Monday reads: Internet activists’ limits in Iran; a middle ground for cyberwar; protests we saw coming

1.   Internet activism running into its limits in Iran. Can a virtual movement survive without developing real-world institutions? (Foreign Policy)

2.  Finding the sensible middle ground when it comes to cyberwar. Is there such a thing? (O’Reilly Radar)

3.  Australian hackers rebel against content filtering. The sad thing is, government IT staff probably saw this coming, even if the Prime Minister didn’t. (The Canberra Times)

Iran@gmail.com = FAIL

Seen around the Twitterverse (HT for Evgeny Morozov’s RT @csoghoian):

How do I sign up for the Iranian Govt’s new free email service? At least they’re not in bed with the NSA.

As reported just about everywhere, the Iranian government announced it’s banning Gmail, a day before the anniversary of the Iranian revolution and the street protests anticipated to mark said anniversary. Access to the service may have been blocked already, after a cable cut last week already diminished traffic. There’s a technical point here that only Wired seems to have picked up:  Gmail uses encryption by default, which makes it more of a challenge to government surveillance than comparable online providers.  And – per the tweet above – one can’t help but wonder if recent news about Google’s relationship with the NSA didn’t play a role, given the role of Twitter in last summer’s protests and the encouragement given Twitter by the State Department.

I wonder, though, if this isn’t more of a means of legal cover for the arrest of opposition protestors – will holding a Gmail account (which, if the service is blocked, can’t be deleted) be used as a chargeable offense by the authorities?

Search in Tibet, before the Internet

Overheard on NPR yesterday:  this interview with Robert Barnett of Columbia University, discussing Tuesday’s anniversary of 1959’s failed Tibetan uprising against Chinese rule. Among the interesting highlights, Barnett mentions China’s current shutdown of text-messaging in Tibet, due to “maintenance.”

He also talks about China’s past efforts to distribute satellite dishes to nomads, as a means to channel Chinese media into Tibet. Tibetans, in turn, tuned their dishes to Voice of America broadcasts instead. There’s an interesting lesson there, and an optimistic one for those who fear government attempts to push propaganda into cyberspace, like the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps’ efforts to recruit “10,000 bloggers.” I’d guess that when it comes to media technology, even the old-school stuff, individuals are often far more active and directed in their consumption than most people credit. Search didn’t begin with Google, and it’s something that seems difficult to control – easy to misdirect, maybe, but control, unlikely.

Valentine’s Day roundup: more Iranian netroots, Saudi Arabia and satellite TV, and net piracy…

1.  John Kelly and Bruce Etling have updated their map of the Iranian blogosphere, noting a dramatic change in what they’re now calling the “CyberShia” cluster. The authors note that this could represent a debate around Islamic law, or may reflect an effort by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps to recruit 10,000 bloggers (the cyber-equivalent of opening a Starbucks on every corner?).

2.  King Abdullah has fired Saudi Arabia’s most senior judge, who last year opened the legal door to the killing of satellite channel owners airing “evil” programming. This may be a little more than Wahhabism vs. skin. As The Guardian noted last fall, several channels are owned by royal family members, and the judge’s fatwa was issued on a radio program. A year prior to the fatwa, the issue with satellite programming wasn’t so much debauchery as it was “programs related to witchcraft,” threatening the religious establishment:

“The popularity of charlatanism and magic has increased amongst Arab satellite channels, which, in turn, has led to an increase in the number of charlatans. These individuals aim to give off an image of a pious sheikh who can solve individual problems. There are others who have a strong sense of persuasion that has been learnt throughout many years of experience. His/her viewers feel compelled to watch and listen as if they have hypnotized the words and become convinced of his/her abilities to solve their problems.”

3.  The Pirate Bay goes on trial Monday. Wired’s Threat Level provides the details…suffice to say that the case has significant implications for cross-border copyright law, possibly raising more questions than answers. The operators of this BitTorrent tracking service have indicated that the service will live, regardless of the verdict, raising yet more questions about legal boundaries and enforceability.

Khatami vs. Ahmadinejad

Via Reuters and every other source – former Iranian President Khatami has announced he’ll run against incumbent Ahmadinejad this June. John Kelly and Bruce Etling produced this nice visualization of the Iranian blogosphere last April, depicting secular/reformist and conservative network clusters.

Where’s Omid?

Just past 10:40 pm on the East Coast and new Iranian satellite Omid has crossed the Aleutians, about 180 miles above the Earth. At least according to this “real time satellite tracking” service. Looks like it’ll be crossing British Columbia as I finish writing this, headed towards the Gulf of Mexico.

