Hacker News Reader

Comment by nabogh | Hacker News Reader

I'm a little confused what Russia has to gain from this. My impression was previously that Russia was somewhat of a wild west when it came to piracy and internet restrictions.

To make things weirder, the article claims that only mobile networks are affected. I wonder why that is. Is this just the decisions of a handful of telcos and it's being reported as a state-imposed restriction?

Edit: also in my opinion, "blocking at the protocol level" is a bit misleading since they can't actually see the packet contents. Wireguard for example is just UDP packets. They have to infer from other patterns that the traffic is Wireguard and drop packets that meet those criteria.

View on HN

This isn't about cracking down on piracy or anything of that sort. It's about slowly getting control of the media and information channels that Russian people have access to. The same playbook that China has been using since forever. Authorities have been encouraging popular Internet celebrities to start posting their content on local networks/apps, so in time Western media sources like Youtube and Twitter will be blocked. The government wants to get full control of the information channels so it can squash dissent easily.

I don't live in China. Yet I'd very much like my country having its own national software stack (OS, search engine, browser, social media apps). All is fine for you guys in the US, but you forget when our national interests conflict with yours or big tech corporations or when the privacy of our citizens is concerned, it happens to be a national security issue. I trust my own government to not spy on me unnecessarily, and even if I'm to be spied by someone, I'd prefer my own government who is far more likely to act in my best interests than the three letter agencies of US.

Why would you need a national software stack when there's open source solutions for everything?

Tech nerds often don't realize how much the world of software is subject to the real world. You can be cut off access to any technology if your country is not willing to give its natural resources to another. No different from trade sanctions. Open source is a bunch of individuals helpless in the face of orders from Pentagon to close it all up.

* You won't have the expertise to quickly build your own solutions when this happens you are cut off access to a certain technology. A browser is a beast to implement as we all know.

* You can't trust that e.g. Chromium as audited by American "experts" is really not phoning home if it detects the IP is from e.g Turkish defense corporation A's RD center.

* You need to have that software-skilled workforce anyway to ensure technological progress of your country.

You mean they block SSL and you have to use plain HTTP?

SSL is but one form of centralization of technology.

I don’t disagree with this, but it would be better to have a stack that’s not controlled by any government but is based on technical standards - not governmental dictates or corporate control.

I would also note that in your country the US agencies have no authority. However your own government can use that information to imprison you or otherwise exert its jurisdictional control. I think that’s generally what people worry about. It’s hard to imagine a reason the US government would care about you as a citizen of X country, whereas there are lots of governments who oppress their citizens for being themselves and for who they associate with.

> it would be better to have a stack that’s not controlled by any government but is based on technical standards

That era of globalization is slowly passing away.

> I would also note that in your country the US agencies have no authority.

No it plenty does. Not well-known on the west side of the internet, but the US can and did easily order to our governments the individuals (which she saw to be influential in the directions she didn't want) to be imprisoned, tortured and executed. And this is just cost-effective side of the coin. Three letter agencies can make anyone disappear. I just searched for almost 25 mins for an article documenting such a case. I was able to find it several times in the past with increasing difficulty. It's not even on the webarchive now. I think the article is finally nuked by some agency.

> there are lots of governments who oppress their citizens for being themselves and for who they associate with.

Not everyone agrees with the idea that individual freedom extremism is good, or that everyone should be allowed to do or say anything as long as it doesn't adversely affect others. In fact in this side of the world we think that's a silly and naive standpoint.

Edit: I literally found the article from my childhood project of replicating the website of the article, sitting in Google Drive trash, awaiting the 30days deletion. I searched for the exact title and indeed the article is nuked from the entire internet including webarchive except mere links on FB and Twitter. Three letter guys caught red handed. Here's the data of the article: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1wjPH5hN-uyATlO7K3Ynz...

Open the metin.txt for article. veri.json is metadata, 'baslik' means title. I hope my google account will not be burned over this.

