[GTER] Fwd: [Isoc-br] Why the World Must Resist Calls to Undermine the Internet

Douglas Fischer fischerdouglas at gmail.com
Wed Mar 2 23:00:01 -03 2022

Em minha visão, perfeito posicionamento!

Em qua., 2 de mar. de 2022 15:19, Danton Nunes via gter <
gter at eng.registro.br> escreveu:

> A posição da ISOC, que eu acho que deve ser levada a sério.
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject:        [Isoc-br] Why the World Must Resist Calls to Undermine the
> Internet
> Date:   Wed, 2 Mar 2022 15:11:34 -0300
> From:   Flávio Rech Wagner <flavio at inf.ufrgs.br>
> To:     ISOC Brasil <isoc-br at listas.tiwa.net.br>
> *Why the World Must Resist Calls to Undermine the Internet*
> https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2022/03/why-the-world-must-resist-calls-to-undermine-the-internet/
> By Andrew Sullivan
> ISOC President and Chief Executive Officer
> It seems that every time there is a large political event in the world,
> someone
> calls for someone else to be excluded from the Internet. The latest call
> to cut
> people off comes in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
> The Internet Society must resist these calls, no matter how tempting. The
> Internet remains our best hope to communicate among the peoples of the
> world.
> The calls to cut Russia off are coming at multiple levels:
>    * There is pressure on global social media giants to block Russian
> content to
>      stop disinformation from circulating.
>    * Others think networks around the world should block Russian
> communication by
>      blocking their BGP announcements. BGP, the Border Gateway Protocol,
> is the
>      network protocol that allows the various networks that make up the
> Internet
>      to negotiate their communications—effectively, it is the “inter” part
> of
>      “the Internet.”  Attempting to convince all the networks in the world
> to
>      reject some BGP announcements on political grounds is unprecedented.
>    * Still others think the physical connections from Russian networks
> should be
>      severed. It is not possible to communicate through cables that have
> been
>      broken. Cut the cables, and Russia will be isolated.
> These proposals miss something fundamental about the Internet: it was
> never
> designed to respect country borders. The idea of unplugging a country is
> as
> wrong when people want to do it to /another/ country as it is when
> governments
> want to do it to their own.
> Internet connectivity means anyone with access can use the Internet to
> communicate. This means aggressors and opponents alike. Unlike most
> historical
> communication methods, the Internet is astonishingly resilient when
> conditions
> for connection are bad. It’s not magic. It won’t end wars or invasions.
> But it
> is a great tool for humans to use against their oppressors.
> The Internet allows people who otherwise would be silenced to speak, so it
> should be no surprise that there are people the world over trying to
> undermine
> the Internet.
> Russia has been trying for over a decade, with limited evidence of success
> (whatever the Kremlin has said), to be able to unplug from the Internet.
> Some
> governments impose Internet shutdowns that harm the interests of their
> citizens
> and impede economic development, all in the interests of social control.
> These
> efforts are not “the Internet with local characteristics,” or any other
> catchphrase. They’re opposition to the Internet. The Internet puts
> decisions
> about connections into the hands of people who want to connect. It’s a
> frightening idea to those who want to control the messages. But it’s what
> has
> made the Internet a resource to enrich people’s lives.
> In the present case, even on a basic technical level, it is not clear what
> a
> “Russian network” is, or how one would refuse its communication. The
> Internet’s
> resilience comes in part from redundancy. There is no hope that every
> single
> network in the world will refuse traffic from networks originating in
> Russia.
> Indeed, it is almost certain that communications that originate from any
> government-controlled network sources will make it to the wider Internet.
> The
> origins will probably be even more obscured than they otherwise might be.
> In an
> already-connected world, it will be really hard to deny someone
> connectivity
> completely, especially when they have the resources of a nation-state.
> Trying to
> block one country’s networks could harm its government, but it could harm
> its
> domestic dissent, too.
> Once large network operators start demonstrating an ability to make
> routing
> decisions on political grounds, other governments will notice. This will
> attract
> regulatory requirements to shape network interconnection in real time
> along
> political lines. If we travel that path, in short order the network of
> networks
> will not exist. In its place we would have a different network design
> built
> around national gateways, broken up on geopolitical lines, and just as
> dynamic
> and robust as other multilateral, regulation-based systems. The Internet
> has
> done a lot to erode those systems because it is more efficient and
> effective.
> We’d give that up.
> Without the Internet, the rest of the world would not know of atrocities
> happening in other places. And without the Internet, ordinary citizens of
> many
> countries wouldn’t know what was being carried out in their name. Our best
> hope,
> however dim, is that those supporting an aggressive regime will change
> their
> support. More information can help, even as disinformation circulates. We
> need a
> better understanding of what is and is not disinformation. Cutting a whole
> population off the Internet will stop disinformation coming from that
> population—but it also stops the flow of truth.
> We must not ease the path for those who hate the Internet and its ability
> to
> empower people. We must fight the suppression of the Internet. This means
> making
> sure connectivity does not stop for anyone. It means ensuring that strong
> encryption, which protects ordinary communications, but also allows
> political
> discourse in the face of censorship, is always available. It means making
> sure
> the critical properties of the Internet are not undermined by legislation,
> no
> matter how well-meaning. It means making interconnections cheap and easy
> and
> ubiquitous, so that all networks are reliable and robust systems that can
> be
> made from unreliable parts.It means dedicating ourselves to ensuring that
> the
> Internet is for everyone <https://www.internetsociety.org/mission/>.
> Far too many people all over the world are living under conflict. All
> should
> have access to the greatest communication tool ever invented. The Internet
> is a
> tool to help them understand what is going on, and to communicate their
> struggle. It is a tool for the oppressed to show their oppression. If we
> try to
> bend it only to the will of governments, we will break it, losing all of
> these
> opportunities. People invaded by a foreign power deserve the Internet. But
> we
> cannot be selective about who has access.
>            We must never waver from this vision. The Internet is for
> everyone.
> --
> Prof. Flávio Rech Wagner
> Presidente da Internet Society Brasil
> flavio at inf.ufrgs.br,info at isoc.org.br           https://www.isoc.org.br
>                 Twitter: @ISOCBrasil
> https://www.facebook.com/isocbrasil/
> https://www.youtube.com/isocbrasil
> https://www.instagram.com/isocbrasil/
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/isoc-brasil/
> --
> gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter

More information about the gter mailing list