<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories filed under &quot;iran&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2013 12:12:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Unintended Consequences Of Google Reader Shutdown: Losing Key Tool To Get Around Censored Internet In Iran &#038; China</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130314/08462522321/unintended-consequences-google-reader-shutdown-losing-key-tool-to-get-around-censored-internet-iran-china.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130314/08462522321/unintended-consequences-google-reader-shutdown-losing-key-tool-to-get-around-censored-internet-iran-china.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Last night, after posting the story about <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130313/17262322315/killing-google-reader-highlights-risk-relying-single-provider.shtml">Google Reader being shut down</a>, I received an email from someone in China, telling me that it was an even bigger deal for him, because "even with a VPN it can be very difficult to access outside news sites," but that the Great Firewall doesn't block Google Reader -- so that's his one way of reading outside news.  And today, European MEP Marietje Schaake tweeted <a href="https://twitter.com/MarietjeD66/status/312189536333594624" target="_blank">nearly the same thing about Iran</a>.  Apparently, neither country blocks Google Reader, and thus people in both countries rely on it as a tool to get around censorship.  Of course, Google need not keep Reader running just for that reason, but it does highlight just how important Google Reader is to some people.  And, yes, there are other RSS readers out there, but as people are quickly discovering, they tend to be much more limited (and, one imagines, more likely to be blocked in those countries).<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130314/08462522321/unintended-consequences-google-reader-shutdown-losing-key-tool-to-get-around-censored-internet-iran-china.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130314/08462522321/unintended-consequences-google-reader-shutdown-losing-key-tool-to-get-around-censored-internet-iran-china.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130314/08462522321/unintended-consequences-google-reader-shutdown-losing-key-tool-to-get-around-censored-internet-iran-china.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>that's-unfortunate</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130314/08462522321</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2013 07:50:50 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Iran Wants To Sue Hollywood Over Argo Somewhere, Some Time, &#038; For Some Reason</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Geigner</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130313/10425522313/iran-wants-to-sue-hollywood-over-argo-somewhere-some-time-some-reason.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130313/10425522313/iran-wants-to-sue-hollywood-over-argo-somewhere-some-time-some-reason.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ I have to admit, I kind of like writing about Iran. They make posting about them so much <i>fun</i>. From their <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130219/06284622026/irans-new-jet-can-fly-photoshop-least.shtml&#038;sa=U&#038;ei=GblAUb66IYXRyQHyp4C4AQ&#038;ved=0CAcQFjAA&#038;client=internal-uds-cse&#038;usg=AFQjCNGqsTh-59LbonW_05KIpM7Hvqf4sA">photoshopped</a> war-machines to their <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121124/13340921130/irans-latest-move-to-stifle-dissent-requiring-id-cards-to-go-online.shtml">plans</a> for internet IDs all the way to their blocking useful internet services like <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121003/06275820579/iranians-protest-leads-to-return-gmail.shtml">email</a>, it's like watching a documentary on how to be ineffective at trolling the rest of the world and your own people. But this time they've gone too far, damn it. Iran <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/reports-iran-mulls-suing-hollywood-argo-18707756">wants to take on Hollywood over Argo</a>, specifically calling out director Ben Affleck for not including things they wanted him to include in <i>his</i> movie. <center>
<p>
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/nivrae/8092907634/" title="Ben Affleck by Nivrae, on Flickr"><img alt="Ben Affleck" height="300" src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8055/8092907634_4802c9cc1f.jpg" /></a><br /> <span style="font-size:10px;">Side note: I consider the Iranians not protesting Gigli an act of war<br /> Image <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/nivrae/8092907634/">source</a>: CC BY 2.0</span>
</p>
</center>
<p>
<br /> Of course, if you'd like any real details on what Tehran is planning on doing about any of this, good luck.
<blockquote>
<i>Iran is planning to sue Hollywood over the Oscar-winning "Argo" because of the movie's allegedly "unrealistic portrayal" of the country, Iranian media reported Tuesday. Several news outlets, including the pro-reform Shargh daily, said French lawyer Isabelle Coutant-Peyre is in Iran for talks with officials over how and where to file the lawsuit. She is also the lawyer for notorious Venezuelan-born terrorist Ilich Ramirez Sanchez, known as Carlos the Jackal.</i>
</blockquote>
Ah, lovely. The problem is that, while Iran is dismissing Argo and its awards as CIA propaganda, because everyone knows how pro-military Hollywood is, they aren't really disputing any specific points in the movie. They just say it shows Iranians as being too violent during the hostage-taking (er...), that Affleck failed to show why Iranians were so angry at the United States (they must have missed the movie's opener), and called Argo's awards an "attack against humanity." Other than that, no details were provided on what charges they were going to bring in what court and at what time. Why?
<br /><br />
Well, probably because there is roughly f#@$-all they can actually do about it, outside of their own borders, where their own population has been gobbling the movie up via bootleg DVDs (are copyright pirates also pro-CIA?). Regardless, a quick message for my Iranian friends: it's a movie, get over it.
</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130313/10425522313/iran-wants-to-sue-hollywood-over-argo-somewhere-some-time-some-reason.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130313/10425522313/iran-wants-to-sue-hollywood-over-argo-somewhere-some-time-some-reason.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130313/10425522313/iran-wants-to-sue-hollywood-over-argo-somewhere-some-time-some-reason.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>affleck-off</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130313/10425522313</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Feb 2013 13:31:29 PST</pubDate>
<title>Iran's New Jet Can Fly (In Photoshop, At Least)!</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Geigner</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130219/06284622026/irans-new-jet-can-fly-photoshop-least.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130219/06284622026/irans-new-jet-can-fly-photoshop-least.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ You really start to get the feeling that some of these less-friendly nations aren't even trying anymore. We recently covered how North Korea tried to scare the bejeezus (technical term) out of the States with an incredibly strange movie about a man dreaming of the nuclear annihilation of America, except they used <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130206/10392021893/north-korea-threatens-to-nuke-us-with-copied-video-game-footage.shtml">video game footage</a> to produce it. This wasn't the first of such instances, but you begin to get the feeling that the attempts, at best, are not getting any better and, at worst, are getting even more lame. As someone who grew up in the 80's, I have to pine for the days when a possible enemy nation really put in the effort required to scare the hell out of me. The USSR did this extremely well, causing more people to build almost-certain-to-fail bomb shelters than <a href="http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/mayan-doomsday-prophecy/photos/doomsday-bunkers-pictures.htm">The Discovery Channel</a> would know what to do with. Each silly attempt only makes me shake my head, mostly because I have to wonder who these guys think they're going to fool in the era of the internet and its global group of fact-checkers.<br />
<br />
Which brings us to the new fighter jet, unveiled by Iran and named the Qaher-313, which could well actually be able to fly, but you can't know that from the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/13/iran-jet-photoshop-image_n_2677778.html">photoshopped pictures released to state run media</a>. Here's a comparison between a stock image of Mount Damavand, a well-known natural landmark in Iran, and a suspiciously similar image with the new jet flying over it.
<center>
<a href="http://imgur.com/P15MolB"><img alt="" src="http://i.imgur.com/P15MolB.jpg" width=560 /></a></center>
<p>
<br />
Look, it's not that the jet doesn't look pretty sweet flying over Mount Damavand, it's just that if the majority world opinion is that your country is still using Russian war technology because you can't build working models on your own, an easily-discovered photoshop of your plane... you know... actually flying probably isn't going to impress anyone. Put some effort into it, guys. At least figure out a way to alter the cloud formations, so they aren't <i>identical</i>.
</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130219/06284622026/irans-new-jet-can-fly-photoshop-least.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130219/06284622026/irans-new-jet-can-fly-photoshop-least.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130219/06284622026/irans-new-jet-can-fly-photoshop-least.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>silly-dictator,-tricks-are-for-kids</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130219/06284622026</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:36:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Cyber War: A One-Sided Battle Against A Trumped Up Enemy</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Geigner</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130123/08103221763/cyber-war-one-sided-battle-against-trumped-up-enemy.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130123/08103221763/cyber-war-one-sided-battle-against-trumped-up-enemy.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ You would have to be a deaf and blind person with a penchant for head-burying to have missed the drum beats of a supposed cyber war the American government has been touting over the past year or so. It's a one-sided conversation that has been hyperbolic on a level normally associated with sketch comedy. Terms like "<a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120615/03214619333/politicians-who-cried-cyber-pearl-harbor-wolf.shtml">Cyber Pearl Harbor</a>" are thrown around without any sense of historical context. In fact, many are questioning whether the entire production is simply a political <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120614/01590919314/cyberpolitics-cyberbellicosity-cyberpushing-cybersecurity-to-cyberprevent-cyberwar.shtml">game</a>, with no real threat existing at all. Unfortunately, many more Americans have now incorporated this <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120511/15460318888/fearmongering-about-cyberwar-cybersecurity-is-working-american-public-very-very-afraid.shtml">manufactured fear</a> into their psyches. Still, the drum beat continues, with the United States labeling Iran as our chief enemy in this inevitable, or perhaps already occurring, cyber war.<br />
<br />
The problem, of course, is that anyone who spends a couple minutes studying what's actually happening realizes that this is a one-sided war, likely started by the West, <a href="http://blogs.cio.com/security/17722/cyber-war-upon-us%E2%80%93-only-one-side-attacking">and our opponent is fighting against our tanks with pea-shooters</a>.
