There's going to come a point at which the Feds/States will lean on the ISPs to handle the censorship for them. We've had people all over the Nat Sec system staring at the "Great Firewall of China" and asking themselves "Can we get something like this over here?"
this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2025
740 points (99.9% liked)
Fediverse
36588 readers
256 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This is why it's perfect time to get some tech literacy regarding tor, i2p, yggdrasil, and shadowsocks. It's not perfect solution to use tech to circumvent restrictions that shouldn't be there in the first place, but sometimes it really comes to that point and it's really nice to have all systems ready!
Arguably though, at some point they'll just say "if we can't read your traffic, you can't use the Internet."
Which still isn't a problem, as I'm sure we can come up with a means to encrypt traffic to make it look entirely legitimate. But it's going to take a while.
At that point people would probably go to a p2p adhoc wireless meshnet to bypass the ISPs entirely.
You mean "at which point, people will just say 'oh, ok'". (Assuming they even notice)
"People" will just comply. Tech savvy people like us are the only ones that could circumvent it
One... Not so disappointing fact is that means at least the Internet will go back to the pre-social media era.
You can feel it here on Lemmy still. It exists.
Yes it has its perks
Except if the topic is wifi meshnets, no amount of tech savvyness will get you around an absence of other nodes nearby. General apathy is actually a huge problem here.
load more comments
(7 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Sneakernets, my friend. Never underestimate the bandwidth of a pocket full of microsd cards traveling on the subway.
Flash drives of banned foreign films are the one method of accessing foreign media that north Koreans realistically have. It's extremely hard to prevent people plugging a flash drive into their computer in their home to view some media
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
I don't know literally ANYTHING, so take that into account when answering this, but why can't a single person access the "Internet" on their own, without an ISP. Can't they be their own ISP? Or can't small groups of people - friends, family, co-conspirators - create their own private ISP?
The p2p meshnet that they were referring to basically is a local/small group ISP.
As for why a single person cannot (effectively) become their own ISP? It's complicated. Really complicated. ISPs have to pay other ISPs just like you and I do, unless they're a Tier-1 ISP/Network. Otherwise you're always going to be paying to connect to (and generally paying for bandwidth) another network that has access to a network that then has access to a T1 network. T1s are basically the largest networks that hold (or can directly access) the majority of people on the internet. Top of the food chain, so to speak.
So in theory, yeah, you can become your own ISP - but you'll still need to pay and be at the mercy of other ISPs. Datacenters are typically their own ISP, but they have to pay others to get online just like we do.
this is what the mesh networks are that people have mentioned elsewhere in this thread.
It is theoretically possible to create a purely peer-to-peer network where each individual connects to people nearby, and then any individual can in theory communicate with any other, by passing data packets to nearby people on the network who then pass it on themselves until it reaches the other person.
You can probably already grasp a few of the issues here - confidentiality is a big one, and reliability is another. But in theory it could work, and the more people who take part in such networks, the more reliable they become.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Imagine the internet is a network of roads. The ISPs in some parts of town control the roads, in other parts they only control the stop lights. You can build your own road through private land to avoid the stop lights but it’s expensive. The isps can put traffic cops at the stop lights and monitor and stop you if they want. The only way to get around it is to build a road all the way to the destination.
To some degree you could, but you'd either rely on Tier1 transits to access the entire internet (costly), or you'd use IXPs (keeping your traffic local to other IX participants).
This doesn't account for how'd you'd actually go into purchasing a port for your residential home, which would probably entail laying your own fiber to a data center nearby.
Like Metastatic on LoRA?
Or maybe we'll use software defined radios (SDR) to transmit on other unregulated bands (as a hacker, you can often force the software to believe it's in the wrong region to transmit on bands the FTC didn't approve, as long as it's legal somewhere.)
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
If you mean an HTTPS ban, it’s technically possible, but even mainland China and Russia haven’t gone that far. One major reason is that it would completely undermine basic internet security. It would instantly make man-in-the-middle attacks trivial, letting anyone sniff purchases, transactions, and more. Buying anything online - or using a credit card at all - would suddenly become extremely risky.
I'm making a website to aggregate all of this information. Pro net neutrality, anti censorship laymens guide. Still in the works but its called zoracle.life.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I've tried a few times to check out i2p, it seems to take hours of leaving it running to even get to the point where you can very slowly and inconsistently load even the official pages though.
In my experience, if you have anything but "Network: OK" status (for example, "Network: Firewalled"), it's not working properly. If you're behind a VPN, you need to port-forward and properly configure a port in I2P config/settings. Another sign that it's misconfigured is 0 participating tunnels. This is how properly configured I2P network statistics looks like with high internet bandwidth:
spoiler
load more comments
(2 replies)
The situation does seem quite desperate. I'd like to heed your call. Please advise on most critical systems I should have ready right now today please. I know have a lot of work to do and must stay efficient
-
If the internet were fully controlled, you’d need mesh networks - DIY, decentralized networks using radios, local connections, or other alternative infrastructures. I don’t know all the details, but Yggdrasil is a promising modern project that functions as an alternative “internet” for mesh networks, while also working over the regular internet.