Oh that’s not hard to find

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Omar_Abu_Ali

I agree, this is egregious. At least I’m allowed to say that and advocate strongly against such stuff without fear of reprisal. In many parts of the world I wouldn’t be allowed to criticize the government. (In fact I’m vacationing in one right now)

Edit: I think the fact that typing his name into a browser provided me not just Wikipedia but hundreds of websites advocating on his behalf, but you couldn’t find an article after 25 minutes of searching and fear you’ll be in some sort of trouble for having it in your Google drive exemplifies my point. An open internet isn’t just a tool for evil by the deranged. It’s how the good and the just know the truth.

Edit 2: by the way, thank you for the respectful discussion here, we don’t all have to agree on things but it’s wonderful to discuss with folks that aren’t part of the echo chamber.

Yeah, the case is on wikipedia but the original article from muslimskeptic.com is gone. I found the article last time from webarchive, the article is gone from there too. I appreciate you as well.

It’s only passing away if people let it. However, I’d note that it’s only passing away in a small number of authoritarian regimes, and technical standards dominate the stack for the parts of the world who value openness. I don’t think this is a “west vs east” thing, but a valuing of open societies.

I think people in many parts of the world would like to see the “others” oppressed - until tides change and they find themselves the “others.”

Once you allow someone to decide some thoughts are a crime because they agree with your views, it’s just a matter of time before that prison is open to your way of thinking.

On the CIA and extraordinary rendition and other things, yes I know it exists. My point isn’t that. My point is that your government does it a lot more and the likelihood of being snatched up by your government (wherever you are) is absurdly higher than the US breaking into your home and extracting you. That it happens is unacceptable but it’s also structurally rare to the point it’s news worthy.

I for one feel sorry for people who are imprisoned for no other reason for the people they love, the ideas they have, the way they view the world. I will welcome them to my side of the world with open arms and wish them peace, and mourn the loss of their home to people who feel they must hurt people for being alive.

> Yet I'd very much like my country having its own national software stack

The question is would you take that at the expense of blocking the big American corporations? That's probably really how the Chinese have developed their own to this degree. For example they weren't ubiquitous but Google was starting to make headway in China and Chinese in the late 00s when gmail hack/Google ban/GFW started. Baidu is not a quality service (though maybe because of government restrictions)

> if I'm to be spied by someone, I'd prefer my own government who is far more likely to act in my best interests than the three letter agencies of US.

I'm also aware of an opposite opinion: if I'm to be spied by someone, it's better to be a three letter agency overseas, since it's much harder for them to harm me, than a three letter agency in my home country, which can just knock at my door.

See my reply to your sibling 'I don't disagree with this...'

Oh, thanks for pointing me to it!

And thanks for the comment. Indeed, I was thinking about countries like Russia, where US three-letter agencies don't have extradition power, as far as I know (thinking about Snowden). Countries like mentioned in that thread, indeed, have more complicated relationships with US.

If the CIA/NSA spies on you what would a plausible bad outcome look like?

If the Chinese government spies on you and finds some behavior it finds unacceptable your social credit tanks and you cant travel, send your children to a good school....

I fully agree with you. Digital sovereignty is important for countries and it makes sense that they are trying to become digitally independent. The bad part is that this particular instance, it will be used against the people.

I would say that better goal would be for individuals to be digitally sovereign, and not countries. Individual digital sovereignty protects us from external and internal oppression.

I'm afraid that's technically not possible. Internet is inherently centralized due to the need for ISPs, and there are TLS CAs, TSMC, and many more things. Current sophistication of technology needs centralization for its manufacture and use.

None of the things you mentioned are fully centralized.

But are you going to block the US/Europe on your national network so that your citizens live in a silo. Are you afraid of free flow of information or of your citizens seeing it? That's what Russia, China, and North Korea do, is that what you want in your country?

I don't directly propose blocking the rest of the world, but e.g. using a national social media app implies banning foreign ones. I'd very much like the personal data and the advertising income mined from the eyeball time of citizens to not cross the borders of my country. This is not to mention a state-run app would have just enough ads to pay for the costs of the service, and maybe even none if it's ruled in the parliament that advertisement is harmful to the wellbeing of citizens.

"Never stop fighting for the control of the agenda, for all your enemies are doing the same."

