Alimardani says it seems mobile data services are unpleasant, and for many people virtual private networks that can be used to avoid censorship have stopped working. This means that it was difficult to reach people in the country and maybe for information to go out, Alimardani says. “Some family who left Tehran today were offline and disconnected from the Internet and eventually found some connectivity when they were 200 kilometers outside Tehran in another province,” Alimardani explains. “My relationships are mainly with people using home bandwidth WiFi, but even that was unstable.”
Over the last decade, countries have become more and more the dragon step of fully or partially closing internet connectivity for citizens in times of perceived crisis. Was 296 stops last yearAccording to Access Now, a nonprofit on Internet rights, which tracks the actions – the largest number of anyone registered. Stops are often linked to repressive governments Trying to restrict protests that could damage them, limit people’s ability to collect and communicate freely, as part of conflicts, and even try to stop deceiving examinations.
“The Internet is a lifetime, we have seen this in many places under conflict,” says Hanna Kretem, director of Internet technology and development at the Internet Society that was Tracking the interruptions in Iran. Kretem says that when the connectivity in Iran first began to drop on June 13, he heard from people with relatives in Iran that their services were significantly slowed down. “People under fire use it to get news, ask for help, learn about safer areas and communicate with loved ones. And for people outside of learning about what’s going on and knowing about their loved ones.”
To limit connectivity, countries use multiple different technical approaches. Iran developed its own Internet alternativeIntranet system called the National Information NetworkKnown as the us, for years. The us, according to Freedom House AnalysisAllows “levels” of internet access and allows the government to censor content and push people to home-grown Iranian programs, such as alternative message programs that may have “weak privacy and security functions.” (Freedom House rates Iran as “not free” in its most recent Measures of online freedomemphasizing constant stops, growing costs and efforts to push people to the home internet.)
Amir Rashidi, the Director of Digital Rights and Security at the Iranian Focus Human Rights Organization Miaan Group, says that in the midst of recent stops, there have been increased efforts to push people to Iranian programs. “In a climate of fear where people simply try to stay bound with loved ones, many turn to these unsafe platforms desperately,” he posted OnlineTelling Wired that a message -App named Bale seems to be paying attention. “Because they are hosted on us, they will work even during a stop,” he says.
Iran is not the first country to restrict people’s access to the Internet – and censorship information – with the possible justification for protecting cybersecurity or security wider, says Lukasz Olejnik, an independent advisor and visiting senior research at the Kings ‘military studies department of the Kings’ College London. While global online stops have increased over the last decade, Olejnik says, officials in Myanmar, India, Russia and Belarus have all cited security reasons to implement interruptions.
“Internet stops are mostly useless against real -world state -meled cyber attacks,” Olejnik says. He explains that military and critical infrastructure systems, such as energy networks or transportation systems, will typically work on separate networks and will not be accessible from the open internet. “Professional cyber operations could use other resources to access, although it could make it difficult for the command and control some of the deployed malware (if so it happens),” Olejnik says. “What it would block mainly would be access to information for society.”
Witness’ Alimardani says the technical details supporting any claims that the Internet limitations are intended to protect cybersecurity are “unclear”, and ultimately, the goal of these efforts can be to rule people in Iran. “The official storytelling of state news broadcasts portrays a strong war against Israel and a path to victory,” Alimardani says. “Free and open access to media would prevent this story, and worst could encourage Iranians to rebel, further destroying the power of the regime.”
