The Internet: Can The Gov Shut It Down? YES! [Archive] - The Project Avalon Community Forum

Harley

13th December 2010, 03:08

There appears to be a lot of misperception all around the internet - in articles, blogs, and forums - as to whether or not the gov can shut down the internet. Therefore, in an attempt to help correct these misperceptions, I have done a bit of research and compiled some facts into this article so that you, the reader, may be better informed. - H.H.

The Internet: Can The Gov Shut It Down?

The bottom-line fact is YES IT CAN.

But first I'd like to discuss the bill known as Obama's 'Internet Kill Switch'. It is Bill S.3480 - Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010 (http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/?FuseAction=home.Cybersecurity) (PDF). The basics of this bill are:

1. Establishes a White House Office for Cyberspace Policy and a National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications, which would work with private US companies to create cybersecurity requirements for the electrical grid, telecommunications networks and other critical infrastructure.

2. Allows the US president to take emergency actions to protect critical parts of the Internet, including ordering owners of critical infrastructure to implement emergency response plans, during a cyber-emergency. The president would need congressional approval to extend a national cyber-emergency beyond 120 days under an amendment to the legislation approved by the committee.

3. Gives the US Department of Homeland Security authority to respond to cyber-attacks.
U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman says in This Article (http://news.techworld.com/security/3228198/obama-internet-kill-switch-plan-approved-by-us-senate-panel/) "Our responsibility for cyber defence goes well beyond the public sector because so much of cyberspace is owned and operated by the private sector. The Department of Homeland Security has actually shown that vulnerabilities in key private sector networks like utilities and communications could bring our economy down for a period of time if attacked or commandeered by a foreign power or cyber terrorists."

In and of itself, this bill does NOT grant the president, or the government for that matter, the power to shut down the internet. It was written to merely establish new offices, and to grant authority to existing offices (Homeland Security), with the authority to respond to and control the internet during a cyber-emergency.

In my opinion bills such as this are created not only for increased security and protection but also to establish more offices which further convolutes government, to increase government spending, and to place further control over the populace.

However, there is one condition which can supersede this and and ALL other additional legal mumbo-jumbo which has been created, and that is WAR.

Contained within this bottom-line law, the Communications Act of 1934: as amended by Telecom Act of 1996 (PDF) (http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/1934new.pdf), in SEC. 706. [47 U.S.C. 606] WAR EMERGENCY--POWERS OF PRESIDENT, we read:

(c) Upon proclamation by the President that there exists war or a threat of war, or a state of public peril or disaster or other national emergency, or in order to preserve the neutrality of the United States, the President, if he deems it necessary in the interest of national security or defense, may suspend or amend, for such time as he may see fit, the rules and regulations applicable to any or all stations or devices capable of emitting electromagnetic radiations within the jurisdiction of the United States as prescribed by the Commission, and may cause the closing of any station for radio communication, or any device capable of emitting electromagnetic radiations between 10 kilocycles and 100,000 megacycles, which is suitable for use as a navigational aid beyond five miles, and the removal therefrom of its apparatus and equipment, or he may authorize the use or control of any such station or device and/or its apparatus and equipment, by any department of the Government under such regulations as he may prescribe uponCommunications Act of 1934 just compensation to the owners. The authority granted to the President, under this subsection, to cause the closing of any station or device and the removal therefrom of its apparatus and equipment, or to authorize the use or control of any station or device and/or its apparatus and equipment, may be exercised in the Canal Zone.
In fact, this power extended to the president has already been utilized. When the U.S. entered World War 2 on December 7, 1941, Amateur (Ham) Radio Operators were immediately ordered to go QRT (Off the Air) by special order of the FCC (ref: USA AMATEUR RADIO HISTORY AND LICENSING (http://www.ac6v.com/history.htm)).

Now obviously the internet was not in existence in 1941. But if it had been the following subsection could or would have applied:

(d) Upon proclamation by the President that there exists a state or threat of war involving the United States, the President, if he deems it necessary in the interest of the national security and defense, may, during a period ending not later than six months after the termination of such state or threat of war and not later than such earlier date as the Congress by concurrent resolution may designate,

(1) suspend or amend the rules and regulations applicable to any or all facilities or stations for wire communication within the jurisdiction of the United States as prescribed by the Commission,

(2) cause the closing of any facility or station for wire communication and the removal therefrom of its apparatus and equipment, or

(3) authorize the use or control of any such facility or station and its apparatus and equipment by any department of the Government under such regulations as he may prescribe, upon just compensation to the owners.

So basically the bottom line is:

All Forms Of Electric Or Electronic Communications Can Be Suspended By The President.

If/When any war or threat of war is announced, whether it be real or fabricated, you can bet the farm that these Acts of Power WILL be enacted. And that will include any False Flag Alien Enemy Threat.

You Can Count On It.

sjkted

13th December 2010, 03:33

Yeah yeah yeah. They can write whatever they want in paper, but there are a few big problems with this in practice.

First, the internet is an international network, so one country can't take it down.

Second, the network is the second version of DARPAnet which is a fully redundant mesh network. In other words, for every destination there are multiple routes to get to it. The internet was designed to survive nuclear war and it will, although all of it may not.

Another big issue is that they're as dependent on it as we are to control their own government operations. If they attempt to take down the internet in the US, it would be like them declaring they will take down the highway system. It would cause a complete shutdown of the country. Business would be unable to operate. ATMs would stop working. Our reliance on offshoring would mean that we wouldn't even be able to pick up the phone to call anyone.

It would literally be like the worst of the Y2K fears coming true.

In addition, people with modems would still be able to make 28K connections with ISPs out of the country and people with satellite internet access would be doing just fine.

Not only is this not practical, it is not feasible.

As far as controlling the internet, I could see them attempting to make websites get licensed, pay fees, etc. and make it difficult to use the internet. But, even that wouldn't control information as we would still be able to use cell networks, BBSs, etc. In other words, they could attempt to drop us back 20 years in technology, but even that wouldn't stop the information flow -- it would only slow it down.

--sjkted

bilko

13th December 2010, 05:32

Thats what i thought sjkted.
You have to shut it off by the source which is fed to us by the phone companies.
But, in doing so you would be ushering in the biggest industrial pandemic the world has ever seen simply because the western world is a networked society.
People got a little twitchy with the fuel strikes when the lorry drivers stopped delivering but that was nothing, this would be government hurry curry or whatever they call it lol.

Arpheus

13th December 2010, 07:12

Ross

13th December 2010, 07:26

Sorry to disappoint you but the shutting down of the internet is never going to happen,they may restrict access to things and stuff like that but shutting it off no freaking way,if there is one thing that would hurt them BAD would be to shut off the internet that would be really bad news to TPTB in my opinion.

I agree, aspects may be restricted...but the Internet has become a very powerful tool for 'them' and will continue to be so...a few 'tweaks here and there' and biz as usual. The porn industry alone is a major player for them, facebook and likewise, is becoming the best access to information of individuals/groups 'they' have ever had. For the 'Under 30 years' age group, it has become unusual to 'not' be involved with the Internet in one way or another.

We haven’t even started on the economics side of things. Think about that one for a bit.

Ross

EDIT:

The real threat to the Internet will come from off planet...the Sun, if it decides to have a 'shake up'. Or perhaps a sneaky space-body only noticed when its to late, or, one of the several 'Super Volcanoe's. This isn't fear mongering, I make that clear, It is a very real reality that has happened many times before and will happen again...but I doubt that the demise of the Internet will come from the Controllers.

Humble Janitor

13th December 2010, 09:12

I don't understand why you're promoting this fear of the internet shutting down?

I'm not sure if you've been paying attention to the Anon hackers but as long as they're at work, the internet will never shut down.

Do you really think that businesses are going to go along with the government on this one? Good luck. Millions in lost revenue? I don't think they'll go along with it.

Wookie

13th December 2010, 09:56

Check out this boat http://www.logoi.com/pastimages/img/titanic_2.jpg It is unsinkable. Personally, when I am told I can't do something, I tend to say watch me and go right ahead and do it. One country can't shut down the internet? how about a handful of the most powerful people/beings? on the planet? The government is afraid of business losing income? Really? if all the dark plans are even close to being on the mark I seriously dout that the PTB will stop at anything to achieve their goals, much less worrying about economics. I do agree that the PTB use the internet, i also understand that they most likely have control over the inferstructure that suports the net. IE If I had control over the military comunication system I'm sure i could make do without a public net. As far as having an opinion about the logistics of shutting down the net, I really don't know alot about it. However, I have learnt from history that many "facts" only last untill proven false. IE: If you sail to far you will fail off the edge of the flat earth FALSE, All I am saying is never say never unless you are prepared to eat your words.

Peaceful Journeys with Love Wookie

bluestflame

13th December 2010, 10:00

personally i think they'd rather keep tabs on what the masses are thinking and talking about , I mean sorta like wikileaks en masse and live

Bill Ryan

13th December 2010, 10:04

Check out this boat

Beautiful one-liner. Made me laugh. :)

I agree, the net can't be shut down. It's like shutting down the highway network (of roads) globally.

But - as a metaphor - they can regulate the drivers, the cars, the fuel, and put checkpoints everywhere. The roads themselves would be untouched.

bluestflame

13th December 2010, 10:22

http://http://www.accelerated-promotions.com/consumer-electronics/usa-patriot-act-carnivore.htm

Anti Terrorism Technology:
Carnivore
Surveillance System
Carnivore

Carnivore is a computer system developed by the FBI that can be connected to an ISP network and remotely accessed by a dial-up link. It can be configured to intercept and record digital communications. The senate recently approved the use of the Carnivore system to investigate terrorism through the Patriot Act.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

"The FBI claims that Carnivore provides "enhanced privacy protection" by intercepting only the specific communications allowed by a court order (Carnivore Diagnostic Tool). Donald Kerr made clear in his statement to the US House of Representatives that Carnivore "does NOT search through the contents of every message and collect those that contain certain key words like 'bomb' or 'drugs'" (Kerr). Before the passage of the Patriot Act, Carnivore was legally employable only when targeted at a specific individual under suspicion, under direction of a court order, and with cooperation of the ISP."

Ammit

13th December 2010, 10:23

I agree Bill, too much of the information used in the industrial and finacial world is held/transported and streamed over the internet, to shut it down would cause global financial loss and dissrupt their own financial gains from it.