<blockquote>
<i>The first shot was probably the release of Stuxnet sometime during or before 2009. Even though no one has officially claimed responsibility everyone knows who was behind it. Stuxnet hit with a bang and did a whole lot of damage to Iran's uranium-enrichment capabilities. The United States followed that up with Flame&ndash;the ebola virus of spyware.</i><br />
<br />
<i>What did the Iranians fire back with? A series of massive, on-going and ineffective DDoS attacks on American banks. This is a disproportionate response but not in the way military experts usually mean that phrase. It's the equivalent of someone stealing your car and you throwing an ever-increasing number of eggs at his house in response.</i></blockquote>
That's what makes all of this seem so monumentally silly. The government is making use of an American public, which is massively ignorant about who and what Iran is and is capable of, to go legislatively nutbars in our own country. Don't ask me <i>why</i> they're doing it, but they are. Perhaps more importantly, we're being told that we need legislation to protect against an incapable enemy in a war that <i>we</i> started. If that makes sense to you, chances are you need psychiatric care.<br />
<br />
And even more problematic, and frustrating for me personally, is that our government isn't even putting in the effort to fool me properly. It's one thing to have Colin Powell waving a test tube at Congress and shouting "<i>We're all going to die!"</i>, but it's quite another to have folks like Gen. William Shelton talking about potential risks in a potential war that we potentially started with a potential threat that we created by attacking it. That's entirely too much potential and not enough blatant falsehood. If the government wants to bullshit us, they can't go in half way. I need real creative lying, not nonsense reports that they have to subsequently pull because they're...you know...made up.
<blockquote>
<i>ProPublica <a href="http://www.propublica.org/article/widely-cited-government-study-on-iranian-spies-pulled-for-revisions">reported yesterday</a> that a widely cited Defense Department study claiming Iran's Intelligence Ministry constitutes "a terror and assassination force 30,000 strong" has been "pulled for revisions." It seems there's no proof whatsoever that the 30,000 number wasn't pulled out of thin air.</i></blockquote>
See, it's not that I'm siding with the pea-shooters here, it's that I'm more scared of the guys that started this war with their tanks. Particularly when the result is poorly-conceived legislation.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130123/08103221763/cyber-war-one-sided-battle-against-trumped-up-enemy.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130123/08103221763/cyber-war-one-sided-battle-against-trumped-up-enemy.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130123/08103221763/cyber-war-one-sided-battle-against-trumped-up-enemy.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>what-is-it-good-for?--absolutely-nothin'</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130123/08103221763</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 17:00:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Going To Space</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101114/23425611871/dailydirt-going-to-space.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101114/23425611871/dailydirt-going-to-space.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Manned space exploration is a lofty goal that requires quite a bit of groundwork before people crawl into a metal cage strapped to a rocket. Only about a dozen countries have successfully launched objects into <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_first_orbital_launches_by_country">orbit</a>, and the list of nations that can send people into space is much shorter (with the retirement of the space shuttles, the US arguably is not on the list anymore). But rocket technologies are only getting better and less expensive, and there are more and more plans (both governmental and commercial) for humans to explore space.

<ul>
 
<li> <a title="http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-01/09/mars-one" href="http://bit.ly/U4PyoO">Mars One is now looking for people willing to become astronauts, train for 8 years, and go on a ONE-WAY trip to Mars (and also be part of this globally-televised mission).</a> The first team to go will be democratically elected from six teams of four astronauts, and the launch is scheduled for September 2022. [<a href="http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-01/09/mars-one">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=iran-launching-monkey-into-space" href="http://bit.ly/W3jMt8">Iran is planning to launch a monkey into space sometime in February 2013.</a> Iran has a goal of sending a human into space by 2020 and putting someone on the moon by 2025. (And Iran has already sent a rat, two turtles and a worm into space.) [<a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=iran-launching-monkey-into-space">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2114320/Can-humanity-cope-long-term-space-travel-Scans-reveal-damage-brains-eyes-astronauts.html" href="http://bit.ly/WkigAp">MRI scans of astronauts who spent over a month in space show that long term exposure to microgravity can damage eyeballs and parts of the brain.</a> The problems are similar to having intracranial hypertension -- where the brain experiences pressures that press it against the skull and eye sockets. [<a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2114320/Can-humanity-cope-long-term-space-travel-Scans-reveal-damage-brains-eyes-astronauts.html">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://www.philly.com/philly/news/science/HealthDay672231_20130107_Psychological_Woes_Could_Arise_During_Interplanetary_Spaceflight__Study.html" href="http://bit.ly/103kZ21">A simulated 520-day mission to Mars found that astronauts may need to keep Earth-like schedules or else they'll have trouble sleeping and possibly acquire some mood disorders.</a> This ground-based study will affect plans for manned Mars missions, and it could also have implications for people who live with disrupted sleep and prolonged exposure to artificial lighting. [<a href="http://www.philly.com/philly/news/science/HealthDay672231_20130107_Psychological_Woes_Could_Arise_During_Interplanetary_Spaceflight__Study.html">url</a>]</li>

</ul>


If you'd like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt post</a>.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101114/23425611871/dailydirt-going-to-space.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101114/23425611871/dailydirt-going-to-space.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101114/23425611871/dailydirt-going-to-space.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20101114/23425611871</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 23:55:30 PST</pubDate>
<title>Iran's Latest Move To Stifle Dissent: Requiring ID Cards To Go Online</title>
<dc:creator>Glyn Moody</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121124/13340921130/irans-latest-move-to-stifle-dissent-requiring-id-cards-to-go-online.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121124/13340921130/irans-latest-move-to-stifle-dissent-requiring-id-cards-to-go-online.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ For a while, Techdirt has been tracking Iran's continuing efforts to throttle its citizens' access to troublesome materials online.  These have included <a href="https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121008/02233020633/irans-latest-aggressive-censorship-plan-block-all-audio-video-files.shtml">blocking</a> all audio and video files, and even <a href="https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121003/06275820579/iranians-protest-leads-to-return-gmail.shtml">shutting down</a> Gmail, albeit temporarily.

But stopping people accessing sites in this way is not the only approach.  Here's another, from a report by Der Spiegel (<a href="http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/iran-ueberwachung-der-buerger-mit-biometrischem-ausweis-a-868076.html">original in German</a>):

<i><blockquote>Iran's government is introducing a biometric ID card that will function at the same time as an access card to the Web. Without registration via "smart card" the Internet will be blocked for citizens -- an insidious strategy for monitoring the opposition on the Internet.</blockquote></i>

All Iranians over the age of 14 will be required to have one of these new ID cards, which will store a digitised fingerprint and other personal information in an encrypted form.  Once these cards are ubiquitous in the offline world, it's only a short step to require them to be used everywhere in the online world too, which would effectively abolish all anonymity and privacy there.  
<p>
Iran's latest move is a useful reminder that wherever they are used, ID cards or their equivalent can become powerful enabling tools for perfect online surveillance.  Other oppressive regimes will doubtless be watching the Iran experience closely.
</p><p>
Follow me @glynmoody on <a href="http://twitter.com/glynmoody">Twitter</a> or <a href="http://identi.ca/glynmoody">identi.ca</a>, and on <a href="https://plus.google.com/100647702320088380533">Google+</a></p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121124/13340921130/irans-latest-move-to-stifle-dissent-requiring-id-cards-to-go-online.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121124/13340921130/irans-latest-move-to-stifle-dissent-requiring-id-cards-to-go-online.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121124/13340921130/irans-latest-move-to-stifle-dissent-requiring-id-cards-to-go-online.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>dangerous-ideas</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121124/13340921130</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 8 Oct 2012 09:49:07 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Iran's Latest Aggressive Censorship Plan: Block All Audio &amp; Video Files</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121008/02233020633/irans-latest-aggressive-censorship-plan-block-all-audio-video-files.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121008/02233020633/irans-latest-aggressive-censorship-plan-block-all-audio-video-files.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ It's no secret that the Iranian government has a bit of an uncomfortable relationship with the internet.  First of all, it's trying to build <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110531/13372014492/censoring-begins-home-iran-announces-plans-to-build-its-own-internet-operating-system.shtml">its own</a> internet, at which point it supposedly would like to block out that "other" internet completely.  It's also pretty <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121003/06275820579/iranians-protest-leads-to-return-gmail.shtml">aggressive</a> in censoring various sites it doesn't like.  Over the past few days, it's apparently gone a step further.  While there were plenty of reports about it blocking YouTube, someone who prefers to remain anonymous sent over this story, saying that Iran's Filtering Committee (IFC) has <a href="http://storify.com/smallmedia/iran-blocks-mp3-mp4-avi-and-swf-files" target="_blank">started blocking all kinds of audio-visual files</a>, based on filetype:
<blockquote><i>
Then, on October 4, 2012, the IFC began preventing files hosted on servers outside Iran from entering the country by blocking specific file extensions. At the time of writing, this policy applies to all MP3, MP4, AVI and SWF files. This kind of filtering was used after the controversial presidential elections of 2009, amidst harsh crackdowns on freedom of information, and coincides with Iran's current economic crisis and the ensuing protests. 
