Blog Posts by ONI

German President Köhler signed Internet filter law

daniel oppermann — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 13:39:11 -0500

After having refused to pass the Internet filter law for the last eight months, German President Köhler agreed to do so by signing it on 17 February 2010. The law is expected to be officially published in the middle of March 2010.

Köhler's decision caused a difficult situation for the ruling coalition of the conservative CDU and the liberal FDP. Especially the FDP spoke out against the filter law (which was developed under the former government) and thereby forced the CDU to rethink its decision to create block lists for the Internet (so far consisting of child porn content). Now with the law coming into force the ruling coalition is pressed for time to agree on a reformulation of the legal text.

Minister of Justice Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger (FDP) declared that the new approach of the German government is focused on deleting child porn websites instead of blocking them. She pointed out that a cooperation with the International Association of Internet Hotlines (INHOPE) would be a crucial step to take.

While the government coalition still tries to save the law by rewriting certain passages, opposition parties like the Green Party and The Left demand a complete repeal of the law.

ONI Releases Special Report on Microsoft Bing Filtering in Arab World

Jillian C. York — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 14:20:24 -0500

Google's recent decision to stop filtering keywords on its Chinese platform, Google.cn, sparked discussion in the media about the role of corporations in controlling access to online material in repressive nations.

Microsoft recently added a new layer of complexity to the ongoing debate regarding the filtering and censorship practices of U.S. search engines via its own search engine, Bing. ONI testing reveals liberal filtering by Bing in one of the most censored regions in the world: the Arab countries.

The new OpenNet Initiative report , authored by Helmi Noman, explores Microsoft Bing's practice of filtering keywords related to sex and LGBT issues across the Arab world.

German Government Steps Away from 2009 Filtering Plan

daniel oppermann — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 12:34:11 -0500

The German government declared its intention to not continue with the Internet filtering law which was passed in 2009 to block child pornography online.

Since the former government, made up of a coalition of Germany´s two biggest parties, the social democratic SPD and the conservative CDU, passed the law in June/July 2009, it remained a controversially discussed topic in Germany. Especially civil society groups including the Internet community criticized the then Minister of Family Ursula von der Leyen for using child porn as an excuse to create a structure of online censorship.

An online petition set up in 2009 postulating the cancellation of the law-making process was signed by more than 130.000 people, making it the biggest online petition in Germany. Due to the controversial discussion about the law, President Koehler refused to sign it so far, for which reason it did not come into effect.

Another factor to inhibit the law was the national election in September 2009 after which a new coalition of the conservative CDU and the liberal FDP formed the current ruling government. During the negotiations between the two parties the FDP made clear that it did not support the law how it was passed the year before. However, to form a coalition, the CDU agreed to wait another year until the law could be implemented.

During the last months after the elections the new government discussed (mostly internal) how to solve the conflict between the two ruling parties regarding this issue. In February 2010 the German magazine Spiegel published the government´s new purpose to not block child porn websites but to delete them, a decision which is supported by many critics of the 2009-law. For this reason the ruling coalition is planning to develop a new law in the coming months which will concentrate on deleting instead of blocking.

Pakistan Blocks YouTube Videos

Jillian C. York — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 11:26:53 -0500

In 2008, the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority blocked YouTube in what was said to be a reaction to a trailer of Geert Wilder's film "Fitna" hosted on the video-sharing site. The ban was reversed soon afterward, and Pakistani netizens have enjoyed unfettered access to YouTube since.

On Sunday, however, the Pakistani Twitterverse began complaining that YouTube had become inaccessible.

The possible block came after a video of Pakistani President Asif Zardari, in which Zardari tells an unruly audience member to "shut up," was posted on YouTube. After an hour or so, YouTube was once again accessible, save for a dozen or so videos that showed the now-infamous clip of Zardari.

Pakistani blogger (and dentist) Teeth Maestro posted about the incident; one commenter noted that despite the blocking of several videos, the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority has not succeeded in removing all copies, and that the video is now also available on Facebook.

ONI Releases 2009 Year in Review: Filtering, Surveillance, Information Warfare

Jillian C. York — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:28:13 -0500

The OpenNet Initiative is proud to release its 2009 Year in Review, a look into instances of filtering, surveillance, and information warfare around the world in 2009.