--- Chairman Mao

Many non-western countries do not share cultural values with western countries. As an example, see the number of anti-LGBT people in Georgia (the country, not the state of Georgia in US) – it's not just a small protest, but thousands of thousands of people. When it comes to Russia, they are doing it for the same reasons, but also in response to the sanctions: "If you don't want to work with us, you won't get any traffic from our country". Every country in the world seeks to control information; Russia is not unique in this regard. The primary reasons they are blocking the Internet are sanctions and an attempt to preserve conservative values.

> what Russia has to gain from this

People won't be able to read anything contradicting government's point of view. It is important for stability in society that there is only correct and truthful information and no falseful foreign propaganda seeding distruct in government (e.g. by falsefully claiming that high-ranked officials own expensive villas in Europe that they cannot afford with their salary).

> only mobile networks are affected. I wonder why that is.

Because it is only testing stage now.

> Is this just the decisions of a handful of telcos

Why would telecoms spend money on censorship by themselves? It doesn't increase their profit.

> Wireguard for example is just UDP packets.

WireGuard packets are not obfuscated and can be easily detected. And even if it was obfuscated, everything that doesn't look like HTTPS can be blocked without causing much troubles.

> My impression was previously that Russia was somewhat of a wild west when it came to piracy and internet restrictions.

Your impression was absolutely wrong. Before war, Microsoft and other big western companies along with police hunted companies which tried to use pirate software. So it was not a good idea to use pirate software for company in Russia, at least if you're big enough to be noticed. Ordinary people were kind of ignored, AFAIK.

Both Internet restrictions and surveillance also were present in Russia in the recent years. Officially to protect children, unofficially to suppress opposition as well.

> Your impression was absolutely wrong. Before war, Microsoft and other big western companies along with police hunted companies which tried to use pirate software. So it was not a good idea to use pirate software for company in Russia, at least if you're big enough to be noticed. Ordinary people were kind of ignored, AFAIK

Didn't they say somewhere that in response to the sanctions imposed early in the war they were going to go lenient on piracy? I wonder if that promise ever amounted to anything, or if it was just empty words.

I'm not aware of any real steps about that. Probably empty words.

There are enough software makers in Russia, so allowing piracy would just make their life harder. Like why would you want to buy КОМПАС-3D for some hefty price if you can pirate Autocad for free.

They were not empty words. Here are a couple examples:

https://torrentfreak.com/rutracker-found-itself-unblocked-in...

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/08/09/russian-cinemas-sc...

Since enforcement was at the behest of the behemoths, I dare say they stopped. No need to try to make Microsoft and Disney willing to do business in Russia if they’re banned from doing so.

> I'm a little confused what Russia has to gain from this.

People use VPNs to get western news and information through other channels than state-controlled Russian media.

If Russia can block these other channels, then their own propaganda becomes the sole information citizens have access to.

I think mostly people use VPN not for news but to access Instagram.

If I was denied access to information sources I trust I would not go and swallow state propaganda..

Having said this, almost all of my Russian colleagues already talk like Russian TV and all of them use VPN this way or another..

> If I was denied access to information sources I trust I would not go and swallow state propaganda.

It seems there is always a segment of the population that takes up nationalism/populism. You don't need a majority to enable authoritarianism, just enough to ease them into power, maintain the facade of support and help chill dissent.

In a strange twist, I'm currently in Russia and use a VPN almost daily, but not for news — English-language news sites from HN to CNN simply aren't blocked, and to watch out for any new scary local stuff I find it most convenient to subscribe to Meduza in Telegram AND read a Russian news site such as lenta.ru "between the lines".

Websites I need a VPN for most of the time are ones that just don't like users with Russian IPs, like my Western credit card company.

> I'm a little confused what Russia has to gain from this.

Maybe Russia thinks that Ukraine is using the mobile phone network to control drones in Moscow.

How does blocking VPNs prevent this?

Im in Russia now posting this over on a wireguard vpn, using a landline ISP. So far no problems, havent tried on mobile.

Are you using port 51820 or a different port for your Wireguard endpoint? Just curious as I have read where others have used different ports to circumvent DPI.

Yes im using 51820, but good idea to change it. I actually have 2 setups. One is a home router within a wireguard server builtin, the second is my Tailscale mesh network using an exit node at home in USA.