</i></blockquote>
Apparently, those blocks do not apply to those files hosted within the country -- just those from foreign sites.  Still, that's a pretty extreme move: blocking all of those files takes away a significant part of the audio-visual part of the web.  The article highlights a number of Iranians complaining on Twitter about how these blocks are having a severe negative impact on what they do.  Still, it's yet another warning for what happens when a government can aggressively filter the internet in extreme ways.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121008/02233020633/irans-latest-aggressive-censorship-plan-block-all-audio-video-files.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121008/02233020633/irans-latest-aggressive-censorship-plan-block-all-audio-video-files.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121008/02233020633/irans-latest-aggressive-censorship-plan-block-all-audio-video-files.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>seems-a-bit-excessive</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121008/02233020633</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 3 Oct 2012 19:55:53 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Iranians Protest Leads To The Return Of Gmail</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Geigner</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121003/06275820579/iranians-protest-leads-to-return-gmail.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121003/06275820579/iranians-protest-leads-to-return-gmail.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ As the fervor over the <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120913/13561520377/youtube-restricts-access-to-anti-islam-movie-trailer-egypt-libya.shtml">hateful</a> <i>Innocence Of Muslims</i> movie is beginning to die down, you may have heard that in response to that film the Iranian government blocked access to Gmail. There has been much postulation over why Gmail suddenly became a target, including what seems to be a ridiculous claim from the Iranian Telecommunications Ministry that they were simply trying to put a heavy block on YouTube (it's been blocked since long before this movie showed up). But, <a href="http://www.ibtimes.com/google-gmail-back-online-iran-after-week-long-block-did-innocence-muslims-cause-ban-798869">as most of us probably expected, Gmail is back on</a>.
<blockquote>
<i>Regardless of whether or not the block on Gmail was intentional, the obstruction to one of the world&rsquo;s most popular email services resulted in many complaints from Iran officials. Legislator Hossein Garousi reportedly threatened to summon Iran&rsquo;s telecommunications minister Reza Taqipour for parliamentary questioning if the service was not unblocked.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<i>Iran continues to block any site or network that expresses &ldquo;anti-government views,&rdquo; including sites like Twitter, Facebook and YouTube, which helped rally citizens and circularize the massive protests following the questionable re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.</i></blockquote>
Now, the blocking of such sites probably doesn't shock any of us anymore. It's unfortunate, but they're doing it. Hell, Iran has previously announced <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110531/13372014492/censoring-begins-home-iran-announces-plans-to-build-its-own-internet-operating-system.shtml">plans</a> to build their very own internet. The good news is that Iranian citizens aren't simply rolling over at their government's heavy-handed censorship of the internet. They know how to use technology to get around the filters too.
<blockquote>
<i>Even though YouTube was previously blocked in Iran before the film was released and Gmail access was barred, Reuters reports on the ability of Iranian citizens to &ldquo;circumvent Internet restrictions&rdquo; using virtual private network (VPN) software, which makes it appear as if the computer accessing the content is located in another country.</i></blockquote>
So best of luck to you, Iranian government, because you're going to need it if you think that suppressing thought and the freedom to access an unfettered internet is going to work out for you in the long term. At least you can rest easy knowing that your citizens can't play online <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120830/09322220220/blizzard-blocking-iranian-wow-players-due-to-us-sanctions.shtml">roleplaying games</a>. We've got that covered from our end.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121003/06275820579/iranians-protest-leads-to-return-gmail.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121003/06275820579/iranians-protest-leads-to-return-gmail.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121003/06275820579/iranians-protest-leads-to-return-gmail.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>but-still-no-youtube</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121003/06275820579</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2012 05:31:19 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Blizzard Blocking Iranian WoW Players Due To US Sanctions</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Geigner</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120830/09322220220/blizzard-blocking-iranian-wow-players-due-to-us-sanctions.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120830/09322220220/blizzard-blocking-iranian-wow-players-due-to-us-sanctions.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A ways back I noted a rather nice story about Israeli and Iranian citizens using the <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120320/11215618174/israeliiranian-citizens-reach-out-over-facebook-peace.shtml">internet and social media</a> to reach out and express solidarity with one another, despite their governments&#39; differences. I found it rather encouraging that political rhetoric from both sides could be dismissed in favor of a humanist approach, no matter the vulgar generalizations each side might hear about the other. If you weren&#39;t already aware, despite the rivalry of the two nations, United States citizens and Iranians have had ways to interact over the internet as well, such as through online gaming platforms like World Of Warcraft. That is, they <i>were</i> able to do so, until the US government&nbsp;made more noise recently about&nbsp;the sanctions in Iran and Blizzard finally blocked Iranian users.
<center>
<a href="http://imgur.com/7xdEG"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/7xdEG.jpg" width=300 /></a>
<br /><br />
<span style="font-size: 10px">"I want you!!! ...to enjoy the Mists of Pandaria Persian-free."</span>
</center>
CNN has the story of how, due to sanctions against Iran, <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2012/08/29/technology/iran-world-of-warcraft/index.html">Blizzard was forced to block gamers from Iran from playing WoW</a>. Apparently the&nbsp;renewed pressure on trade with Iran resulted in&nbsp;this block.
<blockquote>
<i>Last week, a user claiming to be from Iran posted on an official World of Warcraft forum to report that the game was inaccessible. A Blizzard employee <a href="http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/5168067998?page=97" target="_blank">responded to the thread</a> on Saturday, writing that "United States trade restrictions and economic sanction laws prohibit Blizzard from doing business with residents of certain nations, including Iran."</i><br />
<br />
<i>"This week, Blizzard tightened up its procedures to ensure compliance with these laws, and players connecting from the affected nations are restricted from access to Blizzard games and services," the employee said.</i></blockquote>
In a fun little addendum, the Blizzard employee also mentioned that the company is unable to refund subscriptions as well.
<center>
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/foeock/7892858952/" title="WORLD OF WARCRAFTS &#038; DIABLO III ARTS by foeock, on Flickr"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/PFPMI.jpg" width=350 /></a><br />
<span style="font-size: 10px">You can have your rials back when you pry them from our cold dead fingers...</span>
<br />
<span style="font-size: 10px"><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/foeock/7892858952/">Image source</a>. CC BY 2.0</span></center>
Now, perhaps it&#39;s just me, but color me confused as to how sanctions against Iran need to be broad enough that online gaming is caught in the mix. Perhaps more importantly, as <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120830/02265920216/want-to-know-how-weak-gops-internet-freedom-platform-is-mpaa-loves-it.shtml">both</a> <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120829/13584220210/president-obama-does-reddit-ama-gives-weak-politicians-answer-about-internet-freedom.shtml">parties</a> like to make a lot of noise about "internet freedom" and its application to broadening freedom and Democracy in nations that enjoy little of both, does this result from our sanctions jive with how our <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120828/11015220181/us-india-stop-censorsing-websites-india-wikileaks-hello-us-thats-different.shtml">State Department</a> seems to want to encourage governments around the world to allow open communication through the internet and social media? While I understand the occasional need to punish a bad government through trade sanctions, this particular result doesn&#39;t seem to do that at all. Instead, it only cuts Iranians off from those that could tell them how great freedom is.<br />
&nbsp;<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120830/09322220220/blizzard-blocking-iranian-wow-players-due-to-us-sanctions.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120830/09322220220/blizzard-blocking-iranian-wow-players-due-to-us-sanctions.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120830/09322220220/blizzard-blocking-iranian-wow-players-due-to-us-sanctions.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>that-will-teach-them</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120830/09322220220</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:33:52 PDT</pubDate>
<title>WIPO: Giving Computers For 'Patents' To North Korea And Iran Didn't Violate UN Sanctions... But We'll Stop Doing It</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120720/02204319773/wipo-giving-computers-patents-to-north-korea-iran-didnt-violate-un-sanctions-well-stop-doing-it.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120720/02204319773/wipo-giving-computers-patents-to-north-korea-iran-didnt-violate-un-sanctions-well-stop-doing-it.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ I still think that one of the craziest stories of the year was the news that the World Intellectual Property Organization, WIPO, was caught defying UN sanctions (despite being a part of the UN) and giving computer systems to both <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120404/12263218371/ip-above-all-else-wipo-defies-un-sanctions-to-give-computers-to-north-korea.shtml">North Korea</a> and <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120705/13081119596/wipo-defied-un-sanctions-to-give-computers-to-iran-its-patent-system-wink-wink.shtml">Iran</a> -- officially to help both set up a database of international patents.  Of course, none of this makes any sense, considering that neither country has shown much, if any, interest in respecting foreign patents.  However, both <i>have</i> shown quite a lot of interest in building nuclear bombs... for which they need computing power.