-
Within the normal internet, the most resilient solution against heavy censorship is probably Shadowsocks. It’s widely used in mainland China because it can bypass full-scale DPI (deep packet inspection) by making traffic look like normal HTTPS. There are ways for authorities to detect it, and there are counter-methods, but it remains one of the most reliable tools for evading state-level traffic filtering.
-
Next in line are Tor and I2P. Both are very resilient, and blocking them completely is difficult. It’s a continuous cat-and-mouse game: governments block some bridges or entry nodes, but new ones appear, allowing users to reconnect.
-
Finally, regular VPNs are useful but generally less resilient. They’re the first target for legal restrictions and DPI filtering because their traffic patterns are easier to detect.
Overall, for deep censorship resistance, it’s a hierarchy: mesh networks > Shadowsocks > Tor/I2P > standard VPNs. You can ask chatbots about any of these and usually get accurate, practical advice because the technical principles are public knowledge.
load more comments
(9 replies)
If this really about protecting kids, they could've done opt in blocking at the ISP level. Just a few new fields with ISPs and they have products that can take care of this already.
This is really about tracking every little thing you do online.
Eventually it will be about restricting what we can access on the web.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
staring at the “Great Firewall of China” and asking themselves “Can we get something like this over here?”
I've just been assuming that was the goal all along.
Fifteen years ago, I said on Reddit, "The U.S. is trying to become like China before China can become like the U.S." Of course, I got buried.
load more comments
(1 replies)
All my IT and InfoSec friends have called me alarmist for suggesting even the possibility of a GFW of America, but every day that passes, it looks more and more likely to happen, doesn't it?
Start practicing circumvention techniques now, y'all, while it's still legal and cheap to do so. Learn amateur radio. Learn Meshtastic. Learn all the different censorship-resistant VPN technology out there. Host your own websites or services for friends, family, or your community. It doesn't make it impossible, but it does make it hard, and fascism is nothing if not lazy.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Its already happening in Spain. Everyday there is a football match from the spanish league (thats from Friday to Monday, both included) LaLiga orders the ISPs to shutdown everything that uses Cloudflare under the pretext that the shady websites that offers pirated football use their services, killing easily 1/3 of the national traffic for like 4-6h.
Why the ISPs comply?
- The biggest ISP of the country (Movistar) also happens to be the main one that showcase legal football.
How is this legal?
- The judge that authorised this and the president of LaLiga have been friends since forever.
Eventually this will go the European court where they will rule this was illegal and anti-constitutional all along and give a Spain a fine (the the citizens have to pay), and revoke this bullshit, but untill then we are screwed. Nothing will happens to LaLiga, the judge, or Movistar, fucking privileged and corrupted bastards.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Country level internet and passport control before you visit another country domain is inevitable. That's just like people want it or at least sociopaths.
nobody should comply
Would have been the smart move for business, too. Just don't comply until everyone else caves and then sue the state for favoring some businesses.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
We need more federation and P2P in everything.
P2P! I have been screaming this into every forum at reddit since last piece of shit president was president. See? This is why!
What P2P solutions exist that need more attention? I know PeerTube does some neat P2P stuff to keep server load down (if they ever had the traffic...)
load more comments
(4 replies)
The more interesting question is, who would you arrest? Just ignore the law. It's unenforceable when it comes to the fediverse.
Those hosting the more popular environments. The posts would live on perhaps but target enough people and it likely becomes too small for them to care anymore, sadly.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Last time i checked "states rights" didn't mean the right to impose your laws on people or businesses running out of other states.
If anyone from Mississippi wants to use our services I'm totally ready to ignore any and all laws that don't acknowledge to sovereignty of the net.
Does the law in Mississippi apply to the geographic region and airspace, or only residents?
Also states don't have one company to go after. It is nearly impossible to track down and file court orders for if your lucky non-profits in other countries.
Like I don't think there are many people that host Mastodon instances that will listen to a court order out of the goodness of there heart.
"Mississippi has a backwards-ass age verification requirement. We're not allowed to let users in from Mississippi. Verify you're not in Mississippi"
States should just create a firewall, and not shift burden to supply chains.
Well they should not do that either, but if they're going to, they should shoulder the burden.
So in this whole embarrassing dick measuring contest Eugen was wrong and Mike Masnick was right, then. Turns out "real decentralization" or not, Masto/Fedi's structure doesn't do anything to bypass this nonsense.
This is not new. People constanty claim AP and Fedi have benefits or features just for being decentralized that they absolutely do not have, but I have to admit I'm kinda shocked that Eugen will do that exact thing without any more self-awareness than the average Masto user. He should know better.
Well even if mastodon.social complies, there are many many other instances to choose from, from all different countries
and even other similar platforms like Sharkey or Mbin that work with Mastodon
load more comments
(13 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
* 10,000
Some lawyer on Capitol Hill: "Hmm..."
Not if, when.
Who knows, the same demand may be given of certain other federated social media sites in a few months.
What's wrong with your own personal 2M band radio network? Or just bring back CB culture. It's in the name: Citizen's Band...
view more: next ›