The History Of Haystack... And Why Online Censorship Will Remain Difficult

from the there-are-always-holes-in-the-wall dept

Over the years, it's been fascinating to watch the battle over internet censorship, monitors and filters, along with the equally rapid attempts to get around all of those things via technology. Many folks are familiar with anonymous proxies, like Tor, which do help provide anonymity, but can still be blocked once the censor is aware of the tor node. If you follow this space, you're probably already aware of Haystack, which is, in some ways, a step up from Tor and has been getting more and more attention lately. Newsweek actually has a pretty good article on the history of how Haystack came about, involving a 20-something programmer who had little interest in political activism or Iran, until he started seeing the various protests and responses after the Iranian election. Something clicked, and helped along by a "disaffected Iranian official" who sent him the details of how Iran's internet filter worked, and led to Haystack, which hides traffic inside what looks like legitimate traffic (and, in the case of Iran, is specifically designed to hide in traffic that is popular in Iran).

What struck me most about the story is just how improbable a story it is if you look at it in a vacuum. We're talking about a 25-year-old guy, with little interest in Iran or activism, suddenly scratching an itch -- and within a week he had an Iranian gov't official leaking him information that was useful in building a system that could get around the Iranian internet censorship filter. That's impressive, no matter how you look at it. It also highlights why it's always going to be difficult to successfully censor the internet on a wider scale. Someone, perhaps from a totally unexpected place, is going to figure out how to get around it.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 6 Aug 2010 @ 9:33pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Speed of innovation

    Although I respect your enthusiasm, radio frequencies are not a solution for internet and the laws of physics are against you on this one, a wireless solution would be swamped in the blink of an eye from moedern traffic, for anti-censorship if the traffic is only about small amounts of information that would be fine, to build something large that would be used for other things it would be difficult.

    People don't need more spectrum or radio waves that go further they need fiber from the purely technical point of view, coupled with radio frequencies that affect small areas and that people already have, new compression and decompression algorithms and ways of sending data on the logical layer are what is needed.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: I Invented Email
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.