<br /><br />
The whole thing should be seen as a massive scandal that calls into question the judgment of those at the top of WIPO -- but it doesn't seem to be fazing too many people.  WIPO recently <a href="http://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2012/article_0016.html" target="_blank">released a statement trying to play down the whole thing</a>, while at the same time admitting that it was changing its policies and likely would stop handing computers over to such regimes based on promises that they'd be used to setup patent databases.  In other words, while it won't do it again, leadership there doesn't seem particularly apologetic for its actions.
<blockquote><i>
The provision of standard IT equipment to the IP offices of the Democratic People&#8217;s Republic of Korea (DPRK) and the Islamic Republic of Iran that occurred in the preceding years, within the context of the Organization&#8217;s business modernization program for IP Offices in developing countries, is being referred to the relevant UN Sanctions Committees for their information and guidance.
<br /><br />
The initial steps are being undertaken for a full external and independent review of the technical assistance provided to countries subject to UN sanctions.
<br /><br />
A new internal instruction has been issued ending any provision of IT hardware in any of WIPO&#8217;s technical assistance programs. 
</i></blockquote>
It still amazes me that anyone at WIPO thought this was a good idea.  The fact that they still refuse to admit doing anything wrong suggests they don't even realize how badly they were played by those governments.
<br /><br />
Either way, WIPO boss Francis Gurry did an interview with IP-Watch where he continues to <a href="http://www.ip-watch.org/2012/07/20/wipos-gurry-discusses-irannorth-korea-denies-whistleblower-retaliation/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ip-watch+%28Intellectual+Property+Watch%29" target="_blank">downplay the seriousness of the issue</a>, and also says he doesn't feel any compulsion to respond to the US's stated concerns about the program.  He says that they stopped sending the program because of some "ambiguity."
<blockquote><i>
&#8220;There&#8217;s a relatively small number of countries who benefit from hardware as opposed to our complete software package,&#8221; Gurry said. &#8220;And since certain member states perceive that there is some ambiguity in the use of standard IT equipment &#8211; printers, cartridges, PCs and servers &#8211; we think the only complete answer we can give because of their perception of ambiguity is to say, we no longer do that.&#8221;
<br /><br />
&#8220;We can argue for hours and hours and hours about the legal interpretation, that it&#8217;s only a few PCs, and so on,&#8221; he said. &#8220;But if there&#8217;s lingering doubt, let's eliminate it.&#8221;
</i></blockquote>
Something about that statement reminds me of a particular <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKGjOE_7bYI" target="_blank">Monty Python quote</a>.  Either way, it still seems like WIPO still doesn't understand why its actions are being questioned here.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120720/02204319773/wipo-giving-computers-patents-to-north-korea-iran-didnt-violate-un-sanctions-well-stop-doing-it.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120720/02204319773/wipo-giving-computers-patents-to-north-korea-iran-didnt-violate-un-sanctions-well-stop-doing-it.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120720/02204319773/wipo-giving-computers-patents-to-north-korea-iran-didnt-violate-un-sanctions-well-stop-doing-it.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>you-know,-just-because</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120720/02204319773</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 6 Jul 2012 09:15:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>WIPO Defied UN Sanctions To Give Computers To Iran... For Its Patent System (Wink, Wink)</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120705/13081119596/wipo-defied-un-sanctions-to-give-computers-to-iran-its-patent-system-wink-wink.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120705/13081119596/wipo-defied-un-sanctions-to-give-computers-to-iran-its-patent-system-wink-wink.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Way to go WIPO.  You may recall back in April we wrote about how the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), a part of the UN, flat out <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120404/12263218371/ip-above-all-else-wipo-defies-un-sanctions-to-give-computers-to-north-korea.shtml">ignored</a> UN sanctions and gave computers to North Korea, <i>claiming</i> that they were to help North Korea allow for better searching of international patents.  This is, of course, ridiculous, because North Korea clearly could not care any less about anyone's patents -- but does want computing power for its nuclear program.  Given that, I guess it should come as little surprise that WIPO is <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-04/u-s-probes-un-s-wipo-over-projects-with-sanctioned-iran.html" target="_blank">now being accused of the exact same thing with Iran</a> (found via <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/07/un-defies-own-sanctions-against-iran-by-sending-computer-gear/" target="_blank">Ars Technica</a>).  Yup, WIPO apparently supplied computers to Iran to "modernize" its patent office, because we all know how much Iran cares about respecting the patents of others.
<blockquote><i>
Geneva-based WIPO has a mandate from members to help developing countries modernize their patent offices. Iran and North Korea, both subjects of international trade embargoes including Security Council resolutions, were both beneficiaries of &#8220;standard information-technology equipment&#8221; after meeting WIPO&#8217;s needs-assessment and validation procedures, according to Edward Kwakwa, legal counsel at the organization.
</i></blockquote>
This would be the very same Edward Kwakwa, who in a private email that was revealed when the North Korea story broke, told a very different story:
<blockquote><i>
I would suggest we go ahead ONLY if you think this arrangement is of crucial importance to WIPO. But given the sensitivities and the broad sweep of the sanctions language, I would prefer that WIPO simply desist from entering into any such arrangement, as it does not seem to be of any consequence or benefit to WIPO, and can bring more trouble than benefit ultimately.
</i></blockquote>
We noted in the story about North Korea that WIPO officials admitted that they had done these kinds of operations before.  I had, at the time, assumed they just meant with North Korea.  I didn't realize they also meant with other countries seeking to be nuclear powers and under UN sanctions.  It makes you wonder who else WIPO is helping to "modernize its patent office."<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120705/13081119596/wipo-defied-un-sanctions-to-give-computers-to-iran-its-patent-system-wink-wink.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120705/13081119596/wipo-defied-un-sanctions-to-give-computers-to-iran-its-patent-system-wink-wink.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120705/13081119596/wipo-defied-un-sanctions-to-give-computers-to-iran-its-patent-system-wink-wink.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>wow</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120705/13081119596</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 1 Jun 2012 14:42:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>NYTimes Reveals Details Of How US Created Stuxnet... And How A Programming Error Led To Its Escape</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120601/04275319163/nytimes-reveals-details-how-us-created-stuxnet-how-programming-error-led-to-its-escape.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120601/04275319163/nytimes-reveals-details-how-us-created-stuxnet-how-programming-error-led-to-its-escape.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ With a lot of new attention being paid to the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/31/technology/researchers-link-flame-virus-to-stuxnet-and-duqu.html" target="_blank">Flame malware</a> that was datamining computers around the Middle East, there have been plenty of comparisons to Stuxnet, the famous bit of malware that was targeted at <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110117/02205812696/stuxnet-increasingly-sounding-like-movie-plot.shtml">mucking up</a> Iran's nuclear power program.  So it's very interesting timing to see the NY Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/01/world/middleeast/obama-ordered-wave-of-cyberattacks-against-iran.html?pagewanted=2&#038;_r=1&#038;seid=auto&#038;smid=tw-nytimespolitics&#038;pagewanted=all" target="_blank">reveal many of the details behind Stuxnet</a>, including confirming that it was a program driven by the US, with a lot of help from the Israelis.  Many, many, many people suspected that already, but it certainly appears that the NYTimes has numerous detailed sources that support this claim.
<br /><br />
Perhaps even more interesting, however, is the fact that Stuxnet (which apparently originally infected Iranian nuclear plants via workers using USB keys when they shouldn't) was never supposed to get out into the wild.  It was supposed to just sit in the computers at the power plant, confusing the hell out of the Iranians.  But, obviously, that didn't happen.   Having that info get out into the wild probably killed off the effort much earlier than expected, since it basically explained to the Iranians what was happening.
<br /><br />
It's also noteworthy that a source in the article claims that Stuxnet was the first example of using a computer attack to destroy physical items (it made centrifuges work irregularly in ways that could cause them to break).  Some have therefore used Stuxnet as "proof" of the cybersecurity threats out there and the misnamed "cyberwar."  I'm not sure that's true.  Stuxnet still appears to be a rather unique case in terms of a very, very specific target that had some significant vulnerabilities.  We hear lots of worries about cybersecurity impacting physical infrastructure -- and I'm sure that those who wish to do harm would love to bring down power grids and airplanes through some form of a cyber attack.  But I'm not convinced that the success of Stuxnet is so easily replicable in other such areas.  And I don't see how that automatically justifies effectively tossing out all privacy protections.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120601/04275319163/nytimes-reveals-details-how-us-created-stuxnet-how-programming-error-led-to-its-escape.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120601/04275319163/nytimes-reveals-details-how-us-created-stuxnet-how-programming-error-led-to-its-escape.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120601/04275319163/nytimes-reveals-details-how-us-created-stuxnet-how-programming-error-led-to-its-escape.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>when's-the-movie-coming-out</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120601/04275319163</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 08:10:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Iran Threatens Action After Google Wipes Persian Gulf (Label) Off Map</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120517/16135118959/iran-threatens-action-after-google-wipes-persian-gulf-label-off-map.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120517/16135118959/iran-threatens-action-after-google-wipes-persian-gulf-label-off-map.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Putting together maps may <i>seem</i> like a simple thing, but it can often have significant consequences, especially involving national identity and nationalistic feelings.  And, given the prominence of Google Maps, the company has been no stranger to controversy over some of its mapping choices.  Back in 2005, Taiwanese politicians protested Google referring to the island <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4308678.stm" target="_blank">as a province of China</a>.  Similarly, there have been complaints about Palestinian territories being <a href="https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!category-topic/maps/map-wont-load/QRGDDzlDuMw" target="_blank">labeled as a part of Israel</a>.  Of course, given the very well documented disputes about the issues in both regions, it's no surprise that the mapping choices (either way) would likely upset some.  Of course, my favorite Google Maps dispute may have been when Nicaragua <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101105/00243211732/nicaragua-accidentally-invades-costa-rica-blames-google-maps.shtml">accidentally invaded Costa Rica</a> and then blamed Google Maps for the mistake, which came close to creating a <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101113/22412311860/google-maps-error-dispute-continues-to-escalate-between-nicaragua-and-costa-rica.shtml">serious international incident</a>.