Ha. I run WireGuard and a Tailscale network also.

I've read that some people have used port 853 to mimic encrypted DNS or other ports less than 1024 to circumvent some WireGuard limits. I've yet to run into that.

Might want to check out https://yggdrasil-network.github.io for fun. I used to use it to connect to various networks.

Are you affected by the annual “internet cutoff”

My office in Moscow has IPsec tunnels and is fine, but we also see no outages other than the occasional last mile loss on one of the circuits (not at the same time). Maybe that’s because it’s a business line.

Try Mullvad.

EDIT:

:rolleyes: try using Mullvad, specifically WireGuard servers, specifically on mobile providers.

From my days of piercing the great firewall of china, as long as you’re somewhat technically adept AND have access outside somehow AND aren’t currently in the crosshairs it’ll work fine.

> I'm a little confused what Russia has to gain from this. My impression was previously that Russia was somewhat of a wild west when it came to piracy and internet restrictions.

Is it not obvious? Russia has long blocked many apps associated with the west, such as Facebook, Twitter etc. and promotes the use of russian-only webspace. Because the people are not stupid, many evaded this act of censorship with VPNs. It was a surprise VPN were permitted for such a long time as it is.

“Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.” -- Pravin Lal

Also, it's not just mobile operators. Major ISPs (with millions of customers) have some sort of DPI, or at the very least enforce the state's blacklist (which includes such "nefarious" websites such as FB, Linkedin, Medium, etc)

>My impression was previously that Russia was somewhat of a wild west when it came to piracy and internet restrictions.

They're still pretty lenient on piracy, which doesn't cancel out the government ever growing desire to control the news/media/social networks space

A dictator has made some ridiculously bad moves and now fears that his time may be wrapping up. The (arguably correct) move from his perspective is to control the information space as strongly as possible. Ideas and truth are his enemy right now.

> I'm a little confused what Russia has to gain from this.

Nothing at all. It's a pointless exercise with which some cyber security apparatchik in Putin's regime hopes to earn kudos from his credulous betters.

In fact it will likely be detrimental once the filter forces communication of legit traffic (...) to propagate without VPN, which you know will happen the minute someone gets inconvenienced.

Russia. \o/

> To make things weirder, the article claims that only mobile networks are affected. I wonder why that is.

This is easier, maybe, to follow where is going a wire than a wave.

The war isn't going as they imagined it.

1.5 years into a "3-day operation" against a smaller poor country armed with hand me downs and some of the western peacetime production does not fit the narrative of 2nd best army in the world.

It's embarassing for the government that we there are even talks about them running out of tanks.

Locking down the internet supposedly helps against espionage and allows easier control of the news narrative. Authoritative regimes are always very concerned with that because the lack of open political discussion makes them seem very stable and united until the very last moment.

Additionally, Putin has a deeply seated mistrust against technology and the internet and technology.

The fact that this appears to be mobile-targeted suggests the intent -- restrict free information flow to the masses.

If you’re a dictator who just survived an abortive coup, then, yeah, you’re probably going to want to tighten control on what people can and can’t see. Putin is very weak right now, and likely feeling extremely insecure. For good reason; like, you would not want to be his life insurance provider right now.

This sort of this is as likely to be emotional support censorship for Vlad’s benefit as anything else; hard to imagine it being very effective, certainly. Expect more and more ineffectual crackdowns on information as he deteriorates.

> you would not want to be his life insurance provider right now

Why not? Sounds like the perfect scam, collect the $$$, funnel it to some offshore account. When Putin dies the chaos of succession ensures that nobody will be able to attempt to collect before I leave the country.

I mean, I'm not sure how it works in Russia, but in most countries the insurance industry is about the most heavily regulated part of the finance industry, particularly since the financial crisis; that would be difficult to pull off :)

(Now curious whether "client became a dictator and is currently provoking people into murdering him" is sufficient basis for an insurer to get out of a policy...)

It is a reasonable bet that you can leave the country between his death and when regulations manage to enforce things.

> I'm a little confused what Russia has to gain from this.

You misspelled Putin.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com