Data == power.
I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
A few years ago the USA's own immigration and customs enforcement DNS-blocked a Spanish sports betting site. What do you suggest the rest of the world do about it? Blackhole all IP addresses assigned to the USA? Seems exvessive, but if you think it would help keep the internet available there, maybe we should.
Must be elections coming up
The 2016 election capsized the democrats. The only way for them to recover is to partner with Republicans.
Nonsense. That is not a recovery.
The only way for the DNC to recover is to embrace the left, instead of trying to be centrist. Voters have shown that they will vote for extremely liberal candidates, and the DNC has shown that it will stab them in the back at every opportunity. Polls showed that Sanders could have defeated Trump, but the DNC chose to run Clinton even though registered democratic voters wanted them to run Sanders. Unfortunately, the DNC is a bunch of corporate whores and they are constitutionally incapable of actually being far enough to the left.
The whole world shifted right at the same damn time.
No, no it didn't. It's just a couple of countries, the US and England. Most other countries are still moving to the left, or simply maintaining business as usual.
The far right is is now the radical left
What the hell are you on about?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"