<br /><br />
The latest such story involves Iran <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/17/world/meast/iran-google-gulf/index.html?hpt=hp_t2" target="_blank">threatening to sue Google for not labeling the Persian Gulf</a>.  The article goes through the details, and Google seems to dance around the subject.  A spokesperson claims that not every body of water is labeled -- but as the report points out, lots of other bodies of water in the area (including many that are significantly smaller) are labelled.   As the article notes, there is at least <i>some</i> dispute over what the body of water is called, suggesting that Google's way of dealing with the controversy this time around is to just not label it at all.  Though, clearly, that doesn't seem to have helped.
<br /><br />
Of course, what I'm wondering is just what kind of "legal action" Iran thinks it can reasonably take here.  I'm sure they can go after Google in an Iranian court, but I can't see how that matters.  Google is outside their jurisdiction and the "worst" case scenario is that Google gets blocked.  But given Iran's widespread internet censorship, and the expectation that it's about to expand greatly, it's not clear that even that would be a big change.  If Iran were to sue somewhere else, what would be the basis?  Not liking how a map is labeled doesn't automatically make it illegal.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120517/16135118959/iran-threatens-action-after-google-wipes-persian-gulf-label-off-map.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120517/16135118959/iran-threatens-action-after-google-wipes-persian-gulf-label-off-map.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120517/16135118959/iran-threatens-action-after-google-wipes-persian-gulf-label-off-map.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>under-what-law?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120517/16135118959</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 09:09:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Iran's Internet Filters Filter Out Leader's Screed Against Getting Around Filters</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120511/02325318874/irans-internet-filters-filter-out-leaders-screed-against-getting-around-filters.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120511/02325318874/irans-internet-filters-filter-out-leaders-screed-against-getting-around-filters.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Well this would be funny if it weren't so sad and didn't involve mass censorship.  Iran has been getting a lot of attention lately for its plans to increase its internet filtering -- and potentially even set up its own "safe" (read: heavily monitored) local internet.  For now, as the filters have been going up, apparently lots of sophisticated internet users in Iran have been figuring out how to get around them.  No problem.  Iran's "supreme leader" Ayatollah Ali Khamenei simply issued a "fatwa" against using anti-filtering tools -- and that was published to the web.... <a href="http://www.rferl.org/content/iran_filters_khamenei_fatwa_on_antifiltering_internet/24575143.html" target="_blank">where it was promptly filtered</a>.   Yes, you read that right.  His attack on anti-filtering technology was itself a victim of the filter -- such that you couldn't read it unless you were using anti-filtering technology (the same technology the fatwa was condemning).
<br /><br />
Apparently this happened because (of course) Iran's internet filter is so ridiculously unsophisticated that it works based on keywords -- and the mere mentioning of anti-filtering software likely set off the filters.  Of course, while you might hope this would lead to a realization that such filters are not a good idea, somehow I doubt there will be any such epiphany.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120511/02325318874/irans-internet-filters-filter-out-leaders-screed-against-getting-around-filters.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120511/02325318874/irans-internet-filters-filter-out-leaders-screed-against-getting-around-filters.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120511/02325318874/irans-internet-filters-filter-out-leaders-screed-against-getting-around-filters.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>shouldn't-a-lightbulb-be-going-off-somewhere?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120511/02325318874</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 13:57:19 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Israeli/Iranian Citizens Reach Out Over Facebook For Peace</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Geigner</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120320/11215618174/israeliiranian-citizens-reach-out-over-facebook-peace.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120320/11215618174/israeliiranian-citizens-reach-out-over-facebook-peace.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Disparate aspects of the ongoing advance of technology throughout the world are coming together in a very interesting and heartwarming result. As groups continue the attempt to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120103/04524417259/550-challenge-can-we-connect-everyone-world-online-yes-everyone-2018.shtml">connect everyone</a> in the world by the near-future, we've also seen how social media has been <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110115/21524712692/pointless-question-week-was-tunisia-twitter-wikileaks-revolution.shtml">used recently</a> to organize and deploy protests and citizen activism, particularly in the Middle East. But those two stories are converging into a fascinating display of communication between two rival nations in that troubled region.
<br /><br />
In case you've been sleeping under a rock these past few months, it turns out the governments of Iran and Israel have some minor quibbles with one another. As a result, there's been much saber-rattling and boot-stomping between the two governments and popular opinion tends to be it's a matter of when, not if, the bullets and bombs begin flying. If one is not nuanced enough to separate out these nation's governments from their people, one might assume the common people in each state are equally rivalrous. This separation is made all the more difficult by the way both nations close off communication with one another, such that an individual in Israel is completely unable to make a simple phone call to an Iranian area code (it's blocked at the government level).
<br /><br />
But if you happen to think closing off all communication is silly and counter-productive (like me), you'll be delighted to know that the internet is here to save the day. CNN has the story of one Israeli citizen, Ronny Edry, a graphic designer, who thinks the prospect of pre-emptive war with Iran is absolutely insane, so he developed <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/19/world/meast/israel-iran-social-media/index.html?hpt=hp_c1">some simple but striking "posters" and put them up on Facebook</a>.
<blockquote>
<i>"My idea was simple, I was trying to reach the other side. There are all these talks about war, Iran is coming to bomb us and we bomb them back, we are sitting and waiting. I wanted to say the simple words that this war is crazy," said Edry.</i>
</blockquote>
The images featured pictures of various Israelies, such as Edry himself and his neighbors along with their children, and a message:
<br /><br />
<center><a href="http://imgur.com/DrUm6"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/DrUm6.jpg" title="Hosted by imgur.com" alt="" /></a></center>
<br /><br />
<p>Now if you're cynical, or you watch too much cable news, you might be wondering what the big deal is. So an Israeli made some posters and put them on Facebook. So what?
<blockquote><p><i>The response, said Edry, was overwhelming. "In a few hours, I had hundreds of shares and thousands of likes and it was like something was happening.</i></p><p><i>"I think it's really amazing that someone from Iran poked me and said 'Hello, I'm from Iran, I saw your "poster" on Facebook,' " Edry said.</i>
</p></blockquote></p><p>And that's when the posters created by <i>Iranian citizens in return</i> began flooding in. Posters with messages of peace and commonality. I found one particular post on Edry's Facebook page from an Iranian to be particularly heartening:
<blockquote><p><i>We share a common history, have been sharing both our great and ancient cultures, languages and poetry together. ... We are so similar, and politicians cannot cut a tie that has been tied thousands of years ago. I am proud to have you as my friends.</i>
</p></blockquote></p><p>I'm not going to go all peace, love and flower power on you, but this is why the internet age is so important. It's also why cutting off communication between nations, or allowing even the first steps of internet censorship to take hold, must be stopped at all costs. It's not just about copyright, or flash mobs, or YouTube videos showing Spaceballs clips. The internet is ultimately about <i>people sharing</i> with one another, whether they're sharing thoughts, images like this, or whatever. It's about commonality. It's about creating a web of bonds through which communication and understanding can flow.</p><p>And now, I'm realizing, it's about giving every man and woman the power to do what their blowhard, acrimonious politicians <i>won't</i> do: talk to one another.</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120320/11215618174/israeliiranian-citizens-reach-out-over-facebook-peace.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120320/11215618174/israeliiranian-citizens-reach-out-over-facebook-peace.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120320/11215618174/israeliiranian-citizens-reach-out-over-facebook-peace.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>come-on-people-now-smile-on-your-brother</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120320/11215618174</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 19:39:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Iranian Filmmaker Banned From Filmmaking... Makes Documentary Via His iPhone About His Plight</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120210/01082817724/iranian-filmmaker-banned-filmmaking-makes-documentary-via-his-iphone-about-his-plight.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120210/01082817724/iranian-filmmaker-banned-filmmaking-makes-documentary-via-his-iphone-about-his-plight.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A little over a year ago, I asked how long it would be until we had a full, professional quality feature film filmed <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20101205/22193512135/how-long-until-feature-length-movie-is-filmed-entirely-with-smartphones.shtml">entirely with smartphones</a>.  This one doesn't completely qualify, but it is quite interesting.   <a href="https://twitter.com/#!/rosspruden/statuses/167515002968883201" target="_blank">Ross Pruden</a> points our attention to the story of <a href="http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/independent/thisisnotafilm/" target="_blank"><i>This Is Not A Film</i></a>, the documentary from widely respected Iranian filmmaker Jafar Panahi.  The story behind this film is pretty crazy.  Basically, Panahi was arrested and given a six-year sentence in prison, while also <i>being barred from making films</i> for 20 years.  While he appealed the sentence, he was apparently able to remain in his Tehran apartment under house arrest... and decided to document his life as he dealt with this situation by filming it, often using iPhones to capture scenes (though not entirely).  The film has been shown at various film festivals, but is hitting US theaters starting February 29th, and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFmZjcgH_iE&#038;width=850&#038;height=511" target="_blank">the trailer</a> recently came out:
<center>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/fFmZjcgH_iE?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
</center>
Apparently the film itself was smuggled out of Iran to Cannes by putting it on a USB key, and then baking that USB key into a cake that was shipped out of the country.  In all the news coverage of this film, I haven't seen anything about how the Iranian government reacted to this film, which they must know about by now.