I believe the only way it could be controlled is to create a huge intranet system where everything we are allowed to see is controlled except for the higher powers who could still have the proper internet, if that makes sense........

bluestflame

13th December 2010, 10:23

assuming it ran a different "hobbled" version of operating software for the demonstration to get it approved

Luke

13th December 2010, 10:28

Beautiful one-liner. Made me laugh. :)

I agree, the net can't be shut down. It's like shutting down the highway network (of roads) globally.

But - as a metaphor - they can regulate the drivers, the cars, the fuel, and put checkpoints everywhere. The roads themselves would be untouched.

I would add to the methaphor: roads need maintenance too, need to be "updated" from time to time, so is internet infrastructure. Where money will come for it? .. and who will clean up all the roadkills?

I-net is very valuable tool of control precisely because of what it is .. if information is exchanged, you want to know what it is, you do not shut it down.. the guys "talking" will find another way you have no control over.

Some parts of net are surely nuisance for controllers.. but so far- nowhere near discomfort levels. And damn good profiling tool, not to mention great possibility of fielding charges about just anybody (IP violation mostly)

After all there is no free domain, anywhere.

It is in OUR best interest to provide really free communication means .. but as far as we have the i-net.. who will bother with providing it?

Just as the road system - who will bother with creating alternative, infrastructureless, roadkill-free means of transportations IF they cay use highways NOW?
Any talk of alternative, like electric cars, still use it .. and as long as it is the case- system is damn happy!
(Actually, electric cars are great example of "controlled alternative" .. all the hype, but where electricity is generated? in nuclear/coalburning/oilburning plants maybe?)
3276
Think Admiral Ackbar have something to say about it
http://blogtown.portlandmercury.com/images/blogimages/2009/09/22/1253637561-admiral_ackbar.jpg
yep. that.

Harley

13th December 2010, 11:53

Greetings sjkted :),

sjkted:
Yeah yeah yeah. They can write whatever they want in paper
Regardless of whether or not they can write whatever they want on paper, the fact is it's a federal law which grants the president power during a time of war, this power has been executed in the past, and it can/will be used in the future.

sjkted:
but there are a few big problems with this in practice.

First, the internet is an international network, so one country can't take it down.
Very true. But in any war coalitions and alliances are formed, and in order to form these organization of people (or countries) everyone involved must agree to and sign a pact or treaty. Therefore anyone not agreeing to this pact or treaty would have to be either a neutral party or the enemy.

sjkted:
Second, the network is the second version of DARPAnet which is a fully redundant mesh network. In other words, for every destination there are multiple routes to get to it. The internet was designed to survive nuclear war and it will, although all of it may not.
Also true. However, none of these points would apply because of the fact that anyone can be limited or restricted internet access at any time. Controls are automatically installed within the network (DNS, IP Addresses, etc) which will enable them to do just that.

sjkted:
Another big issue is that they're as dependent on it as we are to control their own government operations. If they attempt to take down the internet in the US, it would be like them declaring they will take down the highway system. It would cause a complete shutdown of the country. Business would be unable to operate. ATMs would stop working. Our reliance on offshoring would mean that we wouldn't even be able to pick up the phone to call anyone.
The government, and especially the military, have their own highly advanced and highly secure lines of communication so the loss of the internet would not effect them in the least. But a complete shutdown of the country would not have to occur because it can still be configured to allow for essential financial and business networking only, restricting access to all others.

As far as taking down the highway system goes, ever heard of the National Defense Highway System (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/ndhs.htm)?
In 1956 President Eisenhower signed legislation establishing the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways (about 41,000 miles of roads). Since then, DOD has continued to identify and update defense-important highway routes. The National Defense Highway system was designed to move military equipment and personnel efficiently. So from reading this it is not difficult to fathom that with a Declaration of War our freedoms of travel and movement could be highly curtailed.

sjkted:
It would literally be like the worst of the Y2K fears coming true. Y2K was nothing more than a man-made marketing event which isn't even comparable to a Declaration of War.

sjkted:
In addition, people with modems would still be able to make 28K connections with ISPs out of the country and people with satellite internet access would be doing just fine.
A modem won't be of much use if your phone line no longer supplies a dial tone or if it only accepts preprogrammed authorized numbers (Essential Services).

sjkted:
Not only is this not practical, it is not feasible.
Right. It's not practical or feasible in the world and the life that we currently enjoy. But in the event of a serious global event, and especially a fabricated one such as a False Flag Alien Attack or Invasion, it is not only highly practical and highly feasible but would be highly desired by the PTB because that is what their goal would be: Full Control Of The Populace. And I seriously doubt that our freedoms and comforts will afford any considerations within their agenda(s).

After spending all this time writing this rebuttal to sjkted's comments I now realize that this was unnecessary because the purpose of the article I presented was not for me to discuss or explain the technical aspects of the subject, but rather it was to pass along the truth as to whether or not the president has the legal authority to shut down the internet. During a time of war, and in the interest of National Security, the facts are:

1. The president has the authority to shut down or otherwise restrict ALL FORMS OF CIVIL COMMUNICATIONS.

2. In the end, the Technical Facts or Details really have little, if anything, to do with said authority because once the War Powers Act is invoked it is the LAW. At this point it makes no difference whether your internet access is up or down or whether or not your cell phone or CB Radio is working, because if you choose to break the law you may go to prison (or worse).

3. The War Powers Act HAS been invoked in the past and it CAN be invoked in the future.

Harley

13th December 2010, 12:05

AND From reading most of these posts I notice how quick a lot of you are to debunk the article and to even go so far as accusing me of "Promoting Fear".

From the content of these posts it "appears" to me that a lot of the responses were based on The Subject Title without reading the Subject Content. The reason I say this is because had the Subject Content along with the provided links been read, most of your comments, questions, and accusations would have been answered.

This article was not written of my own opinion, nor did I say that I agreed with it. It was merely an attempt to provide you, "The Avalonian", with the honest, factual, legal, TRUTH regarding the Subject so that you may be better informed and better equipped for any eventualities of the future. Period.

I am in no way promoting FEAR. I am only promoting TRUTH. We all need the truth, no matter how scary it may be, if we are to be able to create our own paths. Therefore, and I submit this to anyone and everyone: If you see the presenting of truth as the promotion of fear, then maybe you should reevaluate your own personal beliefs with respect to being an Avalonian.

And finally, I would like to thank all of you for showing me any kind of appreciation, for my effort in the researching and posting of this valid and useful information, which I did for YOU.

THANKS A F'ing LOT!

Oh! I almost forgot . . .

Have A Nice Day!

Steven

13th December 2010, 13:05

Can the people brought it back on ? YES! :)

As it is said in Brazil; 'The power to give freedom is greater than the power to take it'.

Namaste, Steven

Luke

13th December 2010, 13:07

Hey, Harley, sorry if you feel offended.

Guess we are all mentally wired for "normal situation"

Thinking in "real bloody war" is something that do not register.
And this is the part where our current trends we focused on mean simply zip.

sjkted

13th December 2010, 18:09

The government, and especially the military, have their own highly advanced and highly secure lines of communication so the loss of the internet would not effect them in the least. But a complete shutdown of the country would not have to occur because it can still be configured to allow for essential financial and business networking only, restricting access to all others.

I'm sure the Federal government and the defense arms have this, but the state and local governments surely do not and this is where hell would break loose.

So from reading this it is not difficult to fathom that with a Declaration of War our freedoms of travel and movement could be highly curtailed.

I'm just saying that they wouldn't be able to take the whole thing down -- just assert more control over access.

Y2K was nothing more than a man-made marketing event which isn't even comparable to a Declaration of War.

Working in the IT field, I know this quite well. I'm saying that it would be like Y2K as all of the systems would go down if someone could pull the plug on the internet.

----------------

Harley: one thing you're missing here is that information wants to be free and we all have great tech already. Let's just say hypothetically they did take down the internet which would cause a major catastrophy to both business and government systems, here are some things we could do:

- Sneakernet (from before the internet: info gets put onto a floppy disk -- today it would be a USB stick). You copy info from the stick to your computer and add information if you have any to add. When you're done, pass it onto your neighbor.

- FIDONet - this was a messaging/email type system from old BBSes that ran based on limited, brief connections. This type of system could be relayed today via WiFi, ham radio data, satellite, plain old modem POTS, etc.

- P2P Networks - With all the tech we have right now, we could have WiFi P2P networks. The idea is that everyone gathers in a central location and shares files wirelessly via their laptops or wireless devices.

And keep in mind, these are all interim solutions. If need be, the people could build their own internet via WiFi relaying and a bunch of different connection methods. It wouldn't be as refined as the internet initially, but you would be surprised at how fast something like this could be established and how it would become the established internet overnight.

I don't personally care that the President has assigned himself power to kill or torture US citizens and people who are innocent of crimes, take down the grid, call martial law, etc. If he wants to puff up his chest and write fancy words on paper, it's fine by me.

I personally am the Ruler of my Universe and I don't take lightly to such threats. In my code, I do not accept such infringements and will not stay on the sidelines if such things are attempted.

--sjkted

shadowstalker

13th December 2010, 19:05

They can't shut it down because even they use it.. to spy on us and other sites to keep up with the world.
With out the internet they themselves would be left in the dark.

sjkted

13th December 2010, 19:27

Shadowstalker: That's a good point and one I had not considered. They do need it to spy on us :-)

--sjkted

giovonni

13th December 2010, 19:28

The Internet :ban: Maybe ? :moony:

i found this very telling of our (world) governments growing paranoia

Justice Department Prepares for Ominous Expansion of "Anti-Terrorism" Law Targeting Activists

Saturday 11 December 2010

by: Michael Deutsch, t r u t h o u t | News Analysis

Justice Department Prepares for Ominous Expansion of "Anti-Terrorism" Law Targeting Activists
(Photo: Ryan J. Reilly; Edited: Lance Page / t r u t h o u t)

In late September, the FBI carried out a series of raids of homes and antiwar offices of public activists in Minneapolis and Chicago. Following the raids, the Obama Justice Department subpoenaed 14 activists to a grand jury in Chicago and also subpoenaed the files of several antiwar and community organizations. In carrying out these repressive actions, the Justice Department was taking its lead from the Supreme Court's 6-3 opinion last June in Holder v. the Humanitarian Law Project, which decided that nonviolent First Amendment speech and advocacy "coordinated with" or "under the direction of" a foreign group listed by the Secretary of State as "terrorist" was a crime.

