3 ms·
So... they resort to intercepting traffic rather than outright blocking them. Interesting. That would mean they want people to speak and they can take them out?
by 2Gkashmiri 6y ago
So... they resort to intercepting traffic rather than outright blocking them. Interesting. That would mean they want people to speak and they can take them out? In India administered Kashmir, they just banned the entire intenet for months, then whitelisted websites one by one. Prevention is better than cure? Fuck these governenments.
- vbezhenar 6y agoI think that they want to block specific URLs without blocking entire domains. For example block specific youtube video without blocking entire youtube. Of course technically they can spy as well, so one should assume so.
- 2Gkashmiri 6y agoIndia already blocks specific YouTube videos in geographical India, they don't want dissent. For that they just approach YouTube or twitter or whatever because these companies have financial incentives aka ads to earn in India and non compliance would mean no business. Big woop. I was routed through a bunch of proxies at ISP level last year because of the internet gag by India and I did not feel safe. Not that I didnt do shit what I wanted to but for the end user, https://theintercept.com/2020/12/06/kashmir-social-media-police/ https://theintercept.com/2020/12/06/kashmir-social-media-pol... This just came up yesterday. Now, I have said this multiple tines before, they dont have "sophisticated surveillance techniques" as alluded to by the article here but a simple handle search in twitter, which links to FB, which links to phone, address, work, parents and next thing you know police are knocking on the door. Its just really scummy of the government to assume they can kill dissent or that these scare tactics would work. They don't.