<br /><br />
Either way, there's something of a statement being made here about the power of smartphone cameras these days.  It really was just a few years ago that the idea of mixing cameras with phones was widely panned as a <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20040310/002654.shtml">dumb idea</a>.  And now they're helping internationally renowned filmmakers who are being censored and persecuted to <i>keep making their art</i>.  It also says something about the <i>need</i> for some creators to keep making their art, no matter what the challenges to doing so. That's really amazing. 
<br /><br />
Also, it starts to lead you down the path to rethinking questions about censorship and free speech limitations.  Obviously, banning someone from making a film is a form of censorship and an infringement on free speech rights.  And, of course, Iran does not have a particularly good reputation on free speech issues.  But technology changes things.  When "making a film" is as easy as clicking a button on the phone you carry at all times, it <i>changes the equation</i>.  "Making a film" is no longer "making a film."  It's just something you and anyone else can do at any time.  When that happens, the very concept of banning someone from making a film... just seems silly.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120210/01082817724/iranian-filmmaker-banned-filmmaking-makes-documentary-via-his-iphone-about-his-plight.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120210/01082817724/iranian-filmmaker-banned-filmmaking-makes-documentary-via-his-iphone-about-his-plight.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120210/01082817724/iranian-filmmaker-banned-filmmaking-makes-documentary-via-his-iphone-about-his-plight.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>necessity-is-the-mother...</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120210/01082817724</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 11:43:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>The List Of Internet Censoring Countries The MPAA Thinks Provide A Good Example For The US</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111219/02551217124/list-internet-censoring-countries-mpaa-thinks-provide-good-example-us.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111219/02551217124/list-internet-censoring-countries-mpaa-thinks-provide-good-example-us.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ As we continue the fight over SOPA and PROTECT IP (PIPA), the MPAA and the politicians supporting these bills are ratcheting up the ridiculousness.  You may recall that we recently highlighted the absolutely ridiculous paper by Daniel Castro for the shill shop ITIF, supposedly <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111208/04204617007/sopa-supporter-if-you-use-dnssec-you-can-ignore-sopapipa.shtml">responding to SOPA/PIPA critics</a>, but really showing just how weak and ridiculous the arguments on the pro-censorship side are.  One of the points Castro raises is that DNS filtering "works."  How does he know?  Because, he points out, thirteen countries already do DNS filtering and research from Harvard suggests not too many people try to get around the filters.
<br /><br />
Of course, Castro doesn't happen to name those thirteen countries, so you have to <a href="http://www.publicknowledge.org/blog/it-worked-china-why-not-united-states" target="_blank">go digging for them</a>, which is how you come up with the following list:
<ul>
<li>China</li>
<li>Iran</li>
<li>United Arab Emirates</li>
<li>Armenia</li>
<li>Ethiopia</li>
<li>Saudi Arabia</li>
<li>Yemen</li>
<li>Bahrain</li>
<li>Burma (Myanmar)</li>
<li>Syria</li>
<li>Turkmenistan</li>
<li>Uzbekistan</li>
<li>Vietnam</li>
</ul>
Yes, it's a sort of a who's who of the most repressive regimes on the planet.  I think the only reason North Korea didn't make the list is because no one has internet access there.  So this raises two key points.  Perhaps the reason the filtering has worked in those countries, and not too many people try to get around the filters, is because they know if they're caught, they might get locked up or killed.
<br /><br />
But, more to the point: is this <b><i>really</i></b> the list of countries that Lamar Smith, Patrick Leahy, the MPAA and Daniel Castro think that the US ought to go about emulating?  <i>Really?</i><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111219/02551217124/list-internet-censoring-countries-mpaa-thinks-provide-good-example-us.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111219/02551217124/list-internet-censoring-countries-mpaa-thinks-provide-good-example-us.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111219/02551217124/list-internet-censoring-countries-mpaa-thinks-provide-good-example-us.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>um,-really?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20111219/02551217124</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2011 17:00:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Getting To Space Ain't Easy</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100802/22570010460/dailydirt-getting-to-space-aint-easy.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100802/22570010460/dailydirt-getting-to-space-aint-easy.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The failure rate of space programs makes space travel a bit of a risky venture. Sitting on enough explosive materials to escape the Earth's gravity isn't the safest-sounding job, but there are still plenty of willing volunteers to try it. Here are just a few stories on some recent space missions. 
<ul>
<li> <a title="http://dvice.com/archives/2011/11/russian-phobos.php" href="http://bit.ly/w3jgKN">The Russian Phobos-Grunt spacecraft isn't going to make it to Mars -- and some waterbears that were along for the ride won't make it back.</a> Over the last year, about 10% of space missions that launched have failed (seven out of about 74). [<a href="http://dvice.com/archives/2011/11/russian-phobos.php">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-10/iran-tried-and-failed-launch-monkey-space-last-month " href="http://bit.ly/svy73w">Iran's space program tried to send a monkey to space, but the monkey didn't survive the trip.</a> Iran's space program will probably get a bit more attention when it succeeds... [<a href="http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-10/iran-tried-and-failed-launch-monkey-space-last-month ">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&#038;id=news/awx/2011/11/14/awx_11_14_2011_p0-394078.xml&#038;headline=Soyuz%20Resumes%20Piloted%20ISS%20Missions" href="http://bit.ly/sXuF8I">Fortunately, the International Space Station will be occupied by astronauts as planned, following a successful launch of a Soyuz re-supply mission.</a> The ISS will resume a full 6-person crew in mid-December. [<a href="http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&#038;id=news/awx/2011/11/14/awx_11_14_2011_p0-394078.xml&#038;headline=Soyuz%20Resumes%20Piloted%20ISS%20Missions">url</a>]</li>
<li><b>To discover more links on space exploration, <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:209" href="http://bit.ly/dPJFRP">check out what's floating around in StumbleUpon universe.</a></b> [<a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:209">url</a>]  <a title="what's this?" href="#" class="whatsthis help_ddstumble">&nbsp;</a>
</li>
</ul> 

By the way, StumbleUpon can also recommend some good <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt</a> articles, too.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100802/22570010460/dailydirt-getting-to-space-aint-easy.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100802/22570010460/dailydirt-getting-to-space-aint-easy.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100802/22570010460/dailydirt-getting-to-space-aint-easy.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100802/22570010460</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:31:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Iran Outlaws VPNs Or Any Other Attempt To Get Around Filters</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111027/00493916534/iran-outlaws-vpns-any-other-attempt-to-get-around-filters.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111027/00493916534/iran-outlaws-vpns-any-other-attempt-to-get-around-filters.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ If you're going to censor the internet, I guess you also have to criminalize attempts to get around the filters.  That appears to be what's happened in Iran, where <a href="http://censorshipinamerica.com/2011/10/25/internet-censorship-iran-criminalizes-antifiltering-methods/" target="_blank">any kind of system to get around the filters, including VPNs, has been criminalized</a>.  Iran now gets to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110830/02133315734/pakistan-officially-bans-all-encryption-online.shtml">join Pakistan</a> in banning VPNs. 
