Thursday, May 22, 2008

The Tale of Cisco: Censorship Is In the Router

“There’s a famous saying, ‘The Internet considers censorship to be damage, and routes around it.’ I say, what if censorship is in the router?” — Seth Finkelstein, (from IEEE Spectrum)


At the recent hearing held by Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law on "Global Internet Freedom: Corporate Responsibility and the Rule of Law" Cisco found itself in the "hotseat" after a leaked power point presentation surfaced which showed that Cisco viewed China's infamous censorship and surveillance efforts as business opportunities. One section specifically focuses on the Golden Shield project, which among other goals aims to "Combat 'Falun Gong' evil religion and other hostiles", and the opportunities for Cisco. This is, of course, not the first time that such evidence has emerged. Cisco has long been condemned for building the Great Firewall of China, a charge that the company once again claims is false:

Allegations that Cisco has built a "great firewall" in China or elsewhere confuse the provision of the basic pipes of the Internet, which include basic security features that every network must have, with more specific technological mechanisms which may be implemented to achieve the invasive effects that have raised specific concerns.


More specifically, Mark Chandler states that "Cisco does not customize, or develop specialized or unique filtering capabilities, in order to enable different regimes to block access to information."

Cisco's defense focuses on denying that they provide customized or specialized equipment to China, a charge that has been made against Cisco in the past. But as Ethan Gutmann, whose book "Losing the New China" first made the charge, states Cisco's defense misses the point:

I should tell you that I increasingly view the “original sin” argument – that is, Cisco routers censoring the Internet starting back in 1998 – as just an interesting historical footnote. It happens to be true, but it’s also a red herring: Cisco’s lawyers love to attack the “special firewall box” argument because, as you pointed out, it’s practically very hard to prove it beyond the shadow of a doubt.


While Cisco claims, carefully, that they do not "develop specialized or unique filtering capabilities" they acknowledge that their "off the shelf" products contain "tools" that "enable site filtering". In other words, they do not need to develop customized products for China because their tools already contain the functionality China needs to censor the Internet. And Cisco does provide training and customer support for their "off the shelf" services.

While they may not directly enter politically sensitive keywords into the Access Control Lists it is disingenuous for Cisco to claim that it has not built the the Great Firewall when they've done everything but actually configure their products to block the web sites of specific human rights groups.

Without a whistle blower or a smoking gun we can only speculate about any direct involvement by Cisco. However, the leaked presentation does indicate that Cisco sees repression of "hostiles" as a business opportunity -- and that's a problem.

Wednesday, May 21, 2008

Klein: China's All-Seeing Eye

Naomi Klein's Rolling Stone article on surveillance and censorship in China is now out and worth the read. Reminiscent of Greg Walton's paper China's Golden Shield (there are some good quotes from Greg in the article), the article explores the massive amount of surveillance in China. For me, it was refreshing read an article on censorship and surveillance in China that moved beyond just looking at how Western companies are profiting from the sale of such technologies to China but how these same companies are profiting from these same technologies are being used here. Moreover, the article provides a welcome departure from the usual China-bashing perspective that is usually so dominant in press coverage on these issues.

China-bashing never fails to soothe the Western conscience — here is a large and powerful country that, when it comes to human rights and democracy, is so much worse than Bush's America. But during my time in Shenzhen, China's youngest and most modern city, I often have the feeling that I am witnessing not some rogue police state but a global middle ground, the place where more and more countries are converging. China is becoming more like us in very visible ways (Starbucks, Hooters, cellphones that are cooler than ours), and we are becoming more like China in less visible ones (torture, warrantless wiretapping, indefinite detention, though not nearly on the Chinese scale).


The focus on censorship and surveillance in China should not come at the expense of ignoring these same issues at home. As Klein points out, the scale may be different but the issues are the same and they are connected.

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Microsoft: Censorship Notification Returns

Microsoft now has a censorship notification in the censored version of the search engine live.com that they provide for the Chinese market. The notification appears when search are made for particular keywords, however, the notification is not displayed when searches are restricted to censored domains. (See Degrading Transparency: Comparing Google, Yahoo and Microsoft for past reports).






































May 13, 2008
EnginePresencePlacementSpecificityConnectionScreenshot
GoogleYesHigh
Notification is placed under results
Low
Mentions "local law"
Yes
Notification only appears when results are censored
screenshot
YahooYesMedium
Notification is placed at the bottom of every page
Low
Mentions "local law"
Noscreenshot
MicrosoftYes*Medium
Notification when searching for particular "key words".*
Low
Mentions "local law"
Yes*screenshot (2)

* Microsoft provides notification when searching for particular "key words", however, no message appears when restricting the search to a censored web site.