The events of 2009 demonstrated a global rise in third-generation Internet controls. Within the first two weeks of January 2009, both Pakistan and Thailand had ordered the filtering of several Web sites, and Germany announced plans to filter certain types of pornography, garnering outrage from free speech activists. By mid-year, the events surrounding the elections in Iran had taken center stage, prompting Iranian authorities to crack down on Internet use and sparking outrage throughout the world, which then rippled through social media.

The OpenNet Initiative estimates that at the end of 2009, 32% of all Internet users were accessing a filtered version of the Internet.

More than half a billion Internet users are being filtered worldwide

Jillian C. York — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 16:45:44 -0500

The OpenNet Initiative (ONI) has been monitoring Internet filtering around the world since 2002. Currently, more that 40 countries are filtering the Internet to varying degrees, while a number of others, including Australia, Iraq, and Spain, are considering enacting filtering policies. So, just how many people are censored online around the world? We have estimated a number based on the number of Internet users that reside in countries which practice substantial filtering--in terms of the number of sites and/or type of content blocked. The number we have come up with is 563,018,414, or approximately 32% of all Internet users.

This number necessarily includes several subjective decisions. We have not included countries, such as the Nordic countries and the UK, that block a modest number of sites alleged to include child pornography. We have not included Germany, which blocks a small number of sites related to extremist groups, and Russia which has just started on a path to do the same. North Korea is omitted from the list. There is also an untold number of users from countries around the world who have no access to the Internet at all due to an unknown combination of poverty, geography and deliberate neglect by governments that would prefer to keep their citizens offline. Nevertheless, this is a huge and growing number.

Jordan to Apply Press Law to Digital Content

Jillian C. York — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 13:57:09 -0500

Jordan has long stood out as a beacon in a region of heavy Internet filtering. Bordered by--among others--Syria and Saudi Arabia, two of the Middle East's worst offenders, Jordan has filtered only one Web site, arabtimes.com, for the past decade.

That is all about to change.

On January 14, popular Jordanian blog ArabCrunch reported that Jordan's high appeal court has decided to extend the reach of the country's print and publications law to any electronic medium (ArabCrunch sourced the information from Arabic-language site Ammon), a decision that could have implications not only for Internet filtering, but also for bloggers and social media users. The press law prevents publication of material that is deemed offensive, or could imply criticism of the government, national unity or the economy.

The New York Times noted:

Critics of the ruling worry that the law will be widely applied to social media, possibly even SMS and to websites that allow reader comments to be posted. Supporters appear to argue that free speech comes with responsibilities along these lines and that the legal framework actually facilitates online communication.

ArabCrunch spoke to Nidal Mansor, the President of the Center for Defending Freedom of Journalists who stated that Jordanian journalists could face trial and subsequent imprisonment for violating the press code. It remains to be seen whether ordinary citizens (non-journalists) will be subject to the law for postings made on blogs and social media sites like Twitter and Facebook.

For a more detailed explanation of the ruling, see Jordan Times. English/Arabic news and translation site Meedan is continuously translating news from Arabic sources here as well.

Official Google Blog Blocked from Baidu Search

Jillian C. York — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:37:09 -0500

Following Google's decision, published on the Official Google Blog, to stop filtering search results on Google.cn, it appears that the Great Firewall is blocking search results for "Google Blog."

Foreign visitors to Baidu are not exempt from the blocking: If a search contains blocked phrases, Baidu will lock the user out of the search engine for five minutes. A search for the term Google returns normal results, while a search for the URL of the Google blog brings about a lockout (warning: you will actually be barred from Baidu for five minutes).

The same scenario occurred when searching on QQ, Sogou, and Yahoo.cn.

hat tip: New York Times.

Google's China Decision Could Have Far-Reaching Implications

Jillian C. York — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:41:40 -0500

It has now been four years since Google announced its intent to censor search results in China. In January of 2006, after finding Google.com to be down about 10% of the time, Google made the now infamous decision to start up Google.cn while complying with Chinese laws. In an announcement on the Official Google Blog dated January 27, 2006, the company stated:

This problem could only be resolved by creating a local presence, and this week we did so, by launching Google.cn, our website for the People's Republic of China. In order to do so, we have agreed to remove certain sensitive information from our search results. We know that many people are upset about this decision, and frankly, we understand their point of view. This wasn't an easy choice, but in the end, we believe the course of action we've chosen will prove to be the right one.