Printers in Tehran

Recently seen on Slashdot:  this surprisingly lengthy piece in the Boston Globe on the possibly illegal sale of HP printers in Iran. Let’s leave aside for a moment debates around the effectiveness of sanctions and embargoes. Isn’t a desktop printer (or cell phone, or Xerox copier, or…) exactly the kind of thing Western countries should want sold on the streets of Tehran? The regime is jailing bloggers and defining “defamation” over SMS as a new computer crime, and an undiscriminating embargo abets this by limiting the introduction of technologies that promote freedom of communication.

For some strange reason I’m reminded of the ban on typewriters in Ceausescu’s Romania.

Tragedy in Gaza

On one level, it’s difficult to write anything truly meaningful or insightful about the tragedy that’s playing out in Gaza. I’m going to use the word “tragedy” for the reason that there doesn’t seem to be an exit for any side in this conflict. And like any tragedy, the danger is not just to the protagonist/antagonist, but to those caught in their wake.

In this case, that includes leadership elsewhere in the Arab world, faced with angry demonstrators with instant media access to the Gaza situation. I heard an expert several years ago advise an audience to “watch Egypt,” a focal point for condemnation for Hamas, Iran, and Syria for its closure of the Gaza border. Hizballah leader Hassan Nasrallah called upon Egyptians on Sunday to force an opening of the border via mass protest, without explicitly advocating a coup – see either this article on Ynetnews or this post from an Egyptian blogger for more details.

Joining the 2009 prediction racket

Forecasting has taken a beating in 2008, from the hard landing crash of the economy to the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries, from the odds of seeing snow in Las Vegas this winter to the chances given to the NY Giants against the Patriots in Superbowl XLII. 

And yet we continue. In the spirit of tradition (if not science and probability), here are my top five calls on for where (and how) ICT will (and won’t) affect international affairs in 2009

1. Global economic conditions tilt the balance towards greater Internet regulation… Watch for nationalist-protectionist tendencies to surface in cyberspace as much as they will in the world of physical trade, assuming the recession extends until mid-2009 or longer. Expect commentators to blur their depictions of “unregulated finance” and “unregulated cyberspace,” and for politicians to justify Internet regulation as a means to “safeguard the economy,” whether by preventing cyber-crime or otherwise. 

2. …and prolong the “digital divide” in the developing world.  The capital drought has already halted or delayed major investments in the developed world. Watch for a similar, if not amplified, effect on ICT projects – charitable or otherwise – in BRIC countries, and definitely the Third World. Cell phones will remain a key network technology in the Third World – but without additional investment, will existing networks be able to handle increased capacity?

3.  Cybercrime gets worse.  The recession presents two key conditions for fraud and exploitation:  (a) significant dislocation in the corporate environment, presenting opportunities for the leakage of sensitive information, and (b) heightened psychological insecurity, increasing the size of the “target audience” for exploitation. Add in year-over-year improvements in criminals’ technical savvy, and 2008 looks to be a year to batten down the security hatches. For a good read, see McAfee’s annual cybercrime report.

4.  The next “Internet election” might be in Iran.  Expect a lot of attention to be paid to Iran’s 2009 presidential election, slated for June. There’s an interesting question as to whether Iran’s filtering mechanisms, which block access to five million websites, will be able to contain both (a) criticism of current President Ahmadinejad from political rivals and (b) both a web-savvy populace’s desire for information and the desire of external parties (e.g., exile groups) to provide it. OpenNet Initiative has an article from November (original source:  ynetnews.com) noting the passage of a draconian “computer crimes” bill earlier this year. Seems like the regime might lack some confidence in its firewall.

5.  Cloud computing will raise new questions about regulation, privacy, and security.  If there’s any technology in the hype cycle right now, it’s cloud computing (see this earlier post for more background). If – and this is a big if – we’re on a path towards the concentration of processing and storage in a limited number of massive data centers, servicing hundreds (or thousands, or…) of customers, there’s going to be a showdown with some questions that have yet to see satisfactory resolution. Such as:  will there be political acceptance of warrantless surveillance (not to mention government data-mining) once data is concentrated? Will government cybersecurity efforts concentrate on fortifying “clouds” as critical infrastructure, and leave the rest of the Internet wild? What responsibilities do Internet giants have towards governments for the data that runs through them? The answer’s going to have to be a little more precise than Google’s “Don’t be evil.” 2009 won’t be the year these questions get answered, but I’m betting that we’re going to start hearing (and listening to) them more.