Alimardani says that it seems that mobile data services are incomplete and, for many, virtual private networks, which can be used to prevent censorship, have stopped working. This means that it has been difficult to reach the people of the country and potentially to obtain information to leave, according to Alimardani. “Some family who left Tehran today was out of line and disconnected from the Internet and finally found some connectivity when 200 kilometers were outside Tehran in another province,” says Alimdani. “My connections are mainly with people who use domestic broadband Wi-Fi, but even this has been unstable.”
During the last decade, countries have increasingly made the Draconian passage of completely or partially closing the Internet connectivity for citizens in times of perceived crisis. There was 296 last year’s stopsAccording to Access Now, a non -profit Internet rights that traces actions: the largest number of any record. Stops are often linked to repressive governments Try to restrict the protests that may damage them, limit the ability of people to gather and communicate freely, as part of conflicts and even try to stop cheating on the exams.
“The Internet is a lifestyle, we have seen it in many places under conflict,” says Hanna Kreitem, director of Technology and Internet Development of the Internet Society, who has been Tracking off the off in Iran. Kreitem says that when Iran’s connectivity began to fall on June 13, he felt people with relatives in Iran that their services had been significantly slowed. “People on fires use it to get news, request help, learn from safer areas and communicate with their loved ones. And for people from outside to know what’s going on and know about their loved ones.”
To limit connectivity, countries use various different technical approaches. Iran has been developing his own alternative to the Internetan intranet system called National Information NetworkKnown as the child, for years. The child, according to Freedom House AnalysisIt allows “levels” of Internet access and allows the Government to censor the content and push people to applications of homemade Iran, such as alternative messaging applications, which may have “weak privacy and security functions”. (Freedom House values Iran as “non -free” in the most recent Internet freedom measuresHighlighting the persistent stops, increasing the costs and efforts to push people on the domestic internet.)
Amir Rashidi, the director of Digital Rights and Security of the Miaan Group of the Human Rights Organization focused on Iran, says that in the midst of recent stops, there have been more efforts to promote people towards Iranian applications. “In a climate of scary, where people are only trying to keep -connected to their loved ones, many are directing to these unsafe platforms outside of despair,” he published onlinetelling Wired that a messaging app called Bale seems to be of attention. “Because they are housed in Nin, they will work even during the stop,” he says.
Iran is not the first country to restrict the access of people to the Internet – and without censorship information – with the possible justification of protecting cybersecurity or security in a wider way, says Lukasz Olejnik, an independent consultant and a visiting main researcher in the London War Studies Department of the Kings College. As global Internet stops have increased over the last decade, Olejnik says, Myanmar, India, Russia and Belarusian officials have quoted security reasons to implement shutdowns.
“Internet stalls are largely ineffective against cyberataques at the actual state level,” says Olejnik. He explains that military and critical infrastructure systems, such as energy networks or transport systems, will usually operate on separate networks and will not be accessible from the open internet. “Professional cyber operations could use other means of access, but in fact it could make it difficult to control and control some malicious programs deployed (if so),” says Olejnik. “What would mainly block would be access to information for society.”
The testimony ‘Alimardani says that the technical details that support any statement that Internet restrictions are aimed at protecting cybersecurity are’ unclear ‘and, ultimately, the purpose of these efforts can be to control the people of Iran. “The official narrative of the state news channels portrays a strong war against Israel and a path to victory,” says Alimardani. “Free and open access to the media would hurt this narrative, and in the worst case, Iranians could urge to revolt -further eroding the power of the regime.”