<blockquote><i>
&ldquo;Based on the law, the use of VPNs or other antifiltering software is forbidden and considered a crime,&rdquo;
</i></blockquote>
 Amusingly, the reasoning given is that VPNs are part of a "soft war" from Western countries, and blocking them is a way to "confront" such Western aggression.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111027/00493916534/iran-outlaws-vpns-any-other-attempt-to-get-around-filters.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111027/00493916534/iran-outlaws-vpns-any-other-attempt-to-get-around-filters.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111027/00493916534/iran-outlaws-vpns-any-other-attempt-to-get-around-filters.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>how-nice</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20111027/00493916534</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2011 14:08:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Evidence Suggests DigiNotar, Who Issued Fraudulent Google Certificate, Was Hacked Years Ago</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110830/13243615741/evidence-suggests-diginotar-who-issued-fraudulent-google-certificate-was-hacked-years-ago.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110830/13243615741/evidence-suggests-diginotar-who-issued-fraudulent-google-certificate-was-hacked-years-ago.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The big news in the security world, obviously, is the fact that a <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20098894-245/fraudulent-google-certificate-points-to-internet-attack/?part=rss&#038;subj=news&#038;tag=2547-1_3-0-20&#038;dlvrit=142337" target="_blank">fraudulent Google certificate made its way out into the wild</a>, apparently targeting internet users in Iran.  The Dutch company DigiNotar has put out a statement saying that <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/239136/google_one_of_many_victims_in_ssl_certificate_hack.html" target="_blank">it discovered a breach</a> back on July 19th during a security audit, and that fraudulent certificates were generated for "several dozen" websites.  The only one known to have gotten out into the wild is the Google one.  Either way, as everyone scrambles to clean this up, you should <a href="https://twitter.com/#!/ioerror/statuses/108548272880238592" target="_blank">remove DigiNotar from your browser trust root</a> (usually under "advanced" or somewhere in the options).  Whether or not you do this, DigiNotar is probably effectively dead as an ongoing issuer of security certificates.  No one will trust them again.
<br /><br />
So how was this done?  The folks at F-Secure have found some evidence <a href="http://www.f-secure.com/weblog/archives/00002228.html" target="_blank">suggesting the company was hacked by Iranian hackers</a> (probably working for the government).  But what's really scary, is that the evidence F-Secure found suggests that DigiNotar was hacked <i><b>at least two years ago</b></i>.  F-Secure also takes issue with DigiNotar's explanation concerning how this one fraudulent Google certificate got out:
<blockquote><i>
While Diginotar revoked the other rogue certificates, <b>they missed the one issued to Google</b>. Didn't Diginotar think it's a tad weird that Google would suddenly renew their SSL certificate, and decide to do it with a mid-sized Dutch CA, of all places? And when Diginotar was auditing their systems after the breach, how on earth did they miss the Iranian defacement discussed above? 
</i></blockquote>
Realistically, this raises a much larger issue about <a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/08/iranian-man-middle-attack-against-google" target="_blank">our reliance on these Certificate Authorities, and what happens when their security is weak</a>, as appears to be the case with DigiNotar.  As the EFF notes, it's time to move beyond this method of security:
<blockquote><i>
As the problems with the certificate authority system become clear, lots of people are working on ways to detect and mitigate these attacks. Chrome's pinning feature is available not only to Google web sites but to any webmaster; if you run an HTTPS site, you can <a href="http://dev.chromium.org/sts">contact</a> the Chrome developers and get your site's keys hard-coded.  Other browser vendors may implement a similar feature soon.  The same result could also be achieved by giving web sites themselves a way to tell browsers what certificates to anticipate&mdash;and efforts to do this are now underway, building on top of DNSSEC or HSTS.  Then browsers could simply not believe conflicting information, or at least provide a meaningful way to report it or warn the user about the situation. 
</i></blockquote>
Of course, there <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110825/23232315691/paul-vixie-explains-how-protect-ip-will-break-internet.shtml">will be no DNSSEC</a> if PROTECT IP passes... Another reason to worry about that law, as it closes off one path to protect against these kinds of attacks.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110830/13243615741/evidence-suggests-diginotar-who-issued-fraudulent-google-certificate-was-hacked-years-ago.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110830/13243615741/evidence-suggests-diginotar-who-issued-fraudulent-google-certificate-was-hacked-years-ago.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110830/13243615741/evidence-suggests-diginotar-who-issued-fraudulent-google-certificate-was-hacked-years-ago.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>diginot</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110830/13243615741</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 5 Jul 2011 22:09:29 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Iran Declares Victory Over Internet-In-A-Suitcase</title>
<dc:creator>Tim Cushing</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110702/17562214956/iran-declares-victory-over-internet-in-a-suitcase.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110702/17562214956/iran-declares-victory-over-internet-in-a-suitcase.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Whatever anyone comes up with, Iran has an answer for it. The regular internet (a.k.a., &quot;<a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110527/13281714462/can-we-kill-off-this-myth-that-internet-is-wild-west-that-needs-to-be-tamed.shtml" target="_blank">The Wild West</a>&quot;) too wild and free and uncensored? No problem. Iran's got it covered with <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110531/13372014492/censoring-begins-home-iran-announces-plans-to-build-its-own-internet-operating-system.shtml" target="_blank">its own internet</a> (still in progress). You say you've put some men and other assorted animals into orbit? Hey, <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110618/17531914736/iran-says-me-too-to-space-race-pledges-to-launch-monkey-into-space-end-summer.shtml" target="_blank">Iran's been doing that since sometime this month</a>.
<br /><br />
So, what's up next for Iran, the little dictatorship that could? Why, it's nothing less than <a href="http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2011/07/01/5612278.htm" target="_blank">announcing its triumph over the possibly still-in-progress internet-in-a-suitcase</a>. Built by the US to keep dissidents supplied with a viable internet connection and a direct line to the CIA, the <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110613/03480914671/mixed-messages-us-talks-cleaning-up-rogue-internet-while-underwriting-censorship-proof-shadow-internet.shtml">internet-in-a-suitcase</a> has already proven to be no match for whatever it is that Iran did to combat it. Says Iranian Intelligence Minister, Heidar Moselhi:
<blockquote>
<em>[U.S. President Barack] Obama admitted several times, in Congress and elsewhere, that the cyberwars he has carried out against us have not succeeded. He has admitted defeat. We had foreseen in advance the steps they are taking in cyberspace -- for example, the 'Internet in a Suitcase' that they have hyped so much -- and we have ways to counter it,&quot; Moslehi said in an interview with Iranian state television.</em>
</blockquote>
A very bold statement from Moselhi, who makes the brash claim that the U.S. has already conceded this cyberwar &quot;several times.&quot; The only thing stopping a chorus of &quot;[citations please]&quot; from raining down on his head is the implicit threat of violence aimed at dissenting opinions. Moselhi seems to have wiped the Stuxnet situation from his memory, much like Stuxnet itself wiped several years of nuclear arms racing right off Iran's &quot;World Domination Timeline&quot; by <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110117/02205812696/stuxnet-increasingly-sounding-like-movie-plot.shtml" target="_blank">tearing them a literal wormhole via some cybernetic centrifuge abuse</a>.
<br /><br />
But... but... supremacy!
<br /><br />
In addition to the un-vetted statement above, Iran would also like you to be aware that <a href="http://www.payvand.com/news/11/jul/1012.html" target="_blank">its military is tops in cyberspace readiness</a>:<blockquote><p><em>Army Commander Ahmadreza Pourdastan has said that the Iranian Army is adequately prepared to counter any possible cyber threats against the Islamic Republic.
<br /><br />
&quot;Iranian armed forces are capable of carrying out offensive and defensive cyber operations,&quot; Brigadier General Pourdastan told the Mehr News Agency on Saturday. &quot;The Army is fully prepared to defend the country against cyber attacks,&quot; he said. &quot;We are not afraid that other countries are turning to (strategies and tactics of) cyber war because we are also familiar with cyberspace.&quot;</em>
</p></blockquote>
Seeing as the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/12/world/12internet.html?_r=1&#038;pagewanted=all" target="_blank">product in question isn't even completely out of R&#038;D yet</a> (or is it? [conspiratorial hmmm accompanied by raised eyebrow]), how does the Iranian superforce know exactly what it's combating? Is it just shaking down everyone carrying luggage or posting &quot;No Luggage Allowed&quot; signs everywhere? Did they hire the Samsonite ape to beat the hell out of everything while outlawing the purchase of ape-proof luggage?
<br /><br />
Perhaps the military's newly minted cyberwarriors are already on the attack, browsing <em>farhadslist.org</em> for spikes in luggage listings or suspicious &quot;Missed Connections&quot; with half the conversation in English. Who knows? Even more to the point, who's saying? Much like its earlier claim of internet superiority over various hacktivists, this is another unprovable statement that Iran will use as evidence of its constant victory over every nation with at least a modicum of civil rights.
<br /><br />
Stay tuned.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110702/17562214956/iran-declares-victory-over-internet-in-a-suitcase.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110702/17562214956/iran-declares-victory-over-internet-in-a-suitcase.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110702/17562214956/iran-declares-victory-over-internet-in-a-suitcase.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>efforts-still-ongoing-vs.-d**k-in-a-box</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110702/17562214956</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 01:14:22 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Iran Says 'Me Too' To The Space Race; Pledges To Launch A Monkey Into Space By The End Of The Summer</title>
<dc:creator>Tim Cushing</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110618/17531914736/iran-says-me-too-to-space-race-pledges-to-launch-monkey-into-space-end-summer.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110618/17531914736/iran-says-me-too-to-space-race-pledges-to-launch-monkey-into-space-end-summer.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Iran, perhaps still power-tripping after its &quot;<a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110531/13372014492/censoring-begins-home-iran-announces-plans-to-build-its-own-internet-operating-system.shtml">we'll just build our own internet</a>&quot; announcement, has decided that <a href="http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-06-iran-monkey-space.html" target="_blank">the space race is its to win</a>, despite having given other countries up to a 63-year headstart. Last year's successful launch of &quot;stuff found in the yard&quot; into space (namely, a rat, some turtles and some worms) has snowballed into a full-fledged plan for a manned space program, tenatively scheduled to being sometime in 2020, with a monkey making the trip, this summer.