The search warrants and grand jury subpoenas make it clear that the federal prosecutors are intent on accusing public nonviolent political organizers, many of whom are affiliated with Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO), of providing "material support" through their public advocacy for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). The Secretary of State has determined that both the PLFP and the FARC "threaten US national security, foreign policy or economic interests," a finding not reviewable by the courts, and listed both groups as foreign terrorist organizations (FTO).

In 1996, Congress made it a crime - then punishable by 10 years, which was later increased to 15 years - to anyone in the US who provides "material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization or attempts or conspires to do so." The present statute defines "material support or resources" as:

... any property, tangible or intangible, or service, including currency or monetary instruments or financial services, lodging, training, expert advice or assistance, safe houses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel and transportation except medicine or religious materials.

In the Humanitarian Law Project case, human rights workers wanted to teach members of the Kurdistan PKK, which seeks an independent Kurdish state, and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which sought an independent state in Sri Lanka, how to use humanitarian and international law to peacefully resolve disputes and obtain relief from the United Nations and other international bodies for human rights abuses by the governments of Turkey and Sri Lanka. Both organizations were designated as FTOs by the Secretary of State in a closed hearing, in which the evidence is heard secretly.

Despite the nonviolent, peacemaking goal of the Humanitarian Law Project's speech and training, the majority of the Supreme Court nonetheless interpreted the law to make such conduct a crime. Finding a whole new exception to the First Amendment, the Court decided that any support, even if it involves nonviolent efforts towards peace, is illegal under the law since it "frees up other resources within the organization that may be put to violent ends," and also helps lend "legitimacy" to foreign terrorist groups. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Roberts, despite the lack of any evidence, further opined that the FTO could use the human rights law to "intimidate, harass or destruct" its adversaries, and that even peace talks themselves could be used as a cover to re-arm for further attacks. Thus, the Court's opinion criminalizes efforts by independent groups to work for peace if they in any way cooperate or coordinate with designated FTOs.

The Court distinguishes what it refers to as "independent advocacy," which it finds is not prohibited by the statute, from "advocacy performed in coordination with, or at the direction of, a foreign terrorist organization," which is, for the first time, found to be a crime under the statute. The exact line demarcating where independent advocacy becomes impermissible coordination is left open and vague.

Seizing on this overbroad definition of "material support," the US government is now moving in on political groups and activists who are clearly exercising fundamental First Amendment rights by vocally opposing the government's branding of foreign liberation movements as terrorist and supporting their struggles against US-backed repressive regimes and illegal occupations.

Under the new definition of "material support," the efforts of President Jimmy Carter to monitor the elections in Lebanon and coordinate with the political parties there, including the designated FTO Hezbollah, could well be prosecuted as a crime. Similarly, the publication of op-ed articles by FTO spokesmen from Hamas or other designated groups by The New York Times or The Washington Post, or the filing of amicus briefs by human rights attorneys arguing against a group's terrorist designation or the statute itself could also now be prosecuted. Of course, the first targets of this draconian expansion of the material support law will not be a former president or the establishment media, but members of a Marxist organization who are vocal opponents of the governments of Israel and Colombia and the US policies supporting these repressive governments.

In his foreword to Nelson Mandela's recent autobiography "Conversations with Myself," President Obama wrote that "Mandela's sacrifice was so great that it called upon people everywhere to do what they could on behalf of human progress. … The first time I became politically active was during my college years, when I joined a campaign on behalf of divestment, and the effort to end apartheid in South Africa." At the time of Mr. Obama's First Amendment advocacy, Mr. Mandela and his organization the African National Congress (ANC) were denounced as terrorist by the US government. If the "material support" law had been in effect back then, Mr. Obama would have been subject to potential criminal prosecution. It is ironic - and the height of hypocrisy - that this same man who speaks with such reverence for Mr. Mandela and recalls his own support for the struggle against apartheid now allows the Justice Department under his command to criminalize similar First Amendment advocacy against Israeli apartheid and repressive foreign governments.

Source;
http://www.truth-out.org/justice-department-prepares-expansion-laws-targeting-activists

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3662/3480915660_94c4a5cb64_o.jpg[i]

shadowstalker

13th December 2010, 19:44

Shadowstalker: That's a good point and one I had not considered. They do need it to spy on us :-)

--sjkted

They also need it to spy on each other

THIRDEYE

13th December 2010, 20:23

they cannot shut the net down if they did the infrastrcture would collapse,they may shut down websites of course,its just another tool to rape us of our 1st ammendment rights love,light and abundance....thirdeye...

Bill Ryan

15th December 2010, 13:08

Shadowstalker: That's a good point and one I had not considered. They do need it to spy on us :-)

--sjkted

I was told exactly this recently.

It's their system, they own it, they run it, they monitor it, and they'll continue operating it as long as it's useful to them.

They use it to monitor all communications and create supercomputer models of personality, attitude, intention, and social networking. We're all psych-profiled in more detail than anyone would believe, and each have our own virtual equivalent in a giant database which is used to forecast events as in a giant video game played at fast-forward.

But everything that is written, spoken or otherwise created and sent digitally, whether encrypted or not - e-mail, phone calls, forum posts, audio or text chat, private message, fax, or silently holding up a handwritten message on Skype video - is instantly monitored, interpreted and stored. EVERYTHING.

You stand a chance with telepathy (I'm not joking), snailmail (hand-write your message - if you type it to a document, write and print it while offline and then immediately delete it securely by overwriting the temporary file), or talking personally in a crowded restaurant picked at random.

There are some things which you can't even think about without them getting picked up. A strong thought on certain classified 'flagged' subjects will register in hyperspace like a bright flashlight on a dark night. It'll be seen immediately. This is real, and they have this technology. One has to learn meditation techniques to 'dim the light' and cloak oneself. (This is frustrating to the insiders who are monitoring thoughts and intentions.)

Otherwise, they're listening and watching. It's all done automatically, of course, but once a number of 'flags' are generated then they bring on humans to take a look at what you're up to. 1984 began 26 years ago, and we're well into it by now.

This is an important post.

Hiram

15th December 2010, 18:56

Thanks for laying that out Bill. There are some who don't realize the depth of the infiltration yet. DARPA outlined their plans to create a virtual universe here:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/07/darpa_cyber_range_rfp/

and from their own site:

http://www.allgov.com/Agency/Defense_Advanced_Research_Projects_Agency__DARPA_

So we know this was already running for years (perhaps decades now) quietly growing and changing as their predictive modeling became better.

Don't believe in it? The network knew you would say that:)

norman

15th December 2010, 19:31

Yeah yeah yeah...........

Another big issue is that they're as dependent on it as we are to control their own government operations.

Errr.... don't count on that........

They have communications abilities that would fry our minds trying to think about it. They have, ready and waiting, a family of super malware that would shut down the net without even requiring a 'legal' case to shut it down. From watching their patterns of behaviour I'd say they were far more likely to 'damage' it covertly than for the president of a superpower to stand up in front of the press and bid it to shut down.

bilko quote:"Thats what i thought sjkted.
You have to shut it off by the source which is fed to us by the phone companies.
But, in doing so you would be ushering in the biggest industrial pandemic the world has ever seen simply because the western world is a networked society.
People got a little twitchy with the fuel strikes when the lorry drivers stopped delivering but that was nothing, this would be government hurry curry or whatever they call it lol. "

Err.... perhaps that's why they have taken all their credit out of the money system, retreated to their ivory castles and pulled up the draw bridges. It seems elementary to my mind that they wouldn't have done that until they were ready to do something very nasty that they already know will be economically catastrophic ( and probably a whole lot more too ).

zebowho

15th December 2010, 20:38

Hi everybody! :) Thanks for the post Harley but that's only a small part of the equation. ;)

One question.....where do you put the "Buttton" to turn all off! LOL Ok...that was a rhetorical question. My point is this:

As a network engineer myself, I would have to agree with sjkted 100%. sure they can pass all the laws they want but the system...the internet (at least the one you use) is NOT one single autonomous "thing". Its still such a huge ball of band aids and bailing wire, even with all the new infrastructure going in the ground, on the polls or through the air including wifi hotspot pockets everywhere. This doesn't even mention the "private" internets (yes thats plural)....ever used WebEx?? In short, no one single company/gov't owns the internet and its not one single system. Its still a collection (a huge one at that) of wires/servers/computers, banks of servers (data centers and NOC's) that really....is totally impossible to put a "kill switch" or "off button" anywhere.

I still think its good info to know what kind of bills are being considered...so on that note it was a good thread Harley, maybe needs a name change though! imho :)

-z

sjkted

16th December 2010, 01:44

I was told exactly this recently.

It's their system, they own it, they run it, they monitor it, and they'll continue operating it as long as it's useful to them.

They use it to monitor all communications and create supercomputer models of personality, attitude, intention, and social networking. We're all psych-profiled in more detail than anyone would believe, and each have our own virtual equivalent in a giant database which is used to forecast events as in a giant video game played at fast-forward.

But everything that is written, spoken or otherwise created and sent digitally, whether encrypted or not - e-mail, phone calls, forum posts, audio or text chat, private message, fax, or silently holding up a handwritten message on Skype video - is instantly monitored, interpreted and stored. EVERYTHING.

You stand a chance with telepathy (I'm not joking), snailmail (hand-write your message - if you type it to a document, write and print it while offline and then immediately delete it securely by overwriting the temporary file), or talking personally in a crowded restaurant picked at random.

There are some things which you can't even think about without them getting picked up. A strong thought on certain classified 'flagged' subjects will register in hyperspace like a bright flashlight on a dark night. It'll be seen immediately. This is real, and they have this technology. One has to learn meditation techniques to 'dim the light' and cloak oneself. (This is frustrating to the insiders who are monitoring thoughts and intentions.)

Otherwise, they're listening and watching. It's all done automatically, of course, but once a number of 'flags' are generated then they bring on humans to take a look at what you're up to. 1984 began 26 years ago, and we're well into it by now.

This is an important post.

This may be true to some extent, but there are some big holes in the system.