Since that time, the OpenNet Initiative has been watching with keen interest. Two days before Google's official announcement, we explained in a blog post how the filtering would work. Shortly thereafter, University of Toronto researcher Nart Villeneuve created a search comparison to show the difference in results between Google.com and Google.cn.

Four years later, it appears that Google is ending the Google.cn experiment. On the Google blog yesterday, David Drummond, Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer stated:

We have decided we are no longer willing to continue censoring our results on Google.cn, and so over the next few weeks we will be discussing with the Chinese government the basis on which we could operate an unfiltered search engine within the law, if at all. We recognize that this may well mean having to shut down Google.cn, and potentially our offices in China.

The decision came following attacks on Google's corporate infrastructure originating from China that resulted in the theft of intellectual property from Google (note Nart Villeneuve's blog post on the subject).

Although Google's decision is commendable, it is unlikely to have any major implications on China's extensive filtering practices. Although Green Dam demonstrated that China is somewhat receptive to criticism, the implications of filtering search results are not the same as filtering sites: A user searching on Google.cn may be able to see a site in search results, but that does not mean that he can access the site itself. So while there is potential for China to accept Google's decision and allow Google.cn to remain, were that to happen the only real result would be that Chinese users would have a more transparent view of filtering.

The short-term financial impact on Google itself is likely minimal. Their market share in China is relatively low, and as several prominent actors in the field, including Rebecca MacKinnon and Jonathan Zittrain have noted, this frees Google up for further work in the area of circumvention technology.

Ultimately, Google's decision is likely to have the biggest impact on China's 360,000,000 Internet users, who thus far appear to have mixed feelings about the decision--as this Wall Street Journal article depicts, some users have placed flowers outside Google's China headquarters in Beijing, while others seem skeptical that Google will follow through. Still others are angry, as evidenced by this blog started up in the past 24 hours that roughly translates to "Give me back my Google!" Google's original rationale for creating Google.cn was to provide for Chinese users; though the decision was met widely with criticism, according to one source, Google's market share in China was at 35.6% in the last quarter of 2009 (Chinese company Baidu held 58.4%). Another likely result is increased pressure within the US on Bing and Yahoo! to back away from filtering within China.

There is additional potential impact on US-China relations. Atlantic writer James Fallows noted last night that, "There are [also] reasons to think that a difficult and unpleasant stage of China-U.S. and China-world relations lies ahead," citing numerous recent events--such as the debate over China's role in Copenhagen and the prosecution of Liu Xiaobo--that are all results of direct or indirect actions of the Chinese government. The implication, of course, is that the decision of a major U.S. company to pull out of China could lead to a chain of events that results in significantly colder relations between the two countries.

This will likely add additional fuel to the calls for more national attention to be paid to cybersecurity. In Google's blog post of yesterday, it was noted that the aforementioned attacks were not leveraged only at Google, but rather, at least twenty other companies were targeted, as were the accounts of human rights activists based both inside and outside of China. The possibility that the Chinese government is complicit in attempts to hack into US computers to track human rights activists is noteworthy. The fact is that we’ll probably never know the facts, nor do we know the limits of US government activity to collect information on those that are seen as a threat. While none of this is particularly new, it is a reminder of the immense challenges that lay ahead for promoting a free and open Internet.

Bahrain, Tunisia Filtering Individual Twitter Pages

Jillian C. York — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 12:03:13 -0500

Over the past few weeks, reports have trickled in to Herdict and via Twitter, alerting us of the filtering of individual Twitter pages in Tunisia and Bahrain (as well as, possibly, China). In Tunisia, the accounts of exiled activist Sami Ben Gharbia (@ifikra), engineer @Ma7moud, and popular independent news source Nawaat (@nawaat) have been confirmed inaccessible, while in Bahrain @FreeBahrain was allegedly blocked on New Year's Day, but has since become accessible.

Twitter is no stranger to being blocked: Both China and Iran have blocked the social networking/microblogging site in the past, and Saudi Arabia reportedly blocked two individual Twitter users' pages in mid-2009. What is particularly interesting is that the governments of Tunisia and Bahrain have now demonstrated capability to block individual Twitter pages, thus silencing certain voices while still keeping a major communication platform open. Only time will tell if this is to become a trend globally.