<br /><br />
This newest simian recruit will join several other less-&quot;manned&quot; vehicles in orbit, including the Rassad-1 (Observation 1) satellite and four other satellites (still unnamed, although my money's on &quot;Rassad 2-5&quot;) to be launched by 2012. The Rassad-1 has a 60-day life span (easily rivaling most major retail store return policies) and will be used to &quot;photograph the planet and transmit images,&quot; albeit in a non-spying sort of way, according to the government-owned media.
<br /><br />
If successful, Iran will join other world superpowers in launching rocket-powered, monkey-navigated vehicles across the metaphorical alkali flats of space, including the United States (1948), France (1967), the Soviet Union (1983 -- and the only country to use real live astronauts as test monkeys) and Argentina (1969 -- although its first attempt fell short of the international definition of space and was recorded as only &quot;like my roommate 70% of the time -- really, really high&quot;).
<br /><br />
Western powers have expressed concern that this belated space program is really just a ballistic missle plan in astronaut's clothing. However, Tehran has denied any such connection between their newest rocket plans and their older plans for cobbling together nuclear devices out of whatever plutonium anyone can throw their way. Various government spokespersons (ha! they're actually all male!) stated that further press releases would be issued via their proprietary internet as &quot;classified internal memos.&quot;<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110618/17531914736/iran-says-me-too-to-space-race-pledges-to-launch-monkey-into-space-end-summer.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110618/17531914736/iran-says-me-too-to-space-race-pledges-to-launch-monkey-into-space-end-summer.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110618/17531914736/iran-says-me-too-to-space-race-pledges-to-launch-monkey-into-space-end-summer.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>oddly,-there's-no-mention-of-'monkey-retrieval'</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110618/17531914736</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 6 Jun 2011 02:44:11 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Censoring Begins At Home: Iran Announces Plans To Build Its Own Internet, Operating System</title>
<dc:creator>Tim Cushing</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110531/13372014492/censoring-begins-home-iran-announces-plans-to-build-its-own-internet-operating-system.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110531/13372014492/censoring-begins-home-iran-announces-plans-to-build-its-own-internet-operating-system.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Iran's government has decided to push past regular villainy and head straight for cartoonish super-villainy with <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/05/31/1238226/In-Censorship-Move-Iran-Plans-Its-Own-Internet?utm_source=slashdot&#038;utm_medium=twitter" target="_blank">its plan to build its own internet</a>. Being one of the &quot;most sophisticated nations in online censoring&quot; just isn't enough these days, what with every &quot;civilized&quot; nation pushing its own brand of censorship. It looks as if Iran has decided that if the internet is too difficult to regulate, it may be easier to start from the ground floor.<br /><br />Iran is promoting its national internet as a &quot;<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/05/29/new-form-censorship-iran-moves-disconnect-internet-world/" target="_blank">cost-saving measure for consumers and a way to uphold Islamic moral codes</a>.&quot; This will operate in parallel with the existing internet  before making the switch to IOL or whatever this new censornet will be  called. The roll-out is going quickly, with 60% of Iran's homes and businesses migrating &quot;soon,&quot; with the entire country due to be completely severed from the rest of the world &quot;within two years.&quot;<br /><br />The Iranian government is also looking to install a new basement (if we follow the &quot;new internet = &quot;ground floor&quot; analogy -- and I guess we will). It intends to roll out its own operating system to replace Windows within the coming months. Ali Aghamohammadi, the Iranian Head of Economic Affairs, has expressed his confidence that the government-approved internet and operating system will also be deployed by other Muslim countries.<br /><br />This bit of dismaying news had no sooner graced the pages of the un-Iranian internet when information surfaced that <a href="http://thenextweb.com/industry/2011/06/03/anonymous-steals-10000-iranian-government-emails-plans-ddos-attack/" target="_blank">Anonymous had hacked the Iranian government's computers</a>. The &quot;group&quot; succeeded in harvesting 10,000 email messages from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs containing &quot;approvals and rejections for a variety of visas and passports, among other requests, and correspondence.&quot;<br /><br />In addition, Anonymous is planning a day-long DDoS attack to commemorate the anniversary of the 2009 elections, which saw Ahmadinejad doing everything from shutting down Facebook access to ordering the torching of an opponent's campaign office.<br /><br />Whether these actions will hasten or delay the implementation of the Iran-only internet remains to be seen. Iran has only stated that it will be rolled out &quot;soon,&quot; wording, which is vague enough that either side can claim it acheived its goals. As more anti-government activity flares up in nearby regions, usually accompanied by a shutdown of communication services, it would surprise exactly no one if other like-minded countries begin to view Iran as their ISP of choice.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110531/13372014492/censoring-begins-home-iran-announces-plans-to-build-its-own-internet-operating-system.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110531/13372014492/censoring-begins-home-iran-announces-plans-to-build-its-own-internet-operating-system.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110531/13372014492/censoring-begins-home-iran-announces-plans-to-build-its-own-internet-operating-system.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>Anonymous-says-O-RLY?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110531/13372014492</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 24 Mar 2011 14:46:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Did The Iranian Gov't Try To Create A Massive Man-In-The-Middle Attack With Faked Certificates?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110324/02594613606/did-iranian-govt-try-to-create-massive-man-in-the-middle-attack-with-faked-certificates.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110324/02594613606/did-iranian-govt-try-to-create-massive-man-in-the-middle-attack-with-faked-certificates.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A few months back, we talked about how the Tunisian government tried to do a <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110126/04453512834/how-facebook-dealt-with-tunisian-government-trying-to-steal-every-users-passwords.shtml">massive hack on Facebook</a> to access the communications of protesters and activists.  It looks like the Iranian government tried to do something similar, figuring out a way to <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20046340-281.html?part=rss&#038;subj=news&#038;tag=2547-1_3-0-20&#038;dlvrit=142337" target="_blank">get bogus SSL certificates for Google, Yahoo, Skype and others</a>, which would have allowed the government to set up a man-in-the-middle type attack to get passwords and access otherwise "encrypted" content.  While this was discovered, it does suggest the levels that some governments will go to in order to spy on users online.  More importantly, it highlights some of the <a href="https://blog.torproject.org/blog/detecting-certificate-authority-compromises-and-web-browser-collusion" target="_blank">serious problems with the certificate authority model of trust and security</a> online.  So here's the big question: how do we prevent these types of things from happening?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110324/02594613606/did-iranian-govt-try-to-create-massive-man-in-the-middle-attack-with-faked-certificates.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110324/02594613606/did-iranian-govt-try-to-create-massive-man-in-the-middle-attack-with-faked-certificates.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110324/02594613606/did-iranian-govt-try-to-create-massive-man-in-the-middle-attack-with-faked-certificates.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>getting-sophisticated</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110324/02594613606</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2011 06:05:39 PST</pubDate>
<title>Paulo Coelho Books Banned In Iran... So He Offers Them As A Free Download</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110114/17013412678/paulo-coelho-books-banned-iran-so-he-offers-them-as-free-download.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110114/17013412678/paulo-coelho-books-banned-iran-so-he-offers-them-as-free-download.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ There are few successful authors who have jumped in and embraced what the online world allows you to do more than Paulo Coelho. Three years ago, we wrote about his efforts to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080124/08563359.shtml">"pirate" his own books</a> and how he found that it only served to help his sales.  He's also talked up the importance for authors of <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090817/0318065899.shtml">setting ideas free</a>  to help them spread.  He's also gone even further than that with cool experiments like <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090817/0318065899.shtml">having his fans make a movie</a> out of one of his books, via a sort of crowdsourcing methodology.
<br /><br />
<a href="http://www.techdirt.com/profile.php?u=esahc">Esahc</a> points us to a recent situation in which Coelho heard that his <a href="http://paulocoelhoblog.com/2011/01/09/books-banned-in-iran/" target="_blank">books were suddenly being banned in Iran</a> for no reason (despite having been published there for over a dozen years), and his immediate response was to rush to get versions of his books that have been translated into Farsi up on his site for free downloads.  He also sought the assistance of the Brazilian government to find out why the books were banned (as he notes, nothing changed in the books, so it doesn't make much sense) and, eventually, the Iranian government claimed that it's not censoring his books, even though his official publisher in the country claims otherwise.  Either way, it's interesting to see that his immediate response to being censored was to release the books for free as quickly as possible.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110114/17013412678/paulo-coelho-books-banned-iran-so-he-offers-them-as-free-download.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110114/17013412678/paulo-coelho-books-banned-iran-so-he-offers-them-as-free-download.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110114/17013412678/paulo-coelho-books-banned-iran-so-he-offers-them-as-free-download.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>good-for-him</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110114/17013412678</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>