For example, each country maintains their own access to the internet and they don't always cooperate with each other legally (i.e. most spam originates from China and Russia but there is no legal recourse to it). China has their internet totally on lock-down except for those citizens wealthy enough to afford a VPN connection to access the blocked sites (~$50-$100/year which is a lot of money over there). A VPN (Virtual Private Network) is an encrypted connection that allows you to originate your internet traffic from the VPN provider. I tried this last year as a basic test. I found a company that offers anonymous VPN connections and bought a money order in cash from a local store and mailed it from another state and they e-mailed me the access info on a one-time use e-mail account.

So, the only people with the info on my VPN connection was myself and the VPN provider, and they did not have my contact info on file. In addition, they stated their systems were all programmed to immediately disgard all IP Addresses, so if records were ever subpoenaed from them there would be none to give. I was able to choose from a connection in one of about 15 countries. I ended up choosing Estonia and thus all websites, e-mail, etc. appeared to come from Estonia. This would not be trackable.

I do understand that encryption can be broken, but when you consider that I'm not the only one doing stuff like this and that there are a ton of people who have applications that are encrypted and many are high-grade encryption that do not have back doors, it would be impossible to crack it in real-time and would require substantial resources to crack -- i.e. assigning a supercomputer to watch every citizen isn't practical in terms of money or staff resources, just as there can't be one police officer to watch everybody full time.

One of the problems with all of this is that it assumes that ALL internet traffic is routed through a central source which is filtering and monitoring and modeling. This simply isn't the case, not even in the US. I have a good amount of contacts at tier-1 ISPs and telcos and have had some experience working in them myself and I can say that there are machines like Carnivore (http://old.disinfo.com/archive/pages/dossier/id408/pg1/index.html), but there is not enough bandwidth or internet infrastructure resources to relay everything twice -- once to the destination and again to the alphabet soup agency to add to our personal profile. I know this is changing in the US, but it certainly isn't the case worldwide, and there are big holes.

If you watch the tech news, there is a bunch of issues about petty governments grumbling about not having access to tap records on the internet. We had a big issue about legal government wiretapping of VOIP phone lines such as Vonage and higher-grade corporate versions. It is extremely difficult to do because there is not one "line" to put a tap on. In addition, there has been complaining by India and Saudi Arabia lately which have both threatened to make Blackberry service illegal as they are unable to tap it.

The internet is still the wild, wild, west. They are trying to control it and succeeding in some regards, but there are big holes and probably always will be due to the distributed nature of the internet and because it is a mesh network that cannot be brought under one central authority.

--sjkted

Ahkenaten

16th December 2010, 02:08

Isn't the law increasingly becoming besides the point? I mean so much of government is Black there is no idea if they are running according to the law or not, zero transparency. Seems ironically pointless that these kinds of laws are passed giving more power to the government that no one knows what it is doing............................the entire meaning of rule of law has been thrown into question as civilization unravels.

Bill WHAT do you mean certain thoughts send up a flag that attracts attention to one? Certain thoughts like.............never mind I can fill in the blanks.

As long as we are all functionally insane we all have plausible deniability.

norman

16th December 2010, 02:23

As long as we are all functionally insane we all have plausible deniability.

So true and so "Deer in the headlights" too.

Ahkenaten

18th December 2010, 01:46

So true and so "Deer in the headlights" too.

Yeah Norm - you mean like that look that Bush II was always getting on his face?!

NoTingles

18th December 2010, 22:55

msg. deleted

sjkted

19th December 2010, 01:06

The most credible threat to the internet today is the ISPs attempting to violate net neutrality.

Take a look at this discussion: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/12/18/1428230/Look-Forward-To-Per-Service-Per-Page-Fees

And this, the $200 Billon Rip-Off: http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070810_002683.html

And the parasite's plan to pull it off: http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/epicenter/2010/12/final_slide_deck.pdf

--sjkted

000

22nd December 2010, 15:26

There are some things which you can't even think about without them getting picked up. A strong thought on certain classified 'flagged' subjects will register in hyperspace like a bright flashlight on a dark night. It'll be seen immediately. This is real, and they have this technology. One has to learn meditation techniques to 'dim the light' and cloak oneself. (This is frustrating to the insiders who are monitoring thoughts and intentions.)

Otherwise, they're listening and watching. It's all done automatically, of course, but once a number of 'flags' are generated then they bring on humans to take a look at what you're up to. 1984 began 26 years ago, and we're well into it by now.

Thank you Bill for bringing this topic to light. Here is an intriguing article on the matter: The NSA and Remote Neural Monitoring (http://dillsnapcogitation.wordpress.com/2008/04/06/thought-policing-the-nsa-and-remote-neural-monotiring-rnm/). I'm not familiar with this topic in depth but this is important stuff to be aware of. I am curious as to what the situation is, regarding this technology, in countries other than the United States.

It is somewhat off topic, but also not, at the same time. I view what we've all called the web/internet as a physical manifestation of a much deeper and more metaphysical 'net' accessible in the realm of dreams/altered consciousness etc which make acts like remote viewing very much a reality. As within, so without :neo:

The One

22nd December 2010, 16:18

http://msn-cnet.com.com/Security+officials+to+spy+on+chat+rooms/2100-7348_3-5466140.html?part=msn-cnet&subj=ns_5466140&tag=msn_home&GT1=5750

TigaHawk

23rd December 2010, 03:13

I think the internet can be shut down, to a certain extent.

Firstly, you'd target the providers. Flick of a switch from their end and everyone using them for a connection to the internet get's dropped.

Secondly, you'd target the DNS servers. Which the PTB would most likey own themselves, or have easy access too. the DNS servers are what turns you're 67.212.160.12 into www.projectavalon.net - meaning you'd have to know the number equivilant for all you're favorite websites to be able to access them.

Thirdly they may choose to lock incoming/outgoing data from the country itself - I dont know how many cables you guys have connecting to the US, but i believe australia has 3/5 giant cables that run underwater - and they support the whole country. Know when you're isp's got technical issues and you make a joke about a guy pulling out the wrong cable? Well this is definately the right cable to pull in this senario.

So that's pretty much 90% of the US internetless right there.

This is just the intial thing - ie they cut off the net yesturday to the whole of the US. That'd be how they'd do it. How, in those situations, would you access the outside world via the internet?

It would take time to build up another internet without using the infastructure they have controll over.

Now for after....

give it a few months time and people would be building their own internet. One would assume the way to do this would to be via connecting everyone, physically. Ie 1 person, connecting to another, who has a connection to here, and soforwarth. Wether they'd be able to host anything usable and informational is another story - seeing as people mostly download entertainment stuff, like movies, games, etc - so these are the things which would be avaliable on said networks.

1 person here and there with the good old conspiracy folder would do great. but that's not helping with the present, up to date news is t?

And say the people-net starts to grow - Its easy for the PTB to pin access points - they need to be good at it too - there are alot of people who try to setup the internet themselves, and end up doing it in a not so good way - ie setting up their home router to be on the highest signal, on teh same signal the local isp is using for sharing their wireless internet. They know how to find problem signals and quickly. A cable network would only go so far - you'd need wireless to jump buildings.

And then - if they couldent be botherd hunting down people's own networks - they'd just jam it. Jamming wireless in a significant area is as simple as taking a shielding plate off the back of a microwave and turning it on. Now if a company/organisations job was to jam wireless, they'd have alot better ways to do it than that :P

and the greatest problem of the lot. Say all the other problems are overcome, and a the people-net is thriving after the internet is pulled. Eveyone in the US can talk amongst themselves allmost the same as they would on the internet. But thats the problem. Amongst themselves. You need a link which is going to get information from the rest of the world In, and vice versa. A single computer wouldent be able to handle a country's worth of people hitting it to try and get to the outside world, you'd need a datacentre.

And then there is the bigger problem - If there's only 1 way "out and in" of the country internet wise - how can you tell teh person "feeding you info from the outside world" isnt tampering with it as well.

I like thinking about things :P

sjkted

23rd December 2010, 05:40

Secondly, you'd target the DNS servers. Which the PTB would most likey own themselves, or have easy access too. the DNS servers are what turns you're 67.212.160.12 into www.projectavalon.net - meaning you'd have to know the number equivilant for all you're favorite websites to be able to access them.

Thirdly they may choose to lock incoming/outgoing data from the country itself - I dont know how many cables you guys have connecting to the US, but i believe australia has 3/5 giant cables that run underwater - and they support the whole country. Know when you're isp's got technical issues and you make a joke about a guy pulling out the wrong cable? Well this is definately the right cable to pull in this senario.

A few problems:

(1) Every ISP, hosting provider, and most companies operate their own DNS servers which all follow their own rules. I am personally responsible for about 50 distributed DNS servers. If I were to receive a government order to take all of these down, I would be leaving literally hundreds of companies completely unable to operate. In addition, anyone could operate a rogue DNS server or still access a DNS server in another country. Keep in mind that many DNS servers are private, and thus the government doesn't know that they exist or where they are because they are behind firewalls and on internal networks with non-routable IP Addresses.

(2) There is not one route from the US to abroad. There are numerous routes and it is not entirely clear based on IP Addressing what traffic is originating from what country because of how routing works and how big ISPs operate in multiple countries.

Seriously, I think you guys need a better plan if you really want to conceptualize how to take it down.

And, even if they could do it, the monetary system would stop working, nearly everyone would be unable to work, utilities would be cut off, government and companies would not be able to operate. Since we do not have 1970's style resources any more, we would literally be knocked back a few hundred years in terms of tech. I'm sure everyone would wait while the food distribution system and everything else is down for the government to rebuild it -- like they really could...

--sjkted

TigaHawk

23rd December 2010, 05:52

ahhh, i diddnt know that bit about the DNS servers.

Lowly 1st level here :P

with #2 tho, i still think it's doable.

The example with Australia, we only have 3/4 big cables that go from Australia, and connect with Japan or other parts of the world and are the main "pipes" which are the only ways our data can leave Australia and travel abroad.

As i said, i do not know how many are in the US. I'd imagine alot more?

But if you wanted to keep you're country running, without crashing all the stuff that relies on the net being up and running - wouldent you just shut off those lines out of the country so the country is isolated to itself?

If there are satelite or alternate to cable ways of communicating with the rest of the world - they'd be overloaded in no time from a country's worth of traffic trying to go thru it at once - right?

ie big bad terrorists release some supervirus that they cant stop re-infecting. so Obarmar can go i know! lets save the internet by turning off the internet while re disenfect the pc's, then set you up on a new, government run internet which is virus free! and requires youre fingerprint, bloodwork, iris scan and firstborn child to use! and we'll make it mandatory too, everyone needs the internet in this day and age!

etc?

sjkted

23rd December 2010, 06:32

Yes, #2 is doable but not completely airtight. There are countries like China and Saudi Arabia that have country-wide firewalls and access control, but they aren't able to control everything -- just the masses. This would be nearly impossible to control with VPN connections, which once again nearly everyone is dependent on -- federal government, big businesses, small businesses, banks/financial systems, students connecting to their school from home, etc.

Other ways of getting out include ham/packet radio, satellite (although some satellite internet is download-only), cellular SMS/MMS, telephone data (i.e. BBS or direct data transfer).

Another way which I suspect would be very easy would be for people who are "on the border" to provide gateway services. For example, let's say the US took down the internet and all of the sites I wanted to get to were in Europe or Asia. Someone who had access to an ISP in the US and an ISP in a bordering country (i.e. Mexico or Canada) could bridge a connection for me. In other words, I would connect to their "system" and they would relay traffic back and forth for me through Mexico or Canada to the site I want to get to abroad. This is basically the way US citizens visit Cuba as you can't take a direct flight, but you can fly to Mexico or Canada and then Cuba.

--sjkted

White Rabbit

26th January 2011, 03:53

During the State of the Union address tonight Obama kept bringing up the internet, we need to get everyone who cannot yet get on the internet connected.... and in my head i was finishing the thought saying... hmmmm the "Kill Switch" Bill... the more people that can connect the more people to control with the Switch.... they can choose who to cut off... for whatever reason they deem the emergency... or maybe someone will spill their coffee on it and shut off everyone... I don't know... I am just tired of people trying to give me something just so they can control it or take it away.

baggywrinkle

26th January 2011, 06:27

No no no, they won't shut down the internet for very long.

But what a clever way to have a bank holiday for a week or so.

When it comes back up the rules might be very different.

All it would take would be an executive order requiring all American ISP's
to shut down.

When it comes back up you might need a government issued dongle to access any ISP legally

They WANT you online. Banking, facebook, myspace, buying, consuming.

But they might not appreciate you listening to Alex Jones and his genre. With a dongle you might
get a visit or just disappear.

With the internet or satellite there is a gate keeper that can be monitored.

But not so with a shortwave radio.

Radio Havana, Radio China, and Radio Russia are still alive and well. They may be lies but the slant
is different

And no one need know who you've been listening to.

Mark my word. The day VPN becomes illegal for private citizens, it will be too late. Your shortwave
should already be set up

You may be able to get on the net. But it might not be a place where you would want to do anything
but check stock prices.

I would love to access a foreign ISP via satellite. If you know how please let me know.

FTA satellite content on C/KUband might also be an option. But shortwave reigns supreme when it comes
to privacy.

ThePythonicCow

26th January 2011, 08:07

... hmmmm the "Kill Switch" Bill... the more people that can connect the more people to control with the Switch.... they can choose who to cut off...

Charles has said, and I tend to suspect he's right on this one, that they (American authorities) do not intend to do much cutting of the Internet off. Rather they seek to master the Internet, as they have newspapers, radio and TV already, as a useful tool of mass propaganda, (dis)information and, in the case of the Internet, monitoring.

cayman

28th January 2011, 14:22

well, I think it´s time for us to practice telepathy, :alien: just in case, right?

Flash

28th January 2011, 14:54

I think this article from the Globe and Mail is more than pertinent here. Can they turn off the internet: Yes. Here is the link, and below the full article.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/tech-news/egypt-unplugs-itself-from-the-internet/article1885879/

Egypt unplugs itself from the Internet
JORDAN ROBERTSON
San Francisco— The Associated Press
Published Friday, Jan. 28, 2011 2:35AM EST

Egypt unplugs itself from the Internet
JORDAN ROBERTSON
San Francisco— The Associated Press
Published Friday, Jan. 28, 2011 2:35AM EST
Last updated Friday, Jan. 28, 2011 9:19AM EST
29 comments Email Print Decrease text size
Increase text size About a half-hour past midnight Friday morning in Egypt, the Internet went dead.

Almost simultaneously, the handful of companies that pipe the Internet into and out of Egypt went dark as protesters were gearing up for a fresh round of demonstrations calling for the end of President Hosni Mubarak's nearly 30-year rule, experts said.

More related to this story
•Egypt’s youth at forefront of ‘people power’ movement
•How a brutal beating and Facebook led to Egyptian protests
•Thousands of protesters in Egypt's streets, clash with police after prayers
Infographic
Demographics of revolt
Media
Tweeting an Egyptian uprising
Video
Mohamed ElBaradei returns to join uprising Egypt has apparently done what many technologists thought was unthinkable for any country with a major Internet economy: It unplugged itself entirely from the Internet to try and silence dissent.

Experts say it's unlikely that what's happened in Egypt could happen in the United States because the U.S. has numerous Internet providers and ways of connecting to the Internet. Co-ordinating a simultaneous shutdown would be a massive undertaking.

“It can't happen here,” said Jim Cowie, the chief technology officer and a co-founder of Renesys, a network security firm in Manchester, N.H., that studies Internet disruptions. “How many people would you have to call to shut down the U.S. Internet? Hundreds, thousands maybe? We have enough Internet here that we can have our own Internet. If you cut it off, that leads to a philosophical question: Who got cut off from the Internet, us or the rest of the world?”

In fact, there are few countries anywhere with all their central Internet connections in one place or so few places that they can be severed at the same time. But the idea of a single “kill switch” to turn the Internet on and off has seduced some American lawmakers, who have pushed for the power to shutter the Internet in a national emergency.

The Internet blackout in Egypt shows that a country with strong control over its Internet providers apparently can force all of them to pull their plugs at once, something that Mr. Cowie called “almost entirely unprecedented in Internet history.”

The outage sets the stage for blowback from the international community and investors. It also sets a precedent for other countries grappling with paralyzing political protests – though censoring the Internet and tampering with traffic to quash protests is nothing new.

China has long restricted what its people can see online and received renewed scrutiny for the practice when Internet search leader Google Inc. proclaimed a year ago that it would stop censoring its search results in China.

In 2009, Iran disrupted Internet service to try to curb protests over disputed elections. And two years before that, Burma's Internet was crippled when military leaders apparently took the drastic step of physically disconnecting primary communications links in major cities, a tactic that was foiled by activists armed with cell phones and satellite links.

Computer experts say what sets Egypt's action apart is that the entire country was disconnected in an apparently coordinated effort, and that all manner of devices are affected, from mobile phones to laptops. It seems, though, that satellite phones would not be affected.

“Iran never took down any significant portion of their Internet connection – they knew their economy and the markets are dependent on Internet activity,” Mr. Cowie said.

When countries are merely blocking certain sites – like Twitter or Facebook – where protesters are co-ordinating demonstrations, as apparently happened at first in Egypt, protesters can use “proxy” computers to circumvent the government censors. The proxies “anonymize” traffic and bounce it to computers in other countries that send it along to the restricted sites.

But when there's no Internet at all, proxies can't work and online communication grinds to a halt.

Renesys' network sensors showed that Egypt's four primary Internet providers – Link Egypt, Vodafone/Raya, Telecom Egypt, Etisalat Misr – and all went dark at 12:34 a.m. Those companies shuttle all Internet traffic into and out of Egypt, though many people get their service through additional local providers with different names.

Italy-based Seabone said no Internet traffic was going into or out of Egypt after 12:30 a.m. local time.

“There's no way around this with a proxy,” Mr. Cowie said. “There is literally no route. It's as if the entire country disappeared. You can tell I'm still kind of stunned.”

The technical act of turning off the Internet can be fairly straightforward. It likely requires only a simple change to the instructions for the companies' networking equipment.

Craig Labovitz, chief scientist for Arbor Networks, a Chelmsford, Mass., security company, said that in countries such as Egypt – with a centralized government and a relatively small number of fibre-optic cables and other ways for the Internet to get piped in – the companies that own the technologies are typically under strict licenses from the government.

“It's probably a phone call that goes out to half a dozen folks who enter a line on a router configuration file and hit return,” Mr. Labovitz said. “It's like programming your TiVo – you have things that are set up and you delete one. It's not high-level programming.”

Twitter confirmed Tuesday that its service was being blocked in Egypt, and Facebook reported problems.

“Iran went through the same pattern,” Mr. Labovitz said. “Initially there was some level of filtering, and as things deteriorated, the plug was pulled. It looks like Egypt might be following a similar pattern.”

The ease with which Egypt cut itself also means the country can control where the outages are targeted, experts said. So its military facilities, for example, can stay online while the Internet vanishes for everybody else.

Experts said it was too early to tell which, if any, facilities still have connections in Egypt.

Mr. Cowie said his firm is investigating clues that a small number of small networks might still be available.

Meanwhile, a program Renesys uses that displays the percentage of each country that is connected to the Internet was showing a figure that he was still struggling to believe. Zero

InCiDeR

28th January 2011, 18:04

I think we have to split this question in two:

Can? Absolutely! How do I know? Because during 10 of my incarnated years I was supermoderator for one of the oldest forum that is still alive today. Member stock consisted of " the most wanted so called hackers"...and I'm not talking of teenagers. Fear not Bill, I quit 2008 ;)

Will? In my opinion, not under normal circumstances. They benefit far to much to keep people like us in the "open". But during riots and uncontrollable happenings, they probably will use that as a tool!

One very important question arise: What will we do if that happens to our forum? Do we have a plan B?

Maria Stade

28th January 2011, 18:21

Yes Egypt has been cut of !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKuzfxDxktE&feature=player_embedded#

Live stream here !

http://www.livestream.com/democracynow

1159

28th January 2011, 18:33

InCiDeR

28th January 2011, 18:43

baggywrinkle

28th January 2011, 18:56

I think we have to split this question in two:

One very important question arise: What will we do if that happens to our forum? Do we have a plan B?

Henry Deacon said it in 2008; ham radio.

Ham radio; shortwave radio; packet radio; FIDONET; SSTV

This takes preparation to another level and eliminates the casual keyboard commando.

I might add clandestine radio; numbers stations; and one time pad for all your serious encryption needs

InCiDeR

28th January 2011, 19:06

Henry Deacon said it in 2008; ham radio.

Ham radio; shortwave radio; packet radio; FIDONET; SSTV

This takes preparation to another level and eliminates the casual keyboard commando.

I might add clandestine radio; numbers stations; and one time pad for all your serious encryption needs

baggywrinkle, thank you very much for your enlighted input. The TPTB:s biggest advantage, in my opinion, is their organisation. Maybe we should do some preparation as well...at least until we may be able to communicate telepathic again ;)

ThePythonicCow

28th January 2011, 19:15

One very important question arise: What will we do if that happens to our forum? Do we have a plan B?

If all countries shut down their public Internet, then the Internet goes back to being some sort of U.S. Military DARPA only thingie. Bye bye Internet for the duration of the outage.

More likely, just some countries shut down (the biggie, from my perspective, being whether or not the U.S. shut down the public Internet.) In that case, it would be important for those of us in the remaining countries to still be able to communicate.

This feels to me like the basic problem the Internet itself was designed to handle, only elevated up from the problem of losing a router due to a nuclear bomb, to the problem of losing a nation (*) due to a tyrannical government.

I wonder if we could come up with a program that those of us who have Internet connected servers could run, where these running instances connect to each other and route packets between themselves as best as possible, allowing for nodes coming and going, handling bisections, and enabling the reporting of current connectivity. Individual users could tunnel into any accessible server in this network, and then communicate with each other.

Kind of an Internet over the Internet. I suspect that such a server could be cobbled together from existing software, with little new code.

That way, when Uncle Sam goes dark, causing projectavalon.net to go off the air, Avalonians outside the U.S. would have a backup way to connect.

Other Internet communities could benefit similarly from such a facility. In order to avoid yet another "single (or mere handful) point of failure", Internet communities setting this up should be able to do so with some quasi independence, able to share connectivity between communities if available, but with no one Internet community able to threaten the overall connectivity of other communities.

This is Tor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_%28anonymity_network%29) like, but not the same. Tor (onion routing) sacrifices considerable bandwidth in order to provide as much anonymity to users as possible.

The facility I am imagining here would strive for higher throughput efficiency, focusing on providing as much connectivity as possible. Any end-user who can still make a single encrypted tunnel to any of the servers of a community to which he belongs should be able to continue to have contact with all other such connected members of that community. Packets would be encrypted in order to frustrate the efforts of our tyrannical overlords to focus monitoring or intervention. But, unlike Tor, routing would be done as efficiently as possible.

The nature of the client application would require some thought. Typical web browser usage depends on specific sites being up and connected. If projectavalon.net goes off the air, most Avalonians are no longer connected - period. They bring up their web browser to that site, it doesn't load, and that's the end of that story.

We'd need a client, perhaps some sort of IRC-like thing, which did not assume that anything specific was up past the first server you were able to connect to.

Am I describing something like Netsukutu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netsukuku)?

(*) P.S. -- "losing a nation" meaning losing public use of most of the major ISP's with systems controllable by that nation.

ThePythonicCow

28th January 2011, 19:25

Henry Deacon said it in 2008; ham radio.Ham radio works for ham radio communities and those close to them.

But the size of vital Internet communities dwarfs the ham radio community. Backup communication methods depend on being regularly exercised, so that you know they will work in times of emergency, and perhaps more importantly, you know that others with whom you wish to communicate will likely fall back to the same method.

We are not going to see most Avalonians (or most of the membership of the other large Internet communities I've known) all install and become familiar with a ham radio, and practice communicating with others in their group using that radio. Just not going to happen.

I believe we could use a robust Internet-based solution.

If the major Internet communities of this world cannot survive the first serious crisis, that would be tragic.

baggywrinkle

28th January 2011, 19:53

We are not going to see most Avalonians (or most of the membership of the other large Internet communities I've known) all install and become familiar with a ham radio, and practice communicating with others in their group using that radio. Just not going to happen.

...

that would be tragic.

Is this a practical example of natural selection at work?

Among my fellowship there seem to be two groups. Those who believe the Lord will provide, and those who believe we are God's hands and feet on earth.

When the trap snaps shut who will be left standing?

God couldn't come today so he sent me in his place, and bread doesn't just bake itself!

ThePythonicCow

28th January 2011, 20:02

Is this a practical example of natural selection at work?

Among my fellowship there seem to be two groups. Those who believe the Lord will provide, and those who believe we are God's hands and feet on earth.

When the trap snaps shut who will be left standing?

God couldn't come today so he sent me in his place, and bread doesn't just bake itself!

My concern was with the survival of community, the connections between people that form a fabric all their own.

The survival of the individual and of the family is another matter. A related matter, yes, for without the individual, there is not a community, and without a community, the individual is limited in critical perhaps vital ways. But another matter still.

Internet communities have become, quite rapidly, the body incarnate of a new extent of human connectedness.

Our communities must survive our tragedies if they are to have long term, life sustaining meaning.

InCiDeR

28th January 2011, 20:42

My concern was with the survival of community, the connections between people that form a fabric all their own.

The survival of the individual and of the family is another matter. A related matter, yes, for without the individual, there is not a community, and without a community, the individual is limited in critical perhaps vital ways. But another matter still.

Internet communities have become, quite rapidly, the body incarnate of a new extent of human connectedness.

Our communities must survive our tragedies if they are to have long term, life sustaining meaning.

Very well put, ThePythonicCow. I am also very concerned about the survival of this community when and if the "heat" triggers. And not just our community, all communities that discuss "alternative things and views". The problem, as I see it, is that there always an ISP that provides the first link from your computer to the first nod into the internet itself...its inevitably unless we don't have our own cables or wireless satelitte to do our biddings. An example in modern time is the torrent portal "The Pirate Bay" that were situated at same ISP that I am today. When they got "the heat", I wasn't able to go online at all.

So the question whitstands: What will we do to keep our communication if things go very bad?

baggywrinkle

28th January 2011, 21:07

My concern was with the survival of community, the connections between people that form a fabric all their own.

.

Ask and ye shall be answered

The Alternative P2P Wireless Internet Network: The Netsukuku Idea

Would it be possible, using p2p and wireless technologies, to gain independence from internet providers and make free and open net connectivity a reality? Andrea Lo Pumo, a young Italian mathematician has developed Netsukuku, a vision for an alternative wireless network that may represent a disruptive change for the Internet as we know it.

The Netsukuku project, which has been recently featured on Wired Italia, is based on the idea of linking multiple computers using only WiFi connectivity and a specifically-built address system that allows direct communications between machines without resorting to the HTTP protocol.

What Netsukuku aims to do is to empower local communities by creating private peer-to-peer networks where connecting to the “standard” Internet is possible, but non compulsory to exchange information and data.

You can think of Netsukuku as a scaled, democratized version of the Internet.

But what are exactly the main advantages of such a solution?

Internet-independent: The core idea behind Netsekuku is to get rid of Internet providers. Each machine inside the WiFi network serves as a router that redirects the information towards all other nodes in the network.

* Resource-uninintensive: The Netsukuku protocol is built to handle a massive number of computers while requiring minimal computer CPU usage and memory resources.

* Private: The Netsukuku address system doesn't work using the HTTP protocol. All computers inside the network cannot be identified outside the local network or remotely-exploited.

* Fast: The Netsukuku wireless network allows fast file transfers between machines because there are no central servers or storage systems. All information is exchanged privately, in a p2p fashion without intermediaries.

* Economical: The Netsukuku network works with standard machines that are WiFi-enabled, thus old machines will work just fine with no need to have last-generation computers, additional hardware or pricey software to install.

* Open-source: The Netsukuku code is released under a GNU / GPL license, it is open and freely editable and redistributable by anyone who wants to build upon on it or fix bugs.

The Netsukuku project is based on the idea of exploiting the potential of WiFi connectivity, linking the PCs of wireless communities to act as routers, forming a network that could become as large or larger than the current Internet.

Think of it as a wireless FIDONET. In fact, I think FIDONET would run very nicely in this environment

Now go forth and make it happen

http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topics/netsukukus-fractal-address

norman

28th January 2011, 21:25

.....So the question whitstands: What will we do to keep our communication if things go very bad?

If the net vanishes ( and I say it could easily - who controls the satellites? ) we will be into some extremely serious straits. Polishing up our big picture analysis on forums like this one won't mean very much anyway. The removal of the web from public access will be a declaration of war against us. In such a live war situation we wouldn't even WANT to broadcast all our plans and ideas.

It would be all down to small groups operating in 'radio silence'. At least we've had a few years of normalising ourselves to the real world, that's a lot more than many will have going for themselves.

I have a shortwave receiver but there is very little left to listen to on it these days. As far as I can tell, the official HAM radio operators are mostly committed tot he 'system' with a blind faith in MUM that's embarrassing to listen to. I wouldn't count on them being much better than STAZI.

ThePythonicCow

28th January 2011, 21:28

Very well put, ThePythonicCow. I am also very concerned about the survival of this community when and if the "heat" triggers. And not just our community, all communities that discuss "alternative things and views".
Yes.

The problem, as I see it, is that there always an ISP that provides the first link from your computer to the first nod into the internet itself...its inevitably ... I wasn't able to go online at all.
The only way for a given individual to increase the likelihood they can connect is for that individual to have multiple ways of connecting. The significant majority, who have only one Internet connection, via one ISP, will be disconnected if that ISP gets the heat and is shut down.

That just is.

At those times in my life when this was unacceptable to me, and when I had the means to address the problem, I always maintained at least two separate ISP accounts, via different media. Alternative media include cell phone wireless, telephone twisted pair, TV coax cable, and satellite.

So the question whitstands: What will we do to keep our communication if things go very bad?
Individually, one can only keep connected if one has some ISP account still working.

My concern here is not so much you or me, the individual. If I cannot afford a suitable alternative ISP account that happens to still be up, and if I am in the wrong country at the wrong time, then I have no Internet. There is nothing much that you or Project Avalon or others can do about this.

My concern here is with keeping a working subset of each important Internet community connected, so that each such community survives major crises, and remains vital through the crisis, when they can make such an essential contribution.

Those community members who still have connectivity need to still be able to connect, as a community, even when say all the major ISP's in the community's main host country are taken down, bringing the community's web server offline, or when that particular community is targeted by The Powers That Were (TPTW), as piratebay and wikileaks have been at times and in various ways.

ThePythonicCow

28th January 2011, 21:47

Ask and ye shall be answered

The Alternative P2P Wireless Internet Network: The Netsukuku Idea
Yes - I was aware of Netsukuku (note that I mentioned it at the end of my long post, earlier in this thread.)

It has been a couple of months however since I considered it in detail. My remaining fuzzy intuition is that Netsukuku is more focused on providing an automated mesh network for cellphone wireless in an urban (dense population) setting, and that it would be unsuitable for the need I am describing here. However that is not a reliable intuition.

I am going back now to refresh my understanding of Netsukuku.

ThePythonicCow

28th January 2011, 21:58

If the net vanishes ( and I say it could easily - who controls the satellites? ) we will be into some extremely serious straits. Polishing up our big picture analysis on forums like this one won't mean very much anyway. The removal of the web from public access will be a declaration of war against us.Yes, all out vanishing of the net would be dire. In such a case we won't have to worry about how to keep our Internet communication secure.

I believe that Charles is correct in anticipating that such will not happen.

The issue of secrecy is a somewhat separate issue, in my view. The best security within our means is usually open mechanism providing mathematically secure secrecy, using little or no security through obscurity. Obscurity is the tool of the tyrant.

What we're doing must be visible to those relying on it, making it visible to all. It must provide the means for secure communication, using open source and means.

ThePythonicCow

28th January 2011, 22:04

I have a shortwave receiver but there is very little left to listen to on it these days. As far as I can tell, the official HAM radio operators are mostly committed tot he 'system' with a blind faith in MUM that's embarrassing to listen to. I wouldn't count on them being much better than STAZI.
Interesting input - thanks!

Harley

28th January 2011, 23:19

It would be all down to small groups operating in 'radio silence'. At least we've had a few years of normalising ourselves to the real world, that's a lot more than many will have going for themselves.

I have a shortwave receiver but there is very little left to listen to on it these days. As far as I can tell, the official HAM radio operators are mostly committed tot he 'system' with a blind faith in MUM that's embarrassing to listen to. I wouldn't count on them being much better than STAZI.

Hi Norman!

These two paragraphs are good and they bring up a point I want to make.

Official Amateur Radio Operators were at one time a very proud and elite breed. Why? Because we used to have to study hard to learn electronics and physics in order to be licensed, and then we had to work even harder in order to advance to higher classes which promised us more operating privileges. And through all of this education a very professional group emerged.

Now that the Gov has changed the laws so much, allowing basically "uneducated" individuals to be licensed and the erosion of frequency bands in the interest of commercialization, Ham Radio has degenerated into basically a free-for-all that is quickly beginning to resemble the US's Citizens Band (CB). And I have to say that this was all preplanned by the ptb.

My Point: Within the background of all this chaos reside many "Old-Timers", such as me, that will arise again when they are needed. So if worse comes to worse, regulated or not, We Got Your Back! And I can guarantee you that!

Thank You for your post Norman!

Chuck

28th January 2011, 23:29

hmmm.. sold my old Ten Tec 30 years ago... maybe it's time to brush up.

norman

29th January 2011, 00:11

....So if worse comes to worse, regulated or not, We Got Your Back! And I can guarantee you that!

That just made the hairs on my legs tingle, Thanks H.

Harley

29th January 2011, 00:49

Remember in the movie Independence Day, towards the end when they finally discovered how to take down the alien ships? Then they needed to get this word out to the rest of the world, but they realized that all the satellites had been seized by the aliens and all other forms of communication would be intercepted? Do you remember their solution to this dilemma?

In the next scene, although it was greatly exaggerated (Hey, it's a movie!), they showed rows and rows of HAM RADIO OPERATORS transmitting their message to the world. And what form of communication were they using?

MORSE CODE!

Knowledge of Morse Code is no longer required to obtain a basic Amateur Radio License and it is quickly becoming all but obsolete. And it's a shame for many reasons, but for me one of the biggest reasons is the basic Continuous Wave (CW) Morse is capable of communication during conditions where no voice or data would stand a chance in penetrating. And I believe that this is going to become a very important fact in our (near?) future. And I do believe this scene was included in this movie for a reason.

How many "New Generation" ham radio operators do you suppose know Morse Code?

As with many things, The Old Becomes The New Again.

We Got Your Back!

:)

Harley

29th January 2011, 00:53

hmmm.. sold my old Ten Tec 30 years ago... maybe it's time to brush up.

Hey Chuck.

I wouldn't even worry about renewing your license, if it has expired.

Just worry about brushing up.

You may be needed!

:)

baggywrinkle

29th January 2011, 00:53

Any comments on the utility or practicality of DSTAR or similar technologies?

I also love the idea of VSAT and have been actively investigating the possibility of a russian or
mexican satellite based ISP.

sjkted

29th January 2011, 01:38

Bill is correct here. The internet system can not be shut down. However, we must understand that it's the servers that feed the traffic along the superhighway. Severs usually belong to ISP and hosting companies. They can be shut down. Remember also that it's the telephone companies that relay the data, either cellular or landline. Already we have see with wikileaks that server companies have been coerced to remove mirrors and payment gateways. Without the servers, you have no websites, no email and no skype etc, etc.

What this means is that if you really want to stay online, you need to make your computer a server. Very easy to do and you can host your own websites and email , but bare in mind that it will send out an IP that can be tracked by a variety of means.

It goes a little further than this. Most people think of the internet in very black-and-white terms. If you were trying to describe the difference to someone between a car and a house, you could say the car has a driver's seat and an engine and the house has a front door, a bedroom, plumbing, electricity, etc. Despite all of the possible modifications, all cars have a driver's seat and an engine and most houses have an entrance door, etc. In other words, houses and cars have a structure that it is to a large extent immutable.

The internet is completely different. We have computers, mobile devices like cellphones, routers, switches, internet providers, etc. What we think of as the internet is nothing more than an idea programmed into software that we all agree on. When I log into this forum, I do so because it is easiest to just pay an internet provider in money and let them handle the rest. That is the paradigm we have for the internet.

I submit to you this is not the only paradigm we could have for the internet and that the government will not be able to control all of the options. For the more technically inclined, I recommend researching wireless mesh networks on Google to see the many possibilities for connecting to the internet and how it can and most likely will be expanded in the future. The future is a decentralized world and the centralized model won't be able to hold a candle to what peer-to-peer networking is capable of.

--sjkted

Chuck

30th January 2011, 05:58

Hey Chuck.

I wouldn't even worry about renewing your license, if it has expired.

Just worry about brushing up.

You may be needed!

:)

Thank you Harley for your continual service to this forum!! Not only offering superb information and advice but also great inspiration.

I will brush up! CQ CQ _ . _ . _ _ . _

johnf

30th January 2011, 22:30

I was reading a yahoo item on the shutdown in Egypt : http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110128/ap_on_hi_te/us_egypt_protest_internet_outage, and was getting disappointed because the spaces between the lines seemed to be saying this was good news for government officials everywhere.

Then a Modest Mabel posted this: A short, short time ago
I can still remember
How that Youtube used to make me smile.
And I knew if I had my chance
That I could make those people dance
And, maybe, they'd be happy for a while.

But January made me shiver
With every paper I'd deliver.
Bad news on the doorstep;
I couldn't take one more step.

I can't remember if I cried
When I read about Egypt's tear gas fights,
But something touched me deep inside
The day that the Internets died.

So bye-bye, Egypt's going online.
Drove my Chevy to the levee,
But the levee was dry.
And them good old boys were drinkin' whiskey and rye
Singin', "this'll be the day that I die.
"this'll be the day that I die."

Then I saw another item stating the real effect of the shutdown was that it didn't help.
And so it goes.

giovonni

31st January 2011, 03:54

Get Internet Access When Your Government Shuts It Down
Does your government have an Internet kill-switch? Read our guide to Guerrilla Networking and be prepared for when the lines get cut

By Patrick Miller, David Daw, PCWorld Jan 28, 2011 3:50 pm
http://www.pcworld.com/article/218155/get_internet_access_when_your_government_shuts_it_down.html

000

31st January 2011, 19:14

ThePythonicCow

31st January 2011, 19:53

Well... didn't take these opportunists too long: As Egypt Goes Offline, US Gets Internet 'Kill Switch' Bill Ready (http://www.theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/as-egypt-goes-offline-us-gets-internet-kill-switch-bill-ready-20110131-1aah3.html)
I still don't have a reliable understanding of what the U.S. "Kill Switch" bill enables. It may or may not lead to killing the entire U.S. Internet, ala Egypt. My hunch is that it doesn't lead to that, but that I still won't like what it does lead to.

jorr lundstrom

31st January 2011, 20:01

The pirate bays servers are in Egypt and they are working. How come?

Jorr

baggywrinkle

1st February 2011, 20:35

I still don't have a reliable understanding of what the U.S. "Kill Switch" bill enables. It may or may not lead to killing the entire U.S. Internet, ala Egypt. My hunch is that it doesn't lead to that, but that I still won't like what it does lead to.

Over Sunday dinner conversation it was related that the decentralized web in the USA has been (re)arranged into a spoke and hub arrangement with three major hubs in New York Chicago
and LA. Yes it is hearsay. If it were true they might be able to take down the lions share in one easy move with a bit of cooperation from key players.

Henry Deacon warned of the possibility in the fall of 2008, and encouraged a move into ham radio at the time. It has been on my list since then, but there were other more pressing issues
demanding attention.

Then Gabby was shot in Arizona and the drums started beating to vilify the alternative media. This and the BIG SHOW by the department of justice seizing domain names pushed
the issue to the top of the list. We purchased a serious shortwave and are getting acquainted with the voice of Russia and radio Havana.

Now, despite Charles assurance that the web will stay up, the dark net in Egypt has pushed us off the fence. We've purchased a USB dialup modem and a solid basic ham rig. The clincher
was knowledge of a national level FEMA excercise come May. When the radio arrives it will be placed in a faraday cage and put away. We'll set up a good basic antenna for it between
now and May and STUDY the exam material for the tech and general licenses. Then we will be set up for a rainy day when life and limb are in harms way.

Call me a belt and suspenders man. We are also studying C/KU/KA band satellite and off grid power sources to run all of the above. If you are a step ahead of the crowd you are a visionary.
If you are two steps ahead you are a crackpot. We are neoluddites, but we are not foolish enough to believe that NIKEnet is sufficient. With some irony we noted the headlines of the
mad scramble for food clothing shelter in the face of the snow storm about to pummel the States. These same people could not be bothered to listen to Jim Phillips or Steve Shenk. Not to
worry. FEMA will protect them.

Those who will not be counseled cannot be helped.

ThePythonicCow

1st February 2011, 20:58

Such preparations sound like a good idea to me, baggywrinkle. I have done my own, according to my own resources and talents.

I would doubt that it is as simple as taking out Chicago, LA and New York. The very design and purpose of the Internet was to survive a few major U.S. cities going off the air and still be able to route packets via some other path.

But other than that, what you say makes sense.

I am not expecting a total, big off, no more Internet day. Rather I am expecting (as I've seen in nutrition, air travel, and news reporting) harassment, confusion, partial and temporary outages, and such. Even the big off day in Egypt will likely not last long.

norman

1st February 2011, 21:20

If they decide to "shut down" the net they have options galore.

The most likely option is software controlled data package blocking.

The second most likely is remote bandwidth strangulation via the satelites combined with physical cutting of undersea cables.

Actually, the zero est most likely is to false flag attack the web and roll out a martial law for the web.

( my opinion, of course )

InCiDeR

2nd February 2011, 12:13

Sadly it seems like Egypt have to face a total shutdown of internet now:

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?12642-Egyptian-Internet-Shut-Down&p=118902&viewfull=1#post118902

The peculiar thing is that they allowed one ISP to remain online until now. They speculate that it had to do with the stockmarket. I think (IMHO) that it more had to do with the classic "False Flag-Routine", keep one channel open so the people may be able to get the so called "right information".

So I believe you soon can count me in Hams society ;)

fifi

6th February 2011, 04:10

How To Kill The Kill Switch
excerpt from last issue of New Earth News from Michael Knight

Quote
As we've seen happen in Egypt, it is obviously possible to pull the plug on a large part
of the Internet service. But I've just discovered that you can outflank the “kill switch”
by using specific number codes for the sites you wish to visit or use.

For example, this was posted below a YouTube video of the riots in Egypt.
“ATTENTION ALL EGYPTIANS! you can still enter websites by using these codes:
“for twitter "128.242.240.52"
“for google "72.14.204.99"
“for facebook "69.63.189.34
SPREAD THIS INFORMATION!!!”

To verify this, I discovered that you can find the IP address (number code) of almost any web
site – then store that code (bookmark it or file it ) on your computer.
Apparently, when the Internet is “killed” they can only stop access to sites that are normally
reached by using the usual alphabetical URL designation (eg www.survivalcenter.com).
However, because computers, servers and web sites around the globe communicate with
each other primarily by using numbers, those codes seemingly can not be shut down.
Therefore, if you have found and stored the coded (numbered) IP addresses of sites you wish
to continue using or accessing even if “they” do shut things down, you should find and store
those codes in advance.
I used the search term “how to find an IP address” and a number of results came up on the
search engine. From the options available I selected
Find IP address of a website - server ip lookup
Find IP address of a website. This tool will find out the IP address of a website as well as
website's country (hosting location). This might be useful if ...
www.selfseo.com/find_ip_address_of_a_website.php

They sell software there – but they also have a free look-up service, so you can type in the
know URL of a web site (such as I typed in survivalcenter.com and VOILA! It will return the
numbers for you (not on all sites – but on many).
All I did then was copy and paste the numbers into the address bar, click the “go” arrow, and
up popped the associated home page. Try it – you might like it.
Unquote

I try to lookup the IP of projectAvalon.net. It is 67.212.160.12

sjkted

6th February 2011, 06:08

I read an article on Slashdot.org regarding the internet shutdown and it seems the order was given to 3500 different sites to turn off Border Gateway Protocol (a routing protocol used by internet providers). If this is the case, it would appear anyone connected to an ISP in Egypt would be dead in the water. If this is the case, bypassing DNS with the IP Adresss of each site would not work.

This would be extremely difficult to do in the US, as there would have to be some sort of legal process -- at the very least an executive order -- and the telecom units and controlling corps would have a field day with Obama as would many of the other business interests that depend on it.

I haven't read the Obama internet killswitch bill details yet. Is this what it proposes to do -- just knock down top-level DNS servers?

--sjkted

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Sadly it seems like Egypt have to face a total shutdown of internet now:

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?12642-Egyptian-Internet-Shut-Down&p=118902&viewfull=1#post118902

The peculiar thing is that they allowed one ISP to remain online until now. They speculate that it had to do with the stockmarket. I think (IMHO) that it more had to do with the classic "False Flag-Routine", keep one channel open so the people may be able to get the so called "right information".

So I believe you soon can count me in Hams society ;)

My understanding was the one ISP that was open for business was for their financial district and that it was used for stock market updates and financial transactions. I have heard reports that it was responsible for about 8% of the internet connectivity in Egypt, but has been also taken down since.

--sjkted

xbusymom

19th February 2011, 03:18

[QUOTE=1159;112273]
The future is a decentralized world and the centralized model won't be able to hold a candle to what peer-to-peer networking is capable of.

--sjkted

I agree with you on that. It all looks like it will come down to the local communities re-empowering themselves and then reconnecting with the next-door neighborhood community- and on down the line... grassroots ...

Harley

24th March 2011, 07:20

There ARE ways! :)

NY-based Access Using Ham Radio Workaround to Political Internet Shutdowns

NYConvergence (http://nyconvergence.com/2011/03/ny-based-access-using-ham-radio-workaround-to-political-internet-shutdowns.html)
March 21, 2011 at 4:03 pm

[A] New York-based [group called] Access is helping democracy movements in the Middle East and North Africa get online. They are equipping a network of ham-radio operators with modems allowing them to convert digital computer data into analogue radio signals. The signals can [then] be transmitted on built portable FM radio stations or makeshift directional antennas until they reach a network member with Internet access who can convert the signal so it can be posted online.

Satellites are also being used to get online because most places can’t shut down ones that are operated by foreign companies or countries. However, these can be expensive to connect to. Others use more creative ways of getting around cyber-attacks. For example, American naval-intelligence analyst at a NATO unit in Estonia, Kenneth Geers, described a microwave oven that has been redesigned so the microwaves can encode information as if it were a normal radio transmitter.

For more also see:

Unorthodox links to the internet
Signalling dissent (http://www.economist.com/node/18386151?story_id=18386151)

Good Stuff!

Rocky_Shorz

6th September 2012, 05:17

bumping back to the top...

bluestflame

6th September 2012, 10:09

cos they are i believe currently blocking posts selectively , they won't bring down the internet unless they have no other option

OBwan

7th September 2012, 04:12

Thoughts on shutting down the Internet:

• The Internet transports information via multiple media types. Physical media such as fiber optic cables, phone lines, and microwaves are used. Networking service representatives could bypass the physical devices or enabled a telephone dial up link. In other words, the telephone system of the world would also have to a shutoff switch to completely inhibit the flow of information.

• Corporate networks using private information links span the globe and implement Virtual Private Networks (VPNs). Shutting off these types of communications would negatively impact the economy and corporate profits. The use of corporate networks in a life saving situation by many corporations is considered to be an appropriate use of corporate network resources based upon my research of the topic.

• There are millions of phone and data lines throughout the world. Controlling the people who control all the types of media both phone and data would require a worldwide controlling mechanism.

Could all media types and all corporate networks and all be controlled?

• Years ago the story of how a major broadcasting company bribed the guards at a remote board crossing enabled the world to see the video tape and know what was going on inside a country that was experiencing an uprising.

• Controlling personal computer media such as Video CD’s, flash drives, and hard drives in situations where a bribe could be used would be difficult task. After the video information made its way into a country that does not prohibit Youtube.com access, the video could be posted online.

Could all video information be controlled?

• Cable and satellite television has security implement to prevent unauthorized use of the service. Hacking these systems has occurred many times. Poor security implementations have been the weak link in many unauthorized accesses.

• The story of the Enigma device used by the Germans during World War II, and how the encryption mechanism was reversed engineered began with operators not using the highest security processes. The encryption key used by operators of the device was reused and this enabled the mathematics of the cipher to be understood.

• Controlling security on the Internet is done in numerous ways. Weaknesses exist is the reason for the continual monitoring of attacks.

Could all operators of the security device be competent in the operation of security devices?

• When the uprising in Egypt occurred, one percent (1%) of Internet information was sent. The video information that was transported by this small amount of bandwidth had the truth about what was going on in the country known.

• The major recent viruses such as Flame were written in a few months by a team of twenty computer professionals. The hacker group Anonymous has reported they have the source code for the Flame virus. Additional information need to implement the use for attacks on devices could be purchased by some type of a bribe.

Could a small amount of information that contained truthful evidence be stopped by a group of motivated people?

• Metaphorically the Internet can be thought of a highway system. New roads are opened, roads are closed for maintenance and traffic patterns continually change. Shutting down major arteries can be done, and alternate routes always exist. You could cause havoc by shutting down major arteries and limit what type of traffic is permitted.

Could the Information Highway be stopped completely?

How do you define “Shutdown”?

OBwan

9th October 2012, 21:55

The U.S. congress is attempting to limit the use of telecommunications equipment in the USA. Immediately following is a portion story from the Reuters website.

(Reuters) - China rejected on Tuesday as "groundless" U.S. accusations that two top Chinese telecoms equipment makers posed a security risk.

The U.S. House of Representatives' Intelligence Committee urged American companies on Monday to stop doing business with Huawei Technologies Co Ltd and ZTE Corp., warning that China could use equipment made by the companies to spy on certain communications and threaten vital systems through computerized links.

"This report by the relevant committee of the U.S. Congress, based on subjective suspicions, no solid foundation and on the grounds of national security, has made groundless accusations against China," Shen Danyang, a spokesman for China's Commerce Ministry, said in a statement on the ministry's website.

The U.S. recommendation would exclude Chinese businesses from carrying out their normal operations in the United States and participating in fair competition, Shen said.

"The Chinese side expresses its serious concern and strong opposition," he said.

The urging by the U.S. congressional committee comes at a very sensitive time for U.S.-China relations, ahead of the U.S. presidential and congressional elections and a transition of power to a new leadership in China. It has raised fears of retaliation by China.

Link to the Congressional report:

http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/Huawei-ZTE%20Investigative%20Report%20%28FINAL